Jump to content
 

New layout - name undecided


cromptonnut

Recommended Posts

At last, I have (I think) a trackplan, odd shaped as it fits in the space I have, I'd love bigger but can't.

 

What we have coming in bottom left is a cassette style storage yard, which I haven't included to save space.

 

There is single line and r2 curve hidden, then a road overbridge coming into a curved point. At the front of the layout (not detailed) is a simple double track station, but truncated to there with run-round facilities. To the right is the old level crossing, which will have buffer stops blocking the line (however, if I move into a larger space I may well remove these and add another storage yard but that's future). The line beyond the station remains laid but out of use.

 

The feed into the factory complex will be a rail-served dairy, operated by a repainted 03 serving as an industrial shunter. Empty milk tanks (the old Lima ones) will come in, loco hauled, and be pushed back into the left hand lower siding. The loco will then draw forward and couple up to the rake of full tanks that have been left there by the shunter, and take them away to somewhere. As this is a single line, invariably the freight service will be between passenger services. Occasional rakes of box vans will also arrive and depart, filled via the loading bay on the top left siding (I haven't drawn the factory details in this plan) and the occasional short wheelbase oil tank to refill the boilers.

 

The layout will be set in the blue/grey period into early sectorisation, so passenger services will be 121/117/108/150/153 hauled as I feel like, and locos will probably be 31/33/47 depending on availability and of course the odd surprise visitor that happened to be the only thing available for the task. Occasional trip workings for the oil tank will bring the 08 on to site as well.

 

Does this sound feasbile and workable to you, or would you change anything?

 

I have got 2 of the boards (4ft x 21") already and the triangle shaped board needs to be cut.

post-8328-0-68679900-1296743215_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a perfect world I'd do something like Chard Junction (google maps view http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&q=chard+junction&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Chard+Junction,+Chard,+Dorset,+United+Kingdom&ll=50.838502,-2.938097&spn=0.001677,0.004801&t=h&z=18 you can zoom in) but at the right end I'm restricted to 21 inches as there's a door - and nothing I can do about it.

 

To scale I think I worked out the whole factory was about 14ft end to end including the waste water treatment plant.

 

The original had a 'kickback siding' in the middle of the passing loop but I can't fit that in so hoped that the 3 way point/double slip options would work out fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been looking at it (still some way off pinning down the first piece of track) and I'm wondering whether the single track in from the FY might be better off as a double track? I've had a quick play with xtrackcad and I can fit in the pointwork required, and the double track will fit, but I don't know if it might be overkill for a small layout?

 

Alternatively I could model it but have some of it as a headshunt with a buffer stop then leave the rest of the track beyond it all rusted and overgrown?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stick to a single line approach - it will look longer and making it double will increase the area devoured by pointwork while making it look visually overdone I think.

 

 

Presumably modelling as if it was double track - ie double bridge and wide trackbed but nothing where the second track should be - as a sign of greater days long gone, would be fine?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Looking at the amount of track that you have, I can't see a second track having been lifted and that remaining. An alternative story might be that the railway built the structures with the exception of doubling the line in the future but that it never happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I haven't detailed the drawing, the top part is a factory complex and the bottom part is a station, on a truncated line. It didn't seem "overkill" trackwise to me, as the freight may well have remained a long time after passenger services were cut back. The station itself was going to have two platforms but only one (the bottom one) in use, the run-round being maintained for the occasional loco hauled service.

 

I quite like the idea of modelling a boarded up, derelict, run down station as it's not something I've personally seen modelled that often - the station here will most likely be unmanned with a couple of 'bus shelter' style structures and a ticket machine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably modelling as if it was double track - ie double bridge and wide trackbed but nothing where the second track should be - as a sign of greater days long gone, would be fine?

 

I like this idea... add's a little extra... you could show the lifted line as coming off the current curved point..

 

Whatever you choose, I like the direction this is headed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this idea... add's a little extra... you could show the lifted line as coming off the current curved point..

 

Which one? I have two!

 

Do you mean (coming in bottom left) on the right hand side of the running line, as if it was going to the platforms? I think I still like the idea of a headshunt, overgrown and out of use with a dumped wagon or something in it, coming off the lower platform line but until I actually start tracklaying it's hard to say what it'll look like - I've done so many computer mock-ups that look great until you actually see it laid out on the board...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look at this:

 

post-7599-0-55793800-1296835498_thumb.jpg

 

 

This would allow for a slightly longer platform on the curve, and still give access to the industry from both lines.

This, obviously looks over kill, but the lifted line would be the explanation as the industry would have required access from both the up and down lines.

 

Just a thought... feel free to disregard! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the suggestions, I have two comments/questions.

 

1) A double slip doesn't fit the geometry as it is currently laid out - I'd have to do some reshuffling of the plan or make a curved double slip from scratch - and given that I've never even built plain track before I can't see that happening...

 

2) Wouldn't the headshunt for the factory foul the "main" line into the disused platform? Ok they wouldn't necessarily both be in use at the same time often but I thought it was bad practice to foul a main line any more than necessary?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Although I haven't detailed the drawing, the top part is a factory complex and the bottom part is a station, on a truncated line. It didn't seem "overkill" trackwise to me, as the freight may well have remained a long time after passenger services were cut back. The station itself was going to have two platforms but only one (the bottom one) in use, the run-round being maintained for the occasional loco hauled service.

 

 

It screamed steam age branch to me. To bring it into the blue grey era I would look at loosing the run round loop, maybe bringing the station forward a little to give the factory more space. Keeping the second platform but not having a line against it would show a rationalised station.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the suggestions, I have two comments/questions.

 

1) A double slip doesn't fit the geometry as it is currently laid out - I'd have to do some reshuffling of the plan or make a curved double slip from scratch - and given that I've never even built plain track before I can't see that happening...

 

2) Wouldn't the headshunt for the factory foul the "main" line into the disused platform? Ok they wouldn't necessarily both be in use at the same time often but I thought it was bad practice to foul a main line any more than necessary?

 

Well, I would suggest that it's only a head shunt because it's not been lifted... could park a shunter, or as you suggested previously, a wagon shoved out of the way. Could be rusty and over grown.

 

I realized the geometry would not fit after I posted it... looking again, Kris's suggestion of lifting the entire 'inside' line might also be an option and would give even more 'eye candy' with a back ground story. My only complaint (and I use that lightly) as I prefer loco hauled passenger trains over units any day... perfectly prototypical or not.. they just have more character IMHO. Removing the run 'round loop would limit the stock that could be used, such as no MK2's hauled by a 31 sad.gif

 

This is an area that I struggle with too. I want to have the operations of the steam era, but want to run Blue / NSE / Railfreight. Finding the balance so that it 'looks right', not necessarily 'correct' is the key. I think there was a thread elsewhere on the forum that talked about the merit's of 'accurate' vs 'looks right'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

br-nse-fan's plan looks pretty good to me with the exception of the curved slip - how about a curved crossing? Maybe someone on here could build one (not me, sadly!).

I thought of a name for you,

"Crompton Yard"!!!!!

It's generic but with 'southern' undertones, feel free to ignore if you don't like it!

Cheers,

John E.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It screamed steam age branch to me. To bring it into the blue grey era I would look at loosing the run round loop, maybe bringing the station forward a little to give the factory more space. Keeping the second platform but not having a line against it would show a rationalised station.

 

The problem is that I really do want some sort of run-round facility for the occasional loco hauled service - if it is literally run unit in, pause then back out again I can see me getting fairly bored with that side of things quickly.

 

The only other option that springs to mind is to go back to the 'kick back' idea, and have the entrance to the sidings coming off the disused platform rather than the line in (also means I can ease the curve a little), which then adds a little bit of operational challenge. Trains can draw into the second platform, then the shunter can draw the wagons back into the sidings and do whatever. Similarly they can be propelled out into the platform for the train loco to then take off. This is based on the situation at Chard Junction before the branch line shut, where the factory shunter was main line certified for a short section of the main line, to take wagons across the main line from factory to branch and back again.

 

Am away the weekend so I can't get on to XTrackCAD to have a play - but will have a look and report back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Probably too many opinions here already but FWIW here are mine. Apart from what I've noted on the plan, I think you need to simplify the factory complex as it does look a bit like track for track's sake at the moment. I might go as far as to reduce it to a long headshunt with a fan of sidings facing left (an inglenook for the private shunter really). The BR loco could use the loop in the station to run round.

 

You probably need more space between the sidings and the main line too as the platform is rather narrow as things stand and there's no room for station buildings.

 

I like the idea of a truncated line, especially the level crossing with derelict track remaining. A singled cross country route seems quite credible to me as a product of 1960s or 70s rationalisation, though as you can see I've reduced it to a single platform too as I really can't see both remaining in use. For short loco hauled passenger trains in the late BR era, doesn't Barnstaple provide a prototype? I'm sure there was a thread about the use of Class 50s, possibly on the old forum.

 

I don't know when the last milk traffic ran on BR but that would obviously form an end date for the layout. In any case I reckon you'd be struggling to drag the idea much into the Sprinter era without further rationalisation and redevelopment - probably to a plain and sterile SLT - so the Class 153 (converted 1991-92) may be pushing things a bit.

 

post-6813-0-17235600-1296859564_thumb.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it was the early 80's that the last milk trains ran, certainly as far as Chard Junction goes. But then again, if we're having little electric motors powering plastic models I'm sure I can stretch that out a few more years since I'm not really basing the layout on any actual location. I don't have to use all the stock I have, of course (in fact I could probably fill up every length of track and stack it 10 deep and still have leftover, like most of us) but I just happen to like a bit of colour (NSE) as well as the blue/grey.

 

I see exactly where you're coming from with removing the second headshunt stub in the platform area to make a loco release - it's obvious but I hadn't thought of it, thankyou. The second point and little bit of track really served no obvious purpose except to be OOU, rusted and overgrown.

 

I am aware of the Barnstaple 3-4 coach loco hauled DMU substitutions, that's part of what gave me the inspiration :) I've seen various pictures around the country too so that's no problem.

 

Re the platform, I was going to have the uppermost one as the derelict one, and the lower one with the boarded up buildings on it; that's why there's more space there. Due to the space I have for the layout (and the only space) I can't really move the curved point down any more to squeeze in a second one, and the actual curve in my original plan is based on the inner (tighter) radius of the Peco streamline curved point - there isn't room to follow the outer radius although I will look at the options, like I said handbuilding pointwork is not something I've ever done but it may possibly be a solution if there is a tighter curved point kit available from someone? Enough people do handbuild track (they even do it in 2mm FS) so I'm sure a cludger like me can manage it if it's my only solution.

 

Another reason for using the lower platform is that the road crossing on the right is at an angle ... which means I get another inch of track space if I use that rather than the upper!

 

If you go back to my post 3 in this thread you'll see the Google Maps view of Chard Junction - the sidings remain although unused for many years. You should be able to pick out the kickback siding and fan of 3 sidings of the original. I originally thought my plan gave a bit more operating flexibility, but then again if the real thing managed with no run-round in the factory then I suppose I should be able to as well - my train length is restricted anyway to 4ft as that's the cassette fiddle yard I plan to use so I reckon I can probably come up with something that fits.

 

Thanks for all the input - it's great to be able to bounce ideas off of people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

But then again, if we're having little electric motors powering plastic models I'm sure I can stretch that out a few more years ...

Fair enough!

 

I am aware of the Barnstaple 3-4 coach loco hauled DMU substitutions, that's part of what gave me the inspiration :) I've seen various pictures around the country too so that's no problem.

The perils of posting late at night - I forgot how common this practice was at one time.

 

Due to the space I have for the layout (and the only space) I can't really move the curved point down any more to squeeze in a second one, and the actual curve in my original plan is based on the inner (tighter) radius of the Peco streamline curved point

 

Pulling the loop point back and maintaining a minimum radius of 30" I got the plan below in XtrkCad, but unfortunately it's badly squeezed against the back wall. Tightening the curve out of the fiddle yard would gain some extra inches at the back (fiddling in XtrkCad suggests about 1" per 3" of radius) and perhaps putting the back siding under cover as a loading road with a low relief factory behind would help disguise the lack of space.

 

post-6813-0-38793900-1296903875_thumb.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

With some slightly odd shaped boards I reckon I can fit it all in and get the joins where there aren't points, using standard Peco code 75 stuff.

 

Thanks for the suggestions and assistance, next job is to clear the clutter to make space to actually put the boards down and lay out the printout to make sure the runround loop in the station is long enough :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...