FraserClarke Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Hi All, Intermittent long time lurker here, but for a first post -- and as a way of soliciting opinions -- here is a long neglected layout project of mine. It's never really had a name, but I think I've settled on "Auldgaird" as homage to where the layout was 'born'. I started the layout when I was living abroad in the early 2000s. I got the track laid and operational, but then packed everything up for shipping back to the UK. Since then, it's been through 2 countries, 3 houses and 4 garages; mainly in storage, and rarely in ideal conditions. I am trying to decide now whether I should revamp the layout and push on, or go all orange juice on it (i.e. rip it up and start again). It is a functioning layout -- with some issues -- and i quite like the track plan -- with some reservations (see below). The layout is OO gauge (code 100 insulfrog, 'cos that seemed like the simplest route at the time), branchline terminus, 1960s eastern scotland-ish... Though I have an affinity for Scottish scenes, I'm not particularly wed to any specific prototype or era (I don't have much existing stock either). I like 'believable' layouts, but I don't need things to be exactly prototypical. I don't have much time/money to dedicate to the hobby at the minute (i.e. I have young kids). I'm doing quite well at indoctrinating said kids into railways though, so I'll get to build a sodor based layout soon too! So I would appreciate any opinions on this current layout, in particular on the track plan. The scenic part is made from three baseboards, 3.2m long and 0.5m deep. The single-line track turns a 90-degree corner to a fiddle yard. Below (I hope!) is a track plan with indications of where I foresee the various infrastructure. I hope the two letter symbols are self explanatory. Are there obvious issues with this track plan? I have some queries myself below... The current status of the layout is that track is laid (loosely pinned so easily removable), wired and operational. I've made a very initial start on scenics. No ballasting or weathering yet. I can make small rejigs easily as I'm strengthening the baseboards anyway, but would prefer not to move too many points around and effect the cabling between boards/to controller. At some point too many changes imply just starting again (an option!) The list of issues I've identified so far: The track plan (the MAIN issue!) A two/three platform terminus in the 1950/60s with no turntable... believable? should I rejig things to fit one in? Goods facilities are 'limited' (though the shed in the diagram is inspired by Torrington, which I found through some excellent posts on this forum) No long trailing siding (not sure that is the right term!?), which seems prevalent in the lot of track plans and presumably used to set back a goods train before shunting?? Cattle Dock is a bit awkward to access... but not sure that is too much of an issue? Is it just a bit too busy!? The baseboards are not great, and I'm currently rebuilding them to strengthen and add alignment dowels. The controller needs a rewire to make it kid-safe... (and adult-safe really) No signals, or wiring, or idea where to put them No remote uncoupling capabilities built in -- would probably like to retrofit magnets for Kirby style uncoupling. No catch points anywhere -- not sure where they would be needed? (industry siding, goods siding, and bays?) Any comments would be very welcome! Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jason T Posted February 5, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 5, 2016 Hi, and welcome to the forum. Your track plan appeals to me as it is not a million miles off that of my layout, based on Bacup (and named as such) although I would say you have crammed a bit much in and some elements will make it a pain to operate, such as the double reversal into the cattle dock. Things to possibly think about: The second, short platform adjacent to the goods shed - is it necessary for a single track branch when you already have a bay platform? The engine shed (and turntable) could be off-scene, giving you three sidings. The aforementioned double reversal into the cattle dock would be a pain; maybe lose the kick back siding? The reversed yard can be shunted from the main platform run round; that is what happened at Bacup. Freight runs in, is shunted and any outbound freight us drawn into the loop before departing. The siding next to the bay platform is pretty short and is possibly surplus to requirements. If it could be lengthened, it could be a carriage siding. Of course, I may just be subconsciously trying to recreate my layout and you can choose to ignore me Hope that helps, Jason Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FraserClarke Posted February 20, 2016 Author Share Posted February 20, 2016 Thanks for the input Jason, very helpful. Have been working on-and-off on the track plan (clear it needs some changes), and the current version is below. I've tried to keep the rework of the wiring to a minimum for simplicity. + I've dropped the engine shed*, and swapped the goods into that location. + I've dropped one siding behind the platform, but kept the single bay (I just like the bay!). + The old goods siding now runs into a paper mill yard, and through a scenic break to some future perhaps fiddlestick... (perhaps though this should just go completely, and the mill yard move up to where the 'factory loading dock' currently it) + I did consider dropping the cross-over from the run-around loop, but I think it is needed as a headshunt for the goods yard. + I'm unconvinced of the need for a goods shed; looks a bit pressed in the space to me. Same goes for the end loading doc; though it seems quite prototypical in track plans of the (north) Esk branch lines I'm (roughly!) basing this on. + coal bins are next to the track, which I gather is not entirely prototypical, but keeps the yard more open. * I've borrowed from Dalkeith, which had an interesting arrangement with the engine shed on a bay behind the platform. It was closed in the 1910s though, track lifted, and converted into shop space. In my version though, the bay remains and the shed is used for other station building purposes... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FraserClarke Posted February 22, 2016 Author Share Posted February 22, 2016 Some photos from rebuilding one of the three baseboards. The boards are too flexible for my liking (In the follies of youth, I did a very naughty thing and screwed directly into the plywood end grain... tsk tsk...), so I've rebuilt the longest one with a ply-block-ply beam approach. It's certainly stiffened it up, but also added a lot of weight! I think I will try a slightly different approach for the next board. Unfortunately due to the existing wiring, I don't think I can add the diagonal members which would help a lot... One of the end bars, with new slots to take legs (short dummy pieces to get the spacing right). The beams are assembled by gluing the blocks and clamping until cured. Reassembled baseboard subframe, viewed from the top. The board is 1.2 x 0.5m. All three boards loosely lined up... That's as far as I got with the scenics in the past 10 years! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FraserClarke Posted May 9, 2016 Author Share Posted May 9, 2016 Long time since I posted anything, but have been pottering away. Orange juice won in the end, I have decided to rip it all up and start again. There were just too many little things which were bugging me. I decided to search for a more prototype-inspired track plan, and ended up at Penicuik -- which is/was a lovely little BLT in my preferred Scottish eastern region I love the following image, linked from http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/p/penicuik/index.shtml; a feel to aim for at least! The track plan I am settling on is based on Penicuik 1920+, with a few sidings dropped to make it fit, and a kick-back added to cover the exit stage right... This will feed a paper mill, which was a key industry in the Esk valley. Apologies for the poor scan of the hand drawn plan... and with anyrail... My big concern now is that shunting the goods yard will mean using the main line. That is presumably what happened in real life, but I'm a bit worried it will look odd popping on-and-off scene during all the maneuvers... I also added a gradient down to the mill yard. I think it would be nice to give some contrast with the main line -- but could make fiddle yard construction a nightmare; so may go! I am struggling a bit to make it flow nicely with peco pointwork, particularly trying to stick with the LH/RH points I already have. Trying to avoid the urge to hand-build the track... The code 100 insulfrog would be well suited to a roundy-round for the kids though.... I have had a crack at the classic model of the model (1/4 scale, so 1mm/foot); A useful exercise (note the track plan is a bit different now, though I'm not sure better!) -- I may even do a bit more scenicing to get a better feel for it. (the big black arrow has nothing to do with the model BTW!). I've also rebuilt all the baseboards, and done a test assembly. Still a bit flexible (in twist), but I think this will improve once the trackbeds and backscenes are added. Perhaps not obvious from here, but the idea with these to allow a general site gradient from "back-left" to front-right, as seen. I plan to use a fairly open frame construction for this, even though there are some large flat areas in the goods yard / station yard. I feel (rightly or wrongly) it would be better to put the 'weight' into the trackbed, and use a lighter construction for the scenic areas -- rather than put ply across the whole area... Next steps are to get the baseboards varnished/painted, and lay out some track to get a better feel for the flow... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted May 10, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 10, 2016 This new plan looks really good. Since you are not aiming to build an accurate model of Penicuik (what a lovely photo that is), it may be worth adding a short headshunt to the goods yard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gerbil-Fritters Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 Plan of Penicuick 1933 here for you. From the outstanding National Library of Scotland maps series Quite a few Scottish BLTs in my collection don't have headshunts, which looks odd to me, by there you are. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottishlocos Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 Frazer Scottish Eastern region papermill ticking the boxes for me here god luck with project will you have steam and diesel? Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FraserClarke Posted May 11, 2016 Author Share Posted May 11, 2016 Thanks for the comments. Yes, a head shunt is an interesting idea. I will have a play with the track plan and see how it looks. As the eminent doctor points out though, they seem to be uncommon on lines in this area... regarding era Dave -- I'm not 100% sure. I like the idea of running the layout in a 1930s LNER guise, presumably staffed mainly by ex-NBR locos. I'm a bit worried however about what RTR (or even kit built) stock is available. Photos suggest something like a C15/6 on commuter trains from Edinburgh, and a J36/7/8/9 on general goods and block trains from Granton docks headed for the mill... I note however that Bachmann have an imminent release of a V3 tank, which worked the Edinburgh suburban lines, and have a J39 in development it seems... There doesn't seem to be much information on the Penicuik (and surrounding) branch lines -- or at least I haven't been able to track it down yet. My entire stock** currently consists of a Bachmann J72 (old split-chassis version), and a green class 25.. So that would suit running in the 1960s. Though these lines typically closed to passengers in the 1950s, there is a nice shot of a clayton humping goods around at Penicuik in the mid 1960s... So, probably heading for the 30-50s I guess, with some later excursions possible! ** (not including a lima delitc with one remaining buffer and "smokey joe" with the funnel broken off...) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 I have just spent an interesting hour or more looking into Penicuik station (or indeed the entire line) as I had not been aware of it. Extremely interesting and many thanks to Fraser and the others. Good luck with the layout. Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gerbil-Fritters Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 A small branch terminus with an almighty paper mill industry next to it has a lot going for it! A perfect modellers cliché in real life! All we need now is for Hornby, Bachmann and Oxford Rail to bring out some tasty little Scottish pre-grouping steamers.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trout226 Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 How did you get on? I'm building an N gauge layout and have always loved Penicuik ever since I discovered it. In my variant it will be a through station with the shed swapping lines. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FraserClarke Posted February 26, 2017 Author Share Posted February 26, 2017 On hold... I decided that I really wanted to build my own trackwork, so have been off doing a smaller layout as a test. Also been experimenting with the blog format, which I quite like for documenting the build; http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/2098-junction-dock/ It's all slow going of course. I suspect I shall get back to 'auldgaird' - possibly with a name change - later this year. Good luck with the n gauge layout. It's certainly interesting to speculate about the line continuing further up the Esk valley... I did consider trying 2mm scale - you can fit all the station + approaches in the space I have - but I think I'll be sticking to 4mm for mine... Fraser Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.