Queensbridge Road Wharf

[garethashenden]

7 hours ago, drduncan said:

I’ve been looking back over the previous posts and to be honest I can’t see an issue with the LH end. The mock ups are very atmospheric and provide the close in claustrophobic feel you show n the inspiration photos you took and the sort of thing I remember from the London near  riverside.

Duncan

Duncan, 

The problem I'm having is the road ending abruptly at the backscene. I can build the buildings, but until I can figure out how to blend it half convincingly I'm not motivated to do it.

Edited December 5, 2021 by garethashenden

[garethashenden]

As for what I'm envisaging for the barge, something like the outer one in this picture from the NRM. Very low in the water. The kit I have is for a full sized barge, not the cut down ones used on Regent's Canal. Haven't found much information about the smaller ones, only that they were narrower. Maybe the easiest thing to do, if I can't find that information, would be to move the layout location away from the canal and closer to the Thames or Lea.

[drduncan]

Bridges on the canal will be a problem for rigged barges.  Perhaps something as an offshoot of the around Limehouse way?

[garethashenden]

22 minutes ago, drduncan said:

Bridges on the canal will be a problem for rigged barges.  Perhaps something as an offshoot of the around Limehouse way?

The masts fold down along the length of the barge. The key is to lower the mast in time to not hit the bridge, but late enough that you still have momentum to carry you under it. Not something I fancy attempting. 

[figworthy]

3 hours ago, garethashenden said:

The masts fold down along the length of the barge. The key is to lower the mast in time to not hit the bridge, but late enough that you still have momentum to carry you under it. Not something I fancy attempting. 

 

The area that the Regents canal runs through is quite built up, so it is unlikely that they would be sailing up there.  If they weren't motorized, then they would be either horse drawn or towed by a tug depending on the era.

 

Adrian

[garethashenden]

I've been looking over prototype photos of the North London Railway and Poplar Docks and came to the conclusion that the whole goods yard area doesn't need cobblestones or setts and that a lot of it was packed dirt of timber planks. This was pointed out to me when I first started the layout, but did I listen? Anyway, I spread some fine ballast around to see how it looks, and it looks good! However, before I go too far, I want to work out how the points are operated by the 1/76 employees of the railway. 

 

At first thought individual point levers seem to be the most appropriate, there are some in some of the photos of the docks. But then I was wondering if a small ground frame would be better, all four points can be operated from one location. Seems sensible enough. A thought that followed on from there was why a ground frame and not a signal box? If this were a terminus a ground frame would be right, but its always been envisioned as a through line, although single track and goods only. So would the North London have signaled a single track goods line? I feel that its not beyond the realm of possibility if it were busy enough and I think it would add interest to the layout. 

 

So now I need a second fiddle yard, a signal box, and some signals. I also need some help with correctly positioning the signals. The only thing I really know about signaling is that I don't know much about it. I would think I'll need at least one in each direction on the model. There should be a distant and home for each section right? I don't really think there's enough space for the distant signals on the layout but maybe there is? The next question is if there's any point in holding trains clear of the loop's points. Its a very small loop, not large enough to let two trains pass. Really just a way for a locomotive to shunt the yard. I think the positions that make the most sense for signals would be just before the bridge when headed to the left, and just before the road when headed to the right. May as well keep the crossing clear until the next section becomes available. Does that seem right? What about shunt signals? How to they work? I feel that this would be a place that they would be used, but is it? 

 

I'm thinking of positioning signals where these two pencils are. Does that fit? The signal box is mocked up in the second picture.

 

[Multigauge]

Space may be your problem here for  signals. 

I think you could feasibly get away with a series of shunt signals and a very small signalbox to control it all. 

 

[garethashenden]

Between the barge and the signaling I have been giving some thought to the location of this layout and how it fits into the wider railway scene. I feel somewhere further east would be a more appropriate setting, as opposed to on Regent's Canal. The North London ran passenger services between Bow, Plaistow, and Barking via the London, Tilbury & Southend. My proposed change is for the NLR to build its own branch from Bow or Poplar to Barking via the Royal Docks. We can imagine that the Great Eastern would have objected to this syphoning off of their traffic, so the North London was only given permission to build a single track line. With the LNWR now easily connected to the new large docks by way of the North London (always under the LNWR's influence) traffic began to flow in large quantities in both directions. The combination of heavy through traffic, local stopping traffic, and light (by NLR standards) passenger traffic in two directions on a single track line kept the signalmen hopping. 

The layout is now imagined close to the banks of the River Lea, in the black box on this map. The existing NLR line is shown in yellow, LT&SR in green, GER in blue, and the new branch in red.

I think this would suit my ambitions for the layout without changing the physical infrastructure too much.

[garethashenden]

I've been giving more thought to the signaling topic, and the realism of the track plan. IF this is a busy inner London route with through trains justifying any signaling, it should be double tracked. It occurred to me that there is enough depth in the baseboard to add a second track. This would most impact the buildings in the back right corner, but that corner has always been tight, I'm not sure this is actually worse. I need to rebuilt the left hand fiddle yard and build a right hand one, so the changes to add another track could be done then, that's not too hard. The first point on the left is a little broken at the moment. Some of the chairs have come loose and it is now puts everything that goes over it into the four foot. So when I rebuild it it wouldn't be too hard to realign it with the straight through route. 

I have come up with two track plan options. The first just adds a second track at the back. 

The second removes the crossover from the original plan. This is probably the most realistic, but kinda blah somehow. And I don't really want to remove it.

Are either of these worth pursuing? Should I do something else? Should the two running lines be connected somehow? Would the best thing to do be starting over  with a better overall plan? The things I want out of the layout have changed since I started it. 

[Jeff Smith]

This sort of cuts across a question I posed in another thread - when does a diorama become a layout, and vice versa?  Can a diorama have any operating interest?