Foyers - The Great Glen Late 1960's/Mid 80's

[SHerr]

This is my 3rd attempt at starting a second layout over the last year, my current attempt Speybridge (GNsR) was just lacking something and I wasn't happy with the feel of it and lack of operational interest and variety of rolling stock.

 

After pondering/researching I came across a website about railways on the south side of Loch Ness. There were a number of plans for railways through Foyers towards to Fort Augustus which really grabbed my interest.

 

My assumption is that after the various legal battles and objections between the North British and Highland Railways that a number of local business' in particular British Aluminium Company who opened their Foyers smelter in the late 1890's, brokered a deal for a Joint Railway to serve the Great Glen and link Inverness and Fort William around the time that the North British took over the Fort Augustus line.

 

The line was built by the North British following the Mallaig extension and allowed Fort William and Foyers Aluminium Smelters to be served jointly.

 

The station follows a similar layout to a typical West Highland and also Fort Augustus line arrangements and also an exchange for the British Aluminium plant. This plant did have a 3 foot gauge railway to the pier and this was linked to the station area and assumed it was converted to standard gauge.

 

Full steam (diesel) ahead to the late 60's and the line still see's good traffic levels with passenger and occasional parcels services, Aluminium traffic both inbound Bauxite in Presflo's and Covhop's and outbound ingots. There is also Timber to Corpach as well as normal regular freight flows of general merchandise, coal, oil etc.

 

Operations are a mix of West Highland and Inverness stock, classes 20, 24/1, 26, 27 and 29 operating services transition liveries mixing Green and Blue areas. The smelter has a Barclay 0-4-0 tank to take wagons from the plant to the exchange sidings.

 

I am hoping to be able to fit more scenery on the plan I've come up with and feel a bit more like the railway is 'in the landscape'.

 

Track plan will be something like the plan below, I was going to use Code 75 but may have a look at Peco Bullhead hence I've tried to keep to long radius points.

Edited January 12, 2022 by SHerr

[SHerr]

I've made some good initial progress. The plan above has been modified. The layout sits on one side of the loft with a larger 80's layout on the other. In playing around with track plans for both I came up with a plan that meant i could make both layouts bigger.

 

Approx 15 inches was taken off the 'bigger' layout to allow the 'smaller' layout to become an L shape adding approx 7ft of running. This now meant the smaller layout was bigger than the big one!

 

Further work came up with a revised plan for the 80's layout which I think will make it feel less rammed in. In turn Foyers has moved to the other side of the loft and has gained a longer scenic section for the River and station approach.

 

I have spent a good bit of time tweaking the baseboard frames to allow a decent drop in height to the river I have managed to loose lay some track out and I am pretty happy. The board will also have a lower 6 inch section at the front to allow a road and give some different levels of scenery.

 

Revised plan is below: Inverness is to the right, Fort Augustus/Spean Bridge to the left and Loch Ness is to the top

 

 

View from Fiddle yard showing branch to Aluminium smelter on the right.

 

 

Right hand Fiddle yard, can just fit 3 x mk1 and a Full brake although most trains will be less. I will use code 100 track in fiddle yard (mainly as I have loads from old layouts and the code 100 3-ways are great for fiddle yards.

 

 

2 views from the River end, I may change the L/H curved point for a straight as the right hand leg gets pulled too far across and narrows the platform.

 

 

Edited February 14, 2021 by SHerr

[stivesnick]

This looks an interesting idea for a layout with lots of operational potential.

 

One question. How will you operate the line to the smelter? In the original plan, there was an exchange siding and the plant could have its own loco that could reach this siding but not the rest of the yard. In the new plan the private loco could in theory access any of the freight yard sidings. Not sure the BR authorities would like that. One option would be to have the gate at the end of the smelter line, so the BR loco would push wagons onto this line to be collected by the works shunter.

 

Nick 

 

[SHerr]

I’d not really twigged that by putting the double slip in that it would create that situation. I had done it to save space and as a had one from the previous layout.

 

On the Speyside line at Carron the distillery shunter had running rights over a short section of the main line so it’s not completely out of the ordinary. I will be installing a trap point out of the siding so I suppose the private shunter could have access rights to all sidings but not the mains.

 

My plan was that for a train going into the smelter the main line loco would propel the wagons into the exchange line and the Private shunter would then draw them forwards. On the return the Private shunter would run up to the buffers and the main line loco would then draw the train onto the mains before either shunting into a siding or heading back to Inverness.

 

I will have another think. I’ve probably now got room to go back to the original plan it just means buying some turnouts and having a spare double slip.

[BoD]

As Nick has already said, an interesting idea idea for a layout.

I shall follow this with interest.

[Ben Alder]

Looks promising indeed - I would say definitely go for bullhead  - it shouts UK rather than Continental HO and to my mind is essential if one is trying to create a believable scene. There is also a very promising range of bullhead kits on the horizon that  should expand your choices of pointwork.

 

[SHerr]

8 minutes ago, Ben Alder said:

Looks promising indeed - I would say definitely go for bullhead  - it shouts UK rather than Continental HO and to my mind is essential if one is trying to create a believable scene. There is also a very promising range of bullhead kits on the horizon that  should expand your choices of pointwork.

 

Thanks, that’s interesting to know although the thought of building points fills me with fear! I’ve never attempted it but just reading threads on here puts me in a cold sweat. I’m presuming your not able/allowed to name the maker?
 

I did research the Marcway points as I think long Y’s in the yard may work better. Now I’ve got something down I can have a play with some long turnouts that will be used on the other layout and see how it all fits.

 

The Bullhead thought has already got me into trouble as whilst looking into availability I accidentally bought a blue class 27 that Rails were selling for under £100!

[Ben Alder]

Ditto! Tried some Marcway points decades ago and backed away....No, these seem foolproof and will be a gamechanger. Here is the topic - he already does 2mm stuff so it isn't pie in the sky, as has been promised before and elsewhere. If you can be bothered doing what I did and add cosmetic chairs to Code 75 along with bullhead rail, they do pass muster but it is a tedious process.

 

 

 

[SHerr]

Thanks for the link, I think I remember seeing something about them but the title including 'Points' and 'Kit' would have put me off reading much more!

 

These do look interesting, no soldering for starters - if I went near a fine scale turnout with a soldering iron it would be history. There's also a Y in the n gauge range so hopeful.

 

Hopefully they will be out soon and I might give one a go.

[Ben Alder]

It's got me thinking as well about Dornoch.....

 

[ianathompson]

 

I have a couple of second string N gauge layouts based in the north of Scotland, not that either makes much progress!

 

The idea of a railway to Foyers surprised me as I had not realised that there had once been a smelter there, despite having been through the place.

My own take on the NBR branch to Inverness was to assume that it ran on the western side of the Loch.

There seems to be precious little traffic on offer on either side.

 

The Highland stopped running the Fort Augustus branch as soon as possible because it was so uneconomic and handed it back to the NBR.

Any trace of the railway in the village itself seems to have disappeared completely, having spent time looking for the remains.

[I was intrigued to find what looked to be a cricket ground but that is another story!]

 

I am more interested in the Inverness end of the NBR "Great Glen" line.

Trains leave Inverness Citadel (the GNoSR terminus in the town) twice per day for Spean Bridge calling at Foyer's Ferry amonst other places along the way.

 

Best of luck with this project.

Referring back to your previous attempt, traffic on the GNoSR was pretty thin in most places.

The site of my roundy roundy layout had to be shifted to another "might have been" for this reason.

 

Ian T

[SHerr]

5 hours ago, ianathompson said:

 

I have a couple of second string N gauge layouts based in the north of Scotland, not that either makes much progress!

 

The idea of a railway to Foyers surprised me as I had not realised that there had once been a smelter there, despite having been through the place.

My own take on the NBR branch to Inverness was to assume that it ran on the western side of the Loch.

There seems to be precious little traffic on offer on either side.

 

The Highland stopped running the Fort Augustus branch as soon as possible because it was so uneconomic and handed it back to the NBR.

Any trace of the railway in the village itself seems to have disappeared completely, having spent time looking for the remains.

[I was intrigued to find what looked to be a cricket ground but that is another story!]

 

I am more interested in the Inverness end of the NBR "Great Glen" line.

Trains leave Inverness Citadel (the GNoSR terminus in the town) twice per day for Spean Bridge calling at Foyer's Ferry amonst other places along the way.

 

Best of luck with this project.

Referring back to your previous attempt, traffic on the GNoSR was pretty thin in most places.

The site of my roundy roundy layout had to be shifted to another "might have been" for this reason.

 

Ian T

Yes, I was surprised to find out about the plan to the south of Loch Ness, I'd only ever considered the North side. I'm assuming that the Fort Augustus line became economic to operate once through running was available to Inverness, especially as partly backed by the British Aluminium Company.

 

I was originally thinking of doing something based on Invermoriston - similar plan/idea minus the private siding/line to the smelter. When I read about the the plan to the south side which referenced the 3 foot gauge railway that was built between the pier and the smelter that was the bit of extra operational interest/traffic that I thought was lacking. It makes sense that once the standard gauge railway came along that the smelter railway was converted to standard gauge.

 

I'd just bought a Hattons Barclay 0-4-0 for myself for Christmas before ditching the GNoSR layout so was also desperate to find it a use. The British Aluminium Company at Burtnisland had Barclays and Pecketts running into the early 70's so it all came together quite nicely.

 

As the South side of the loch is quite wooded it also allows for some timber traffic to Corpach - I just need to have a crack at a Timber-P or 4 now!

[SHerr]

A bit more about the location, attached are extracts from a 1903 map showing the Aluminium railway to the pier.

 

 

I have then (badly) drawn over this the approximate position of my assumed railway, the line going in land slightly to follow General Wades old military road before coming back to the shore of the loch. The original suggestion was that the line was intended to be built out onto the edge of the loch (as I believe was originally the plan for the West Highland around Loch Lomond.)

 

Edited February 15, 2021 by SHerr

[SHerr]

I've been into the loft tonight and played around with all large radius points to look at whether Peco Bullhead would work. Its likely to have been a costly trip as it works nicely (better than I thought) and to my relief I can do it all with standard Peco so no kit building of points!!

 

The costs can be offset by being able to sell a double slip that I didn't buy that long ago and a boat load of curved points from the main layouts original incarnation. Its still going to get a bit pricey though.

 

The turnout into the Smelter is a short radius here as I didn't have any more Longs but will likely be a long radius.

 

 

 

 

 

[SHerr]

I received a delivery this morning, a Faller truss bridge for the River Foyers. Great service from Tops,Slots & Trains who sell a lot of Continental stuff - ordered very late Weds and postie knocking on the door at 10am Friday.

 

 

I nearly overlooked this as it’s described as Narrow Gauge but then in the description says also suitable for standard gauge. Plus the photo on the front doesn’t show the height of the bridge. Great price at £23 for something that including the side arches is 300mm long. I decided against anything longer as I would have struggled to get a wider river without it taking too much space. I think it has a pretty good ‘British’ feel, much more than a lot of the continental or even British bridges on sale - I have spent 30 years in railway Civils and Infrastructure so do know what a British rail bridge should look like!

 

There seems a decent level of detail on rivet work etc and it comes with 2 very small cattle creeps that I was going to discard but I may try and join them together for a slightly longer span for the station underpass.

 

 

 

[BoD]

48 minutes ago, SHerr said:

 I think it has a pretty good ‘British’ feel, much more than a lot of the continental or even British bridges on sale -

 

More than that I think the girder lattice is a pretty good representation of that seen on the West Highland line specifically.

[SHerr]

1 hour ago, BoD said:

 

More than that I think the girder lattice is a pretty good representation of that seen on the West Highland line specifically.

Yes, I agree. It was that style of structure I was looking for. There is a Noch laser cut bridge but it’s a bit too big - about 390mm and the trusses look a lot deeper. Looks nice at a price but just a bit big. There’s also a shorter span of the Noch bridge but uses the same truss so looks too deep for the span.

[SHerr]

I've built up the main parts of the river bridge, the side arches needed to be reduced in height by 2 courses to fit the baseboard level.

 

The kit goes fairly well together although some parts don't hold square vary well with a bit of play around the corners. Also slightly annoyingly the stone courses don't all line up between front and sides. Generally though its reasonably good especially for the price, will look better with some paint and weathering on the stonework. 

 

The tracks are supposed to fix directly to the girder tops and onto the side span tops so effectively the track will be the main thing holding span to abutments, I will have a play in the loft a bit later but may glue a false deck across everything in styrene sheet to hold it together better - as the deck gets timber always you won't see it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I also bought some Peco Bullhead track yesterday, 10 lengths of flexi, joiners and 3 turnouts to allow the main lines to be laid before final decision on the yard arrangements. It certainly looks a lot better than code 75FB but also a lot more flexible - one reason I may glue a deck to the bridge. I've not laid any track yet as I'm trying to complete the woodwork to which the bridge is needed.

[SHerr]

And the bridge sat (approximately) in place on the layout. It actually seems quite solid pushing a loco over it.

 

 

 

 

 

[David Bell]

On 14/02/2021 at 21:40, SHerr said:

The Bullhead thought has already got me into trouble as whilst looking into availability I accidentally bought a blue class 27 that Rails were selling for under £100!

Done that before! Actually more than once.

[Graham108]

On 19/02/2021 at 11:31, BoD said:

 

More than that I think the girder lattice is a pretty good representation of that seen on the West Highland line specifically.

If Nicola Sturgeon had her way, Scotland would be 'Continental' 

 

Graham

[stivesnick]

The bridge doe slook the part, shame about the stone courses not lining up, normally Faller kits get those sort of details correct.

 

One question, is there enough clearance at the side of the stone piers to allow for some sort of handrail, it looks tight.

 

Regards 

 

Nick 

 

 

[SHerr]

3 hours ago, stivesnick said:

The bridge doe slook the part, shame about the stone courses not lining up, normally Faller kits get those sort of details correct.

 

One question, is there enough clearance at the side of the stone piers to allow for some sort of handrail, it looks tight.

 

Regards 

 

Nick 

 

 

Yes it does have handrails and walkways with the kit. May be slightly tight which may be the downside of it being HO/Narrow gauge. The main span will be ok but will need to see what happens with the side spans. 
 

Being for narrow or standard gauge it actually comes with 2 sets of walkways, narrower ones for standard gauge and wider for narrow gauge to line up with the stonework. If the main span looks too tight I could put the wider walkways on. Often bridges have less clearance for walkways at the ends so wouldn’t look out of place.

[SHerr]

The bridge has had its main girder and abutments painted and weathered. Finishing off with walkways etc will mainly have to wait until track can be aligned and final position fine tuned as the track is supposed to fix to the girder top and then the walkways fix to the sleepers.

 

 

 

 

[SHerr]

Things have started to come along nicely over the past week.

 

I have finished the major woodwork elements, glued down cork sheet and then at the weekend I have managed to get down the first pieces of the Peco Bullhead track.

 

It went down quite nicely and I have glued the long straight as a datum to work from, the points at each end and the curved loop are laid loose but fitted to final size etc. As mentioned elsewhere the peco fishplates are a bit difficult to fit to the points but go nicely onto the flexi. I must admit that working with something finer certainly makes you work a bit slower and more precisely. I am pleased with the results.

 

By far the biggest bonus is the new frog arrangement - I have a bit of a phobia of all things electrical but these are a joy, one feed and no insulating fishplates and things run very smoothly fully through the station, over the bridge and back round the loop. I always seem to struggle with shorts but nothing of the sort and super smooth running.

 

One question if anyone knows the answer, what’s the best (non kit) way to a catch point? If such a thing exists. I could try a code 75 but suspect the sleeper spacing may look wrong. Yes I know the catch point in the photo is the wrong hand, it’s the only one I have and was using it to check appearances.

 

The sidings are old code 75 to test sizes, I am looking at ditching one of the sidings as it left one fairly short one and a second reduced length, plus was looking a little cramped. I’ve not made my final decision yet but erring more to the 3. 

 

 

 

 

The first 2 test trains pass each other