Would this ever have existed?

[MattWallace]

Hi all,

 

I've had two attempts at building a layout since I started back in model railways 6 months ago and although I started with a "who cares how it looks or how accurate it is as long as the trains run!" attitude I'm about to embark on a 00 gauge layout that could take me several years to complete (given family commitments etc.) and I'm starting to think that I want this to "look right".

 

I want to run as much mixed trafic as I can on the layout and I am constrained to 8' x 3.5' (although this could be 3' once I've finished clearing out the garage this weekend!).

 

I'm thinking somewhere in London and it will definitely be modern era as I have a Class 66, a Class 92, an old 06 and a Class 43 set (driver and dummy) that will be renovated from their current BR blue to something more modern.

 

At the moment, my plans are to have a split-level layout with some kind of Intermodal yard or similar on the bottom of the layout and a small commuter line on a raise platform similar to the following (two images because I'm too tight to buy the full version of AnyRail and too short on time to learn xtrkcad at the moment!):

 

 

 

My main question about all of this is "would a track plan like this ever have existed in 'real life'?"

 

Any help would be gratefully appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Matt

[18B]

Hi, not sure if you;ve ever travelled into Birmingham New Street from the Derby side as when you come in, there is the container terminal and various commuter and mainlines runniong in on elevated track and on several differetn levels, so in short, split level track in a ssociation with a container terminal is fine. (IMO)

[MattWallace]

Thanks 18B, I've not travelled that route recently (and I've only been paying attention to what's where on the railways over the last 6 months!) so that's good to know.

 

Looking on google earth, I've found the area around here is that the area that you mean?

 

I don't have enough space to join the upper section to the lower (it would appear I need at least 8' for an incline in 00), however I figured that if I ran a small commuter service (class 170 for example) back and forth over the upper level it would probably look fine - if this is modelled around the New Street area then the particular model above would pretty much be ideal as I believe that the Cardiff-Notts line runs up through this very section of track.

 

Let me know if I've got anything wrong!

 

Kind regards,

 

Matt

[TheSignalEngineer]

Nothing wrong with the two level concept. My main concerns would be the amount of stuff underneath out of reach - don't forget track cleaning, train failures and derailments have to be accessed, and that with the way you have laid it out it would be difficult to run more than a one-coach train in 00.

[18B]

Looking on google earth, I've found the area around here is that the area that you mean?

 

- if this is modelled around the New Street area then the particular model above would pretty much be ideal as I believe that the Cardiff-Notts line runs up through this very section of track.

 

morning matt,

 

yes that's the area and if you look just to the south, you can see the multi level area's.

 

RE: stock indeed there's the Cardiff -Nottingham's with Class 170's but there's also the 158's and given the amount of lines around there, really there wouldn;t bee too much modellers licence used if you pretty much any modern unit seen in the West Midlands area. Across from the freightliner terminal was the old Saltly depot and this saw a wide variety of classes even seeingf the odd Class 50. There's plenty of scope fora wide variety of traction.

[MattWallace]

Thanks Both.

 

Having actually measured up the space available (and realised that a 8x4 in a space that is only 12 x 8 and also has to house a freezer/lawnmower etc etc is far to large!) I've manged to reach a compromise with my wife of an "L"-shaped layout.

 

My initial design is as follows (again, based loosely on the area suggested by 18B) and I'd welcome any thoughts:

 

 

The red track is hidden and acts as a fiddleyard/runaround loop to add an extra bit of realism (I didn't want to just be shuttling back and forth!) with an incline (light blue) up to a raised level commuter station (this may turn into a terminus depending on how I feel when I actually start building it!).

 

The main part of the layout is the goods yard (really more of a couple of small private sidings) and another smaller station (this will probably only have one platform, not two as above) loosely based on Acton Mainline (Gravel/goods works behind the small station).

 

I'm hoping I can run a Class 150 sprinter around this layout without too much difficulties as well as "local workings" of a Classes 66/92 picking up from the goods yard and setting off to "remote destinations" (although as I'm typing this, I'm considering turning the goods yard into a TMD so I can run 06/08's and other locos empty from the sheds on their long journey to pick up goods)

 

The feedback so far has been very much appreciated and I'd welcome the same on the above.

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Matt

[rob D2]

As long as you can justify everything in your head off you go ! I try and have a reason for every bit of track to be there in real life, because they don't put the real stuff in willy nilly.

Temptation of course, is to squeeze as much track in as possible, try and resist this.There's alot of space in real life.

At least you are only modelling one era - current ?

 

Are your paltforms long enough on the lower left station ? Looks like 1 and a half feet - Is that enough for what you want to run now or in the future ? If not have you considered the half station approach ? ( only model the ends of platforms with a scenic break, covering the supposed rest ).

 

Remember alot of current freight, the trains are looooonnnngggg. There are not that many short freights (MOD, engineers trains come to mind). As per the TMD, I would stick with a goods area - If you are modelling the current day the trend is for very few TMDS, and they are not small.It's a man travelling out to where the loco is in a van mostly. Maybe a stabling point (oily track/portacabin type set up ). Just giving you some food for thought.

[MattWallace]

Thanks robD2, that's helpful

 

The platforms may not be long enough for a 170, however they should be ok for a 150 if I lengthen them slightly. The platforms/trains can't be much longer than that otherwise they'll never make it across the points in the fiddle yard to make it up to the main station!

 

I know that the freights (especially the ones pulled by sheds) are incredibly long, however engineering trains work nicely for me as it gives me a chance to play with some of the more esoteric rolling stock - do you have (or can you point me towards) any photos of the modern MOD trains?

 

The era will be "current" and I'm thinking that one of those sidings may well be "private" so I can have a flask in there giving me an excuse to purchase a class 20

 

I like the idea of the stabling point, I'll keep it in mind.

[rob D2]

Hi,

Brian Daniels , who is a regular on here, has a flickr site (Brian ews), which is stuffed full of rolling stock photos from didcot (MOD hub).

 

Including all the good MOD stuff. The beauty is you can get away with a few VGAs , or make it as involved as you want . OCA wagons with 2 landrovers in them also comes to mind. The vehicle carrying warflats/ warwells are not currently available other than kit form I believe .

 

You'll find a wealth of info on here, there are some real freight experts ( not me !)

[Katier]

One thing - don't worry at all about linking up tracks. If one is goods and the other passenger, then nothing to stop them connecting off scene.

 

My Emmyton is of that format, high level station, low level goods.. unconnected (but if I had about another 20ft to play with would join up 'down the line).

 

Another example of 'low level' goods and high level track is Wolverhampton. On the approach from Birmingham is a Steelworks (and old Canal wharf) which are at low level compared to the mainline.

 

https://maps.google.com/?ll=52.580451,-2.108603&spn=0.004837,0.00942&hnear=Wolverhampton+WV1+4SR,+United+Kingdom&t=h&z=17

[MattWallace]

Thanks both.

 

rob D2 - I've checked out some of brians photos and I think there's probably a lot of inspiration there for me.

 

Katier - I'm not massivly worried about the tracks linking up, I just feel it would be nice to be able to run a sprinter down from the high-level, round the back of the layout and through the goodsyard for more "realistic" running. I've taken a look at the area you linked to and it also has some good ideas for my scenery etc.

[rob D2]

He has some great shots, and unusual angles as he works beyond the fence....

[MattWallace]

OK, so yet another track plan, this time based (very!) loosely on a combination of Paddington, King Cross and Old Oak Common:

 

 

This has a terminus at the bottom, a "storage" area behind the back-scene to the left, a "run around loop" using a Shinohara double crossover to provide room for a EMU/DMU to change tracks and a TMD at the bottom right.

 

I'm planning on using a bit of artistic license and run my 66 as if it were on-loan to metronet giving it an excuse to run into the station and back out into the tunnelsI'll probably have a 5-road shed in the TMD area and the two "spider legs" will get tidied up and turned into a fueling point with a run-round points section

 

Any thoughts on how to improve this are more than welcome - I'm still not 100% happy with it!

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Matt

[rob D2]

Looks ok. My only comment is that any stock coming out the left two platforms to the depot, will have to run "wrong line" for quite a away before they enter the depot. I don't know how prototypical this would be as it's gonna slow down arrivals

[MattWallace]

OK, so work has got underway on the baseboards for this layout and I've started a new thread for the actual development work.

 

Once the base boards are in place, I'll probably post another layout plan here for discussion - I don't really want to mix the two threads as this one is about "what" and the other is about "how" - in my mind, they need to be distinct...

 

Kind regards,

 

Matt