Chuffnell Regis

[Gedward]

I agree, the balance between track and place is just right. Lots of space for the surrounding terrain to assert itself here.

[Harlequin]

There's still too much track to my eye, I'm afraid.

The splay in the goods yard doesn't leave enough room for lorries to back up to the loading bay.

The turntable is in an odd position away from the engine shed.

The baseboards are 3ft deep and so it might be difficult to reach the back when all the scenery is in place. The far corner will be very difficult to reach.

I'm worried that the operation of the branch line stub will be unsatisfying. Trains will just stop and stand in the valley and they will inevitably be visible from some angles, destroying the illusion that they've gone somewhere.

Sorry to go against the flow.

 

[Gedward]

47 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

Sorry to go against the flow

 

There's nothing IMHO, to be sorry about. We all ask questions here to get good constructive advice from the better minds. But sometimes that advice can be conflicting. And when that happens, rule one is there to save us. 

[Graham T]

On 29/04/2021 at 09:39, Harlequin said:

 

Sorry to go against the flow.

 

 

Not at all!  I'll aways welcome different opinions.

 

I've  tweaked the plan a little, which hopefully gives better vehicle access to the goods shed.  Also, you'll see that I've reversed the curve on the "disappearing branch line", to make hiding it easier.  I'm still not entirely convinced by this, but think it will work.

 

I wasn't 100% happy with the engine shed being separated from the turntable.  I was putting it near to the platforms on the basis of Wallingford largely, but perhaps it would look better sited on the spur to the right of the turntable?  But I still have a question mark in my mind about the engine access to the turntable from the goods siding.  I'd like a more elegant solution for that but can't think of one.  Any suggestions regarding that would be gratefully received!

 

As for access to the rear of the baseboards, I'm not too worried as I I will be able to reach ok, and have a step that I can also use if required.

 

Thanks again for the input

 

 

Edited April 4, 2022 by Graham T

[Harlequin]

Regarding reach: Remember that you need to be able to work at that distance comfortably for long periods, not just reach it momentarily at a stretch. And the more scenery there is at the front, the less room you have to put one hand (or foot!) down to steady yourself and reach further.

 

Maybe three goods sidings would be enough? 1. Cattle dock and Goods loop. 2. Goods shed, <yard splay>, 3. back/mileage siding.

 

I think the shed and the TT should be close together - I can't think of an example where they aren't. The TT can either be on the line into the shed (e.g. Whitland), beside it (the most common arrangement) or kicking back from it (e.g. Princetown, Fairford). The shed probably only works in the Wallingford/Lambourn-style position when there is no TT at the station. A loco needs to be able to get in and out of the shed area without blocking, or being blocked by, any other stock. The water point, in whatever form, should be positioned where a loco can get to it quickly, without too much shuffling around (but you can work around that by providing an extra water column at the end of the platform).

 

You could maybe have the shed and TT on a long kickback off the shared run round line and use the shed as the view blocker to hide the exit of the main line from the scene instead of a bridge or tunnel. (That needs quite a low eyeline to work, though.)

 

I'm sure there's neat way to arrange a shed and TT in your station but it needs a bit of thought...

 

What about replacing the branch line stub with a small private industry that would realistically terminate in the top right corner? That would give a reason for some interesting traffic and more complex shunting operations. A dairy, wood mill, furniture manufacturer, the world's your oyster! (It would also make the signalling simpler.)

 

BTW: What did you decide about cassettes across the door? That would give you a lot more scenic room to play with.

 

Edited April 29, 2021 by Harlequin

[Graham T]

Thanks very much for all those thoughts and suggestions.  I'm swayed by moving the engine shed onto the same line as the turntable, so I think that will happen.  Having trouble visualising what you mean about the three goods sidings and putting the engine shed on a kickback from the run round line though.  Could you maybe sketch that out for me?  Just a "bag of a fag packet" sketch, not a fully fledged track plan!

 

Your mention of a small private industry got me thinking about Tintern quarry, but I'm not sure there is enough space in the upper right corner of the layout for me to make that look convincing.  It would have covered a pretty large area.

 

I'm still planning to have cassettes running across the doorway, I don't think I can use that for a scenic area (and I suspect that my partner will complain if the layout spreads any further into the room!)

[Harlequin]

Schematically, like this:

 

or maybe like this:

 

I don't know if they would fit when curved into your space. You said above that the space was 10ft by 6ft 6in. Does the 6ft 6in length already include the doorway?

[Graham T]

Gosh, that's great, thank you.  Impressive for the back of a fag packet ;-)

 

The available space is 10ft by 4ft 6in, for the scenic section.  Then the tunnel mouth you see in the plan below feeds onto the cassettes.

 

I like what you've done with these plans (and am grateful for your time and effort), but I can't really move anything substantial - such as the engine shed and turntable - beyond the station throat, as I have planned a river in there!  The pic below shows roughly how things stand at the moment.  I'll be moving the engine shed onto the turntable road, more or less where the water tank is indicated now.  The goods shed and its siding will be moved nearer to the station itself, and the track will run through the far side of the shed, rather than the nearside as it does in the sketch.  Finally, the branch will be curved in the same direction as the main up/down line as well, which will make it easier to mask I think, and the small stream running alongside it will go.  I might also put a down gradient on the branch line after the bridge, to take it deeper into the cutting (which will have trees all along the top of it).

 

We need more plans!!!

 

[Graham T]

 

 

Here's a view from the doorway, so basically standing at the far end of the cassettes.  I've added the elevated section carrying the main running line over the river.  Hopefully this gives some impression of the space available and how the scenery will lie.

 

 

Edited April 4, 2022 by Graham T
Couldn't attach photo...

[Harlequin]

Thanks for the new photo and clarification of the dimensions.

 

This is my best suggestion to keep the engine shed and turntable connected that would work within the tight constraints of the existing baseboards:

 

Two bridges cross the river, maybe stone in front and timber trestle behind.

No branch line and no private industry but that's OK - less track and more room for non-railway scenery and buildings.

 

[Harlequin]

6 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Thanks for the new photo and clarification of the dimensions.

 

This is my best suggestion to keep the engine shed and turntable connected that would work within the tight constraints of the existing baseboards:

 

Two bridges cross the river, maybe stone in front and timber trestle behind.

No branch line and no private industry but that's OK - less track and more room for non-railway scenery and buildings.

 

 

In the cold light of a new day I can see that there is, of course, a better answer: Abandon the turntable.

 

Then there would be many more possibilities to arrange things. Your current plan would work but my suggestion would be with one less goods siding and without the stub branch, which is just too "tricksy" in my book.

 

[Graham T]

Thanks again, but I think I might invoke Rule 1 for the turntable

 

I'm still undecided about the branch line.  I'll see how things look when I have some buildings and scenery in place.  Plans are nothing but a basis for change, after all!

[Graham T]

The elevated sections across the river (the Wye or the Lugg, not sure which yet) are now in place.  I've also started building a bridge for the nearer crossing, using a modified Scalescenes item.

 

[Gedward]

This is coming along really well. Loving the elevated section.

[Graham T]

Thanks, I've got high hopes (!) for this section.  As soon as the bridges are built, and the backscenes arrive from the UK, I'll make a start on the hills.  Then I think I'll be able to figure out whether or not the branch line will work.

[Graham T]

Slow but steady progress with the first Scalescenes bridge.  I don't know how some people manage to turn these kits out in a couple of hours!

 

[Gedward]

11 minutes ago, Graham T said:

Slow but steady progress with the first Scalescenes bridge.  I don't know how some people manage to turn these kits out in a couple of hours!

 

 

I know this feeling very well. Yes, you could get to be quicker and get the whole layout done much sooner. But then what?

 

Start another one me thinks.

[Graham T]

I don't think there's much risk of this layout being finished quickly!  Work and so on gets in the way, and it also takes a long time for bits and pieces to arrive from the UK.  There are some good modelling suppliers here in Vienna, including railway stuff - but of course they don't tend to carry much in the way of GW-themed items...

 

Anyway, the building part is what I enjoy, so all is good.

[Graham T]

The glacial progress with the Scalescenes bridge for Chuffnell Regis continues.  Far from perfect, but I'm reasonably happy with it.  Errors are down to me and not the kit!  I made life difficult for myself, of course, by opting to build it with skewed abutment walls, rather than at right angles to the span.  Still, I think it looks okay so far and it's certainly been a good learning exercise!

 

The photos show it dry fitted in place on the layout, and then the supporting piers glued in place.

 

 

[Graham T]

I'm now having doubts of course, and wondering if I should make the bridge longer, so that I can build it with the abutment walls at right angles to the span...

[Graham T]

Well, it's fixed in place (for now), with the wing walls added.  I'm thinking now that  the small brick columns at the end of the wings should be vertical, but I think they might end up being covered with groundwork anyway once I start adding the scenic layer.  And some judicious weathering and vegetation should cover up any gaps!

 

[MrWolf]

I rather like skewed bridges, they add visual interest.

I'll let you off for having a coach on the bridge, at least it's a coach, not a bus...

[Graham T]

I'm sure there will be one along shortly

[Graham T]

As I suspected, the leaning columns at the end of the wings were bugging me, so they've been amputated and repositioned properly.

[MrWolf]

I hadn't noticed that the newell piers were leaning. I can understand that would bug you once everything else was in place and there was little that you could do about it.

It's those little things that matter.