GWR + MR Rural Canal Wharf, c.1900

[Nearholmer]

20 minutes ago, Schooner said:

As before, but shed moved left.

 

Is, unsurprisingly, the one I prefer, and I particularly like the way it tightens the left-hand scene up a bit to become its own little world. I think something might now be needed in the right-hand scene, almost dead-centre of the entire layout, though, maybe not more than a tall post of some sort, to get the eye from the top of the gable of the tranship shed to the top of the first of the warehouse/watermills.

 

One thing that you must be able to judge better than anyone is the impact of the roof-lines and masses on all of this. I certainly can't yet make the dark-red cuboids take on the shapes of the buildings you have selected, and the exact shapes, and particularly where points are on roofs, will decide how the eye sweeps through each scene. I got quite into all this when I built a long (15ft) New England wharf scene in H0, and one trick with that was to use perched seagulls, because their whiteness attracts the eye, and they can be used to guide the gaze. That layout had a somewhat similar building, doing a similar job to your tranship-shed, in that case a boat-repair shop at the top of a slipway, with a small fishing boat up out of the water for repair.

 

Sorry, rambling a bit.

 

 

[Schooner]

18 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Sorry, rambling a bit.

 

Not at all, it's all useful stuff  Ten points for reading through it quicker than I could edit it!

 

I've just added another version of left-hand shed to the bottom of my last, but that's it for now...apart from anything else, I've forgotten what I was aiming to do with each variant!

 

Re. planning, you're quite right and it is something I'm aware of. Although my next fortnight is looking particularly up in the air, I'm hoping to be able to make it home (for all the obvious reasons) for a little bit at least. It won't be a priority (equally obviously), but it'd be nice to start mocking up in earnest before too long and make some real progress!

 

Thanks, as ever  

 

ps. Is your New England wharf visible on the internet? I'm fairly familiar with that part of the world and would love to see your take on it

Edited December 22, 2020 by Schooner
Post-script

[Nearholmer]

59 minutes ago, Schooner said:

Is your New England wharf visible on the internet?

 

It isn't visible anywhere except in about three photos, which is a real pity, because I put about five years intense hobby-time into it. It was heavily inspired by a combination of Camden, Maine (which is what I called it), and Belfast, Maine, which is where I nabbed most of the railroad inspiration from. I started work on it c1990, and exhibited in 1995-96, but it then got junked partly due to the baseboards being annoyingly large (5ft long is too long). 

 

If ever I went back to H0, I would build the same layout again, because the waterfront scenes are so interesting.

 

 

Edited December 23, 2020 by Nearholmer

[Schooner]

After the other evening's excretia-acceleration exercise, the embankment remains be-spattered by the three with the greatest adhesion. They can wait for later, but it proves that it was a useful excercise although there's more to do.

 

In more exciting news (there's been a lot of that today), I'm in the same place as my nascent trainset allowing my little loco to be run in:

...and first train set up

...even if it had nowhere to go. Controller, track and wiring all best part of thirty years old and used straight out of the (storage) box - not perfect, but it all worked. The wagons are from Wessex Wagons, couldn't resist  Length of wagons, inc. couplings: 285mm + loco = 415mm. Ideal! The planned move to Spratt and Winkle couplings (open to suggestions) will reduce this slightly.

 

A Christmas Question: should there be an on-wharf coal merchant and, if so, where? The coal in the stockings of boys who've been bad must've come from somewhere...but would they have been at the wharf, or at the goods yard proper from whence the wharf branch stems. Other cargos to be discussed in the future.

 

Mostly, I just wanted to say thank you for all the help and support with this project. You're a knowledgable, kindly and generous group of people and it's been a treat to have had so much involvement from you. For some it's a particularly tough period, for others the highlight of the year. Either way, I wish you all a peacefull evening, a joyful Christmas day and a decent rest!

 

All the best,

 

Schooner

[Schooner]

More grist to the mill:

Stonehouse Wharf, Stroudwater Canal, Gloucestershire, served by the Midland's Nailsworth Branch. Looks fascinating, although not sure how much will be usable.

 

Likewise the gunpowder store at Stonebridge Wharf, Shalford, Surrey:

 

Back to the layout plan:

Anyscale 53ft narrowboats under a timber-framed tin-roofed shed, in place of the boathouse/tranship shed from before; RHS shifted about to make use of the Pendon/Wanborough Barn, which now opens on to the wharf itself.

 

An alternative:

The pivot could be not a boat shed, but piles of goods (deal perhaps?)...or even a little gunpowder store...

 

Opinions invited.

 

[Schooner]

With a predictable inevitablity, this week I have done two things:

1) ordered the buildings, as per the plans above (with the exception of the Timber Tracks stableblock)

2) found somewhere in the country where all my biases and desires can be met without straying too far from the observable or reasonable, and for which there is a comparative wealth of useful information.

 

Of course in that order, and of course they're not particularly compatible  

 

In terms of Layout Design (I am trying to keep this thread relevant, honest), here are some salient points:

• my hoped-for month off is lookiing more like a week, still at a point unknown. Frankly, I'm happy to be in work, but it does have a bearing on plans here
• this being so, the perfectly workable approach reached so far is still the way I'm planning to go
• I'm very much enjoying exploring my new discovery (although I'm sure it'll be well known to others), and so intend to keep learning and noting. When I've got a better grasp on the area, I'll start from scratch with a new design. Same trackplan (most likely), but in a more grounded setting. If this is done to an acceptable standard in time, that's great. If not then that's still okay. I'm not unhappy with Ingleford as it stands, in either edition.

 

It turns out I've been picking desirable examples from this system since the very start of this project, but have only just realised they were all linked. I can do no better to explain my new-found excitement than to suggest you do as I did: look at Stonehouse Wharf, as shown in the upper pic in my previous post here, on the NLS georeferenced maps. Follow the Midland branchline West, to the interesting junction station, and from there South to the wharf and siding against The Ocean; and then East, past rail-served mills, Dudbridge Junction with it's own short spur to Stroud's second station (from 1885 so not shown on this map, but who knew?!), through to the terminus at Nailsworth. All through an area whose Outstanding Natural Beauty (it's official) would've been evident even through the smoke of industry.

 

...and then notice the GWR line to the North, and follow that too...through Stroud, through to the junction of the Stroudwater Canal and the Thames and Severn Canal at Brimscombe Port, and on to Inglesham (note!), with it's characteristic and characterful warehouse and roundhouse, where the canal meets the Thames proper. Use the excellent Cotswold Canals website, Gloucestershire Society for Industrial Archaeology and even Britain from Above to explore the architecture and infrastructure of each system - dark red brick to Cotswold rubblestone. For someone interested in Victorian logistics, it's all absolutely wonderful  

 

For me, somewhere between Stonehouse and Brimscombe Port could reasonably be invented to form an ideal spot: already old by 1900, half-way rural, a transhipment centre between interesting watercraft (I've a long-held soft spot for Severn Trows), a huge variety of industries (and so rail traffic), well supported by dedicated and general warehousing, and with the Great Western and the Midland of relevance, private railways forgivable...lots to enjoy there, lots to explore...  

 

I've run out of time, sorry. Do follow the links though!

 

Cheers, and gone!

 

Schooner

Edited December 30, 2020 by Schooner

[Nearholmer]

You make it sound so attractive that I now want to go there but, leaving aside the minor challenges of time-travel, can't because we are all under a "stay at home" order, and, anyway, the weather is horrible.

 

Build the model, quick, as a substitute, and set it in warm, late-spring sunshine, with copious amounts of cow-parsley in full bloom.

 

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by Nearholmer

[Northroader]

It’s a good area to pick for a model setting, heart of the Cotswold country, so the bulk of the buildings done in honey coloured stone, set in deep winding green valleys. “Smoke of industry”? Well, besides the availability of plenty of wool,  the mills that turned it into textiles were powered in the main by water, although chimneys were visible. Do an enquiry on “Chalford Mills” for a range of sizes. The canal is slowly being brought back to life, next job is getting under the M5.

[Schooner]

One version of the plan assumes a twin-track brick-built goods depot, on which some advice please:

The kit (shown above with the ends super-imposed above to give some idea of what I'm on about) will need to be modified to make it twin track. Should this be via

 

A: Platform side (ground floor windows) next to canal?

B: Platform side next to loading dock (which would be lost as a result, the siding being plain and terminating at the building roughly as shown)

 

C: Don't go double-track, don't modify the kit. I would still need to decide which way round to have the depot.

 

D: Sack it off, and go for something sheddy, like in the lower-right

...or even a single track shed over the platform road, leaving the nearest one (the 'quayside' road) open as in runs in front of the shed and heads off-scene...

 

Thoughts?

 

Still poking at the Cotswolds, seeing what might fall out. Main value currently is for a colour guide when it comes time paint the (excellent, by the way) JSM Small Stone Warehouse. Shown next to the Scenecraft watermill for size comparison:

...hmmm...

[LBSC123]

Hi @Schooner, it looks like the project is progressing well and I'm following with interest. 

 

To be honest, I can't help feeling the Goods depot building in your post above is a bit modern compared to the rest of the buildings, in both design and materials, and wonder if the corrugated depot you were planning to use would suit the scene better?

Best,

Will

[Schooner]

Thanks for the feedback LB - I agree  The 'two-scene' approach was unconvincing, unpopular here and would've been unsatisfactory in reality, so the plan is to abandon the new vs. old thing and try to make one coherent scene with a similar narrative more gently told. Also abandoned is the hope of getting the bits together for a kind of super-kit to smash out over a month's leave. That month is now a week (this week), and I'm still waiting for delivery of some crucial parts (like track). I'll just keep doing what planning I can, and then start construction when I can.

 

Current Plan A:

Excuse the rough photoshopping - hopefully it helps to make some more sense of those brown cubes. Speaking of, the brown cube inside the 'depot' shed is a potential wooden platform to suggest movement of goods across the two long sidings. Just a thought.

 

Other changes are the exchange of the Timber Tracks stables for a smaller, less Railway brass kit from Severn Models. No purchase yet made though. One vessel on the canal has become a Severn Trow (probably based on Spry, deep laden to reduce visual impact); the other should no longer be a West Country barge (a hangover from the layout being based on the Wey Navigation), but one of the Thames boats for which more research is required. Kits exist for neither, so will need tackled as individual projects. Can't help but feel all this has got a little out of hand...but could be worse, I could've spotted the very modellable Tewkesbury wharf last month!

 

Small steps...

[Harlequin]

I like it!

 

There is very much an implied backscene. Are you going actually build one in the traditional way? If so, remember to leave room to round the corners to avoid "corners in the sky". And maybe think about how the roads exit the scene at the back - you've nearly got them all covered already so it would only take a bit of tweaking to hide them, I think. (Assuming you don't want to try to paint perspective roads disappearing into the distance...)

 

Edited January 4, 2021 by Harlequin

[bgman]

Just read through the extremely interesting thread and love the whole concept / ideas, it now makes sense re- Thames barge / Trow questions elsewhere !

 

I will follow with interest and good to see you're  prepared to mix up some off the shelf offerings to get to a result ( as per NHY 581 ) on his layouts.

 

G 

Edited January 4, 2021 by bgman

[LBSC123]

Looks good. 
 

A Thames Barge can be obtained from: https://www.vintageminiaturemodels.co.uk/

 

As discussed on my own layout thread it makes a fairly nice model, albeit with some filling required.

 

The rigging and masts requires a bit of lateral thinking as there isn’t much provided in the kit, I haven’t quite worked out how I’m going to undertake this yet...

[Schooner]

6 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Are you going actually build one in the traditional way?

I keep saying 'no' but thinking 'yes'  ...actually, I'm thinking of building the backscene as a free-standing unit on a dedicated frame into which the layout can slot. Two Three reasons:

• turns the backscene into a seperate job - I'm more likely to think it through and less likely to rush it
• allows it and the layout board to be moved (or used) individually aiding mobility
• it means room for rounded corners, fully enclosed sides etc (and maybe lighting frame...) is inherent to the backscene only, independant of the layout. It also builds in an inch or two space between the edge of the layout and the backboard which should help rogue shadows, depth perception etc. 

Not seen it done, so assume it's a stupid idea but that's where I'm at with it!

 

Thanks Phil, and thank you @bgman and @LBSC123. It does finally feel like it's coming together.

 

On which, had I delayed yesterday's update by 24hrs I could've included these:

 

The 'old warehouses' on the RHS will require some fettling, but we knew that. I'm going to make a start with a paintbrush tomorrow to see if they can be made to at least look of one geology (Cotswold stone and local dark red brick; local dark tile roofs for the old, imported grey slate for the new; any weatherboarding dark and...well...weathered) before reaching for the razor saw to remove the more obvious watermilly-bits  

 

A more immediate question is to cut down. or not to cut down?

By cut down I probably mean taking @jrb up on his offer to specially cut a two-storey version (which, I should say, was offered before I ordered the normal one). This would leave me an excellent model on which to practice painting and detailing, which could still be of use on the backscene...

 

It's a shame to give in to the too-small Bachmann/Scenecraft models, but perhaps it would be for the best. Thoughts? I think I'll boost those RHS buildings up 5mm (on a second layer of foam) from rail-height, which should help without being OTT (and can be lost in the general falling away of the ground away from the bridge). This also complements the -5mm from rail height for the RHS canal edge (no foam!). Workable? 

 

On ground, is it I've started thinking about a ground-cover 'map' - useful, or a waste of time better spent...? What else should I be thinking about? 

 

Today has also allowed time for an wiring diagram, which isn't exciting enough to post twice so I'll link it instead.

 

Thanks for stopping by, the good vibes, and useful advice. We're getting there  

 

Schooner 

[bgman]

On 04/01/2021 at 18:29, Schooner said:

I'm thinking of building the backscene as a free-standing unit on a dedicated frame into which the layout can slot. Two Three reasons:

 

I have seen it done by a good friend Iain Rice on some of his layouts. He "cuts" the scenes into areas in a jigsaw fashion which helps to concentrate on one piece at a time with the whole in mind. It has worked for me too in the past and something well worth considering.

 

It also helps to declutter the mind without imposing too much of the bigger scene in ones head all at once.

 

Enjoying your journey.

 

G

 

p.s. be careful when sawing the resin buildings that dust is a big NO NO so consider wearing a mask.

[Schooner]

More useful and interesting info, thank you. The cart constantly tries to get ahead of the horse with this project, and the idea of splitting the scenes up sounds a good way to keep things in order!

 

Speaking of, Severn Models stables built up this afternoon and trialled in position:

(The kit is excellent, the kit-builder less so. First brass kit. Much learned, much left to learn, but good to be doing a little actual modeling)

 

I'll try to get a pic of the overall scene tomorrow, but compositionally I think the smaller stables could use some support:

 

Thematically, something like the Wills Timber Yard might work, placed to the left of the stables, between it and the railway gate:

 

 Although without knowing its height it's hard to know how big an impact it would have on the scene.

 

The other minor change has come about as a result of flipping the layout a while back. It sits better with me this way round (for why I don't know, but there we are), but has caused knock-on issues with building placement. We've already mentioned this in relation to the Pendon/Wanborough Barn , which is very detailed on two walls and very plain on the others, but is true of all the planned RTP buildings. 

 

The end result is that the 'old wharf' buildings don't sit together well and are too obviously independent buildings. To manage this, I think the newer-looking building can be moved more into the top-right corner:

 

I'll try to post an updated plan tomorrow too. 

 

Erm, well that got a little out of hand.

 

On 04/01/2021 at 18:29, Schooner said:

What else should I be thinking about? 

Uncoupling magnets.

 

Advice please:

How many would you have? Where would you have them? Are electromagnets worth it?

 

Cheers, 

 

Schooner

Edited January 10, 2021 by Schooner
Picture management

[Schooner]

Bit of an update mezze, hopefully with something to suit all tastes. I've been back at work since the last post, with no leave in the foreseeable, so there's no real progress but things have been slowly ticking along. 

 

The plan itself takes another step forward...

...as I take my first gleeful steps towards sett-induced mania. Might as well start now! Oh, and sorry about the colour - meant to represent the stone buildings, hadn't noticed how vile it was.

 

The intention is to have fully inset (in-sett, aaah than' you) track left of the LH points' frogs; the LH pair of points themselves inset in setts (back) and earth (middle and front) but with the four-foot exposed (a look I rather like); the RH point earth/cinder-ballast to sleeper-top (so at least there's one bit showing off the 75 BH track, which should look nice and light with daylight showing under the rails); and then the final piece of track fully inset again, but just in the earth. The last will be part of the ground gently rising to the back and to the right of the layout. Flangeways possibly protected by baulk timber, but most likely just dug out by use...I think. I want to try to learn a few techniques and the variety will, I hope, mitigate the large open expanse in the middle without losing coherence...or without having to work out how to inset switch blades! Feedback would be appreciated

 

I'm still debating how to do the setts - I think a mix of DAS (scribed for the edges, embossed for the bulk) and sheet (for the insets, as I don't trust my ability not to mess that up) would be the best balance of ability vs ambition, and even so practice will be essential which will also help make a more informed decision. Came across a Third Way just now, which I'm going to link here for my own convenience  https://www.dcctrainautomation.co.uk/noch-60316-cobblestone-structure-road-32x75cm.html and https://www.dcctrainautomation.co.uk/auhagen-52236-oohott-paving-stone-slabs-straight.html [usual disclaimer; not even a customer].

 

The scene is getting busier and busier, but I love how open it is in the middle (!) which I think lets the shunting/puzzle be main focus of interest, and gives the locomotive room to be the star. 

 

Wagon placement (A-F on the plan above) is now legacy only, and will need a re-think a) now things around them have altered and b) since I got carried away a bought a few too many kits just before leaving home...idiot...! 

 

Dark red dots are proposed inital/primary un-coupling magnet positions, 90mm from frogs for clearance, pink* are for subsequent secondary magnets to minimise the Uncouple Shuffle, c.100mm from the layout edge . Workable? I've decided not to worry about electromagents or not: the Sprat & Winkle starter kits comes with 4 x magnets, I'll try them out and let the question answer itself.

*including one hiding under the shed

 

I've been thinking about buffer stops too. I only 'need' one of these, for the headshunt, but it'd be nice to have something to protect the two sidings. Plan A is currently to curl up the ends of the rails (almost certainly seperate pieces to the actual siding track - I'm not that brave), as in the bottom left:

 (from the very useful igg.org.uk)

...with the turn-ups supported by baulk timber, the top of which will be at ground level for the Pendon barn building, if that makes sense?. I've gone this route as just laying a sleeper or two across the rails seemed a little too lax, but I'll need to squeeze every mm out of that siding. Very open to suggestions.

 

Stops for the other two sidings might be the trow's stern line (made fast to one of the shed posts due to another boat's manoeuver down the wharf out of shot, or perhaps as the latest petty act in the on-going spat between the skipper and the wharfinger...who knows...) for the nearer, and the low-hanging hook of a shed crane for the other. Clutching at straws but I'm sure between us an on-scene explanation for the shunt limits can be found that isn't too 

 

Messing about with the top RH corner continues, but I think now the buildings will sit fairly well together and the wall between road and wharf just about blocks the sightlines to the edge of the board which, as @Harlequin noted, was the last to be masked. There's still the vertical component to manage, mind...

 

More looking at the real world in our new setting provided some more inspiration for the shed: that in the centre of this photo of Stroud:

https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW023880 (register for free to zoom in/full screen etc - it's the most wonderful timewaster research tool). Hopped across to the NLS maps to grab some rough measurements:

Call it 45' so 180mm, as on the current plan and below (note: ground level and rail level are miles out from what would be modelled - do not trust the number of steps!):

and catered for here: https://www.scalemodelscenery.co.uk/lx247-oo-depot--industrial-building-roof-trusses-180mm---oo4mm176-8611-p.asp 

 

Although as with the Stroud example I'd be tempted to truncate one, if not both, of the sides, which would give a footprint c.150mm wide. In this case I think the wooden platform would be ditched. On which, I have in mind something like:

 

which is an On30 kit, but the dimensions are not so far out.

 

That's plenty for now, I'm sure you'll agree! 

 

Thanks for your time, and in advance for your feedback. Both are much appreciated.

 

Cheers,

 

Schooner

 

ps. In the background, research on the watercraft also continues as they will need to be scratch built (and/or drawn up in CAD and 3D printed, the jury is still out). It turns out the barges of the Stroudwater Navigation and the Thames and Severn Canal are something of an enigma, though related to Kennet barges (and thence Wey Navigation barges, of which several still exist), so I'll close with a barely relevant picture of a pretty bottom

 

 

 

 

pps. Turns out two donkeys would be as likely canal motive power as a horse, order placed with Dart Castings. Two horses were used for heavy barges (eg. timber, a cargo set to feature on the model). One horse would take the empty barge to Gloucester, a day or two later the other would be taken there by rail (!) and the pair would bring the laden barge back. Wildcard traffic notes officially open!

 

ppps. Oh, the other thing I've done is to hold up a mirror to the model, as it were, to see if the 'whole wharf' is convincing or not. Obviously there are all sorts of caveats, but if you can convert the below into a black and white photo of c.1900 vintage in your mind's eye, then I think you can see a functional wharf and transhipment dock of the same:

 

Edited January 19, 2021 by Schooner
Spellink, posties

[Schooner]

Correction:

 

This will give the correct capactities for the

• Approach road - 1 wagon (eg. road van) - although I might move this magnet c.140mm from the end of the headshunt to allow the loco to uncouple from the train before setting back into a siding.
• Loading dock (upper siding) - 5 wagons
• Shed road (middle siding) - 3 wagons 
• Quay road (lower siding) - 3 wagons

All the sidings are generous, which could allow

• for wagons longer than 90mm between couplings*, or
• more than 8 wagons to be included in the puzzle, or
• the 'standard' puzzle to be played with another wagon at the end of the siding for aesthetics/shunt limit justification 

*the headshunt remains the ruling length, at c.415mm to hold 3 wagons and locomotive. This is constrained by approach road radius and desire to extend the scene beyond the siding. I'm not that keen to sacrifice those for a longer headshunt. Although it would open up wagon and locomotive variety further, I'm hoping to move towards earlier, shorter, stock in the future  

 

[Schooner]

On 21/01/2021 at 18:47, Schooner said:

 I'm not that keen to sacrifice those for a longer headshunt.

 

Can't believe me when I'm whistling...

 

 

The further back one goes in time, the less likely one is to find a dedicated shunter and more likely to find shunting being done by the trip loco...often 0-6-0 tender engine...sooo ummm this happened.

 

The plain wall of the Pendon building provides the backdrop to the end of the siding, which hopefully will stop its proximity to the siding impacting too much. I think the gate would have to go - it doesn't feel right any more - and space is tight for getting a cart in through the doors (which open to the bridge end)...but one of my favourite views across the 'layout' remains functionally intact:

 

Happy Tuesday  

 

[Schooner]

Bored of blowing around at the end of our anchor chain, I've been looking at bridges. Particularly this one:

 

Not a slavish copy, but plugging in the dimensions etc from the SCARM plan gives a first sketch of:

 5mm grid, so 4 squares = 20mm = 5' in 1:76. The parapet brickwork should be one with the spandrels and wings, which should help the thing look a little chunkier than the sketch suggests. I quite like how lightly built it is, which should also excuse it being quite narrow (I've allowed c.70mm width, but would it'd be good to get it down to around 40mm over the span).

 

I'll need to do a trial-run in card, and then was thinking of using Wills embossed sheets for the sides, Slaters for anything curved (and perhaps even brick papers for anything difficult). 

 

Stonehouse Wharf (a touchstone for the layout's new setting) for reference:

Thoughts?

 

In other news:

I'm in the process of inventing a lightly fictionalised reality where rather than the Railway Companies trashing the Canal Companies, the latter were able to combine to get one over on the former (largely by stealing the real plans the Railway Coys were intending to use to screw over each other). This sets the layout in a world in which a) the Stroudwater Navigation and Thames and Severn Canal and Railway Company exists, b) the SN&T&SC&RC owns a line of some 15 miles between exchanges sidings at Stonehouse and Cirencester, shadowing the canal and indeed built along infilled sections of it, with some of its own stock and motive power. The exercise...well... it's just Rule One with knobs on  Whether the idea's a keeper I don't yet know, so all input on the formation of the SN&T&SC&RC will be very welcome!

 

Cheers,

 

Schooner

[Schooner]

Sensible and completable he said; making use of RTP for an achievable end-point in the available time he said; shed based on commercially available trusses he said...

 

Well, he obviously talks bal-......ogne!

 

First stab at the shed. As with the bridge, just a sketch to get my ideas down and start working them out - feedback of any kind appreciated. Not really ready for public consumption, but posted with ulterior motives in another thread and so shared here too:

 

 

Based on the framing for one of the early transit sheds in the West India Docks () largely because I couldn't find decent drawings for railway-related sheds* with the kind of attributes I'm after. As with all things, pointers welcome  

 

Timber framed, tin roofed. Skylight down the centreline, and perhaps a window in the end - would these have been glass panels? - if it doesn't make the thing look too posh. As previously threatened, one side shortened for a bit of variety. Should the side panel be extended down another 4-5mm? The other side (open to the front of the layout) will be protected by canvas dodgers (rolled up to let the sunshine (and sightlines) in - a nod to Ingleford's perpetual beautiful Spring morning until I get round to a lighting rig). Crane is a suggestion only, and would be right at the edge of the layout (possibly forming the stop to prevent loose stock rolling off the edge in case of surprise).

 

The real question I have is whether this is the right route to go down at all? Would there be an end-loading dock butting on to a shed - even one so open? Is there room for some tarpaulin'd crates etc against the wall without blocking access for porters trying to unload a van in the 'loading dock road'? What is the point in the timber trestle platofrm, and how would it have been used? etc etc etc... Hopefully this process will sort some of those questions, but if you have an opinion please share it!

 

Gale-induced inactivity, hence the time to get pencil and paper involved. Enjoyable and useful process, hopefully more to come...

 

Cheers,

 

Schooner

 

*Currently away from home and books, so totally internet-reliant. Sub-optimal.

[Mikkel]

 

On 20/11/2020 at 13:01, Schooner said:

Inspiration comes particularly from the wharves at Hungerford, Bradford on Avon and Tavistock for feel and specific buildings - this sort of thing:

  

 

 

Those are lovely photos. Do you happen to remember which ones are Hungerford and Bradford? They're not too far from my layout setting, and I've been wondering...

 

 

3 hours ago, Schooner said:

First stab at the shed. As with the bridge, just a sketch to get my ideas down and start working them out - feedback of any kind appreciated. Not really ready for public consumption, but posted with ulterior motives in another thread and so shared here too:

 

 

I look forward to this one, the timber construction and see-through nature will add a lot of atmosphere and period feel, I think.

 

3 hours ago, Schooner said:

The real question I have is whether this is the right route to go down at all? Would there be an end-loading dock butting on to a shed - even one so open? Is there room for some tarpaulin'd crates etc against the wall without blocking access for porters trying to unload a van in the 'loading dock road'? What is the point in the timber trestle platofrm, and how would it have been used? etc etc etc... Hopefully this process will sort some of those questions, but if you have an opinion please share it!

 

All valid questions, this is why I sometimes envy those who model real locations: They don't have to worry too much about such things, as they can "just" build what the photos show.

 

In this case if I were you I would not worry any further and just have a go. That structure is simply too nice to abandon, and spring is only a few weeks away  

[Schooner]

2 hours ago, Mikkel said:

Do you happen to remember...

Of those three, top two Hungerford last one  Tavistock. If any are of particular interest I'd be happy to provide all the info I can. Definate potential there...and 'Farthingford' has a certain ring to it...

 

[SteveyDee68]

Read through your thread with interest (anything wharf related floats my boat!)

 

Quick thought re your comment about Bachmann resin buildings being small/underscale - keep them entirely at the rear and don't attempt to mix in more scale buildings and so perhaps create a slight sense of false perspective?

 

Will follow with interest!

 

Steve S