Franco-Prussian Terminus Layout

[Lacathedrale]

I'm rolling around the idea of building a Minories-type layout based on a french or german practise in H0. Current thoughts are directing me towards Epoch I german prototypes, i.e. KPEV.

 

Homage to C. A. Hart's Achaux

• Overall length: 5' (short), 6' (long)
• Passenger Platforms: 3
• Goods sidings: 3
• Turnouts: 10

 

This plan can be stretched and compressed using different points lengths, a double slip, etc. between 5' and 6' in length. Operationally I am foreseeing Minories-style locomotive switchover - sleepers and NPCS being attached and detached with a branch shuttle service, or freight transfer between the main and branch lines.

 

Track Choices

The folliwing are the versions of what the station might look like in Tillig Elite Roco-Line and Peco's Code 83 geometry - not really much in it!

 

 

The main difference is that the tillig track doesn't seem to have a 'flat' double slip, so a pair of turnouts is substituted. This S-curve between the outbound main and platform 3 isn't as significant as one might expect, the topmost platform being essentially reserved for a branch shuttle service - no shunting moves would use this crossing, only departures from the middle-top platform.

 

Any thoughts on track choices/availabillity/etc. or the plan? I'm expecting this to be an 'operating' layout as well as a scenic one, and I am also thinking that while it would be good to be mobile and exhibitable IN THEORY, it is not a priority for me.

 

 

 

 

 

[Allegheny1600]

That should be an interesting layout!

If you need any Prussian inspiration, please take a look at my layout in the German section, called Leberecht. Far be it for me to blow my own trumpet but it may be used to you.

May I suggest that if you’re buying models from well, anywhere really, do only pick the Olive green with red/brown under frame rather than the earlier (model) bright green with red under frame as this is incorrect.

Cheers,

John.

[Lacathedrale]

Thanks John, I'll check it out - the precise subject is yet to be determined. Infact, the precise scale and gauge is also yet to be set - but I feel like this is a solid opportunity to model something awesome. I've been comparing and contrasting track options - I truly enjoy hand laying track, for example, but I'm slowly getting worn down by only ever having built one (very small) cameo layout to completion, so I'm considering what off the shelf options might give me a good bang for buck.

 

[Andy Hayter]

If Franco Prussian, why KPEV?  More logical would be EL _ Elsass-Loethringen - Alsace Lorraine.  From memory there was almost no Franco Prussian border - Saarland perhaps(but did EL isolate that section of border?)  but the Pfalz (Palatinate) was Bavarian  (aka Bavarian Siberia and used as such) , and to the east on the other side of the Rhine was Baden- isolated by the EL.

 

If KPEV then it is just Prussian.

 

As such it is worth remembering that all of the German State railways had right hand running and a number of your track plans do not work quite as I think is  intended unless mirrored.  

[Lacathedrale]

The topic title really only because I was inspired by C.A. Hart's "Achaux" via @Dr Gerbil-Fritters discussions as a track plan source, but thinking about potentially state railway or DR setting - rather than specifically relating to the topic of the layout. Essentially, I think at this point I am notionally thinking about a "continental/non-UK Minories" .

 

Thank you so much for the info re: running lines, that's very interesting.

 

I've re-drawn the plan in Unitrack in N rather than Tillig in H0 - and I'm quite fond of how it looks:

 

 

Due to the double crossove, it actually ends up being significantly more compact than Minories:

 

 

Both of these are configured for four or five coach trains (depending on the era and prototype) and could fit nose-to-nose on a shelf on the average spare bedroom.

 

One of the interesting things about Mr. Hart's plan is the branch platform forming an interchange between companies - maybe it could be a non-electrified line and thus requiring turn over of trains from electric to diesel and vice versa?  Or standard to narrow gauge, etc. ?

 

[Lacathedrale]

Back to back, the plans fit on a standard Wickes hollow-core door - maybe ideal while the caprice has yet to settle?

 

 

Obviously not a permanent layout solution as the long discussions of 'island' vs 'around the walls' layout designs will testify - but for the sake of £40 to get a testbed it seems like it may be worthwhile?

[Ian Morgan]

I built Freshwater on a door, and it was not a good move. What I thought was a plywood skin was actually something in between hardboard and card board. It is filled with a honeycomb lattice of cardboard which makes it difficult to fit point servos and wiring. I ended up removing the lower skin and honeycomb beneath where the trackwork was to go, and adding a timber frame around that hollowed out area.  I then cut the upper skin and removed the honeycomb where the river and stream were to go. The upper skin that the track was glued to is still very flexible. I also had to add some more framework below because the servo mechanisms and gubbins needed more depth than the thickness of the door to protect them.

 

It would have been much better to ditch the door and build a proper baseboard instead. I will be looking at laser cut baseboards next time.

 

The underside being worked on:

 

Topside:

 

 

Edited January 6, 2021 by Ian Morgan
Added photos

[Allegheny1600]

Like Ian above, I tried a door once! Mine was actually cut in two lengthways and half thrown away. The good part became a time saver (waster) layout, it was adequate at best but not recommended.

Also, it was something that was being thrown out and replaced by a decent door, I would never have purchased such a thing!

Cheers,

John.