S&C Layout Plan Critiquing Needed

[Seanem44]

I have a plan I have been mulling for a Settle to Carlisle layout in N scale.  It would be on two 7 foot long baseboards.

 

I'm horrible at actual track planning.  This is my idea, but I don't even know how close to scale I have the buildings, etc.  I would very much welcome some comments, critiques and any help you can give.  I really want to start something sometime soon.

 

Thank you everyone!

 

[DCB]

Looks good.  I would lose the facing crossover into the goods shed as the S&C famously had no facing points from Settle to Appleby.

I would lengthen the laybye to take decent length trains.  The signalbox should probably be on the Laybye side so the signalman could see the tail light and allow a following train into the section as a train backed into the laybye.

 

The disappearance of the line into tunnels a short distance from a Viaduct seldom works well, I have often thought of using a bridge or two as scenic breaks with track in cuttings beyond but arranged so there is no view of the curve and cutting except through the bridge. Raising the boards at the front of the layout  as one would if there was a tunnel would probably work.   Trains need to shunt into the tunnel as drawn to shunt the goods shed so changing to a bridge would make this easier,

 

  I don't think the S&C went in for foot bridges

[gismorail]

Plan looks ok to me but I would consider making it on three baseboards as 7ft is a fair length for a single board .handing wise. 

[Harlequin]

Both your original and David's modifications look good to me.

 

I assume the backscene will extend to the very edges of the layout and it might be good to curve it gently along it's length and then more definitely into the sides. That would help make a more "panoramic" scene.

 

The change of direction after the viaduct is a bit abrupt. If you could ease it out a bit that would look more like the real thing. Maybe even curve the viaduct and curve the platforms - but that would make modelling more difficult.

 

At the viaduct end the entry to the fiddle yard could be disguised by a cutting and/or some trees instead of a tunnel, perhaps?

 

How will you access the fiddle yard?

[Joseph_Pestell]

Agree with comments above, particularly with regard to facing point into the goods yard. Using a single slip will gain space.

 

Although 14' is a good length in N, it's not really enough to include both a complete station and a large viaduct.

 

Four possible solutions to that:

 

1) A separate scene at the "rear" of the layout, plain track with viaduct;

2) A smaller viaduct, (Lazonby and Kirkoswald);

3) Only model one end of the station. I can't remember now which station it is, but one of the S&C stations has a road bridge across the goods loops which can act as a scenic break and save a lot of length.

4) No station at all but a set of sidings.

 

There are a lot of books with S&C station plans. Suggest you get hold of one of those and see which location might suit you.

[Seanem44]

I think I’ll likely just go with a smaller viaduct.

 

I will also take the recommendation of shorter base boards.

 

I had wanted to gently curve the station but anyrail has its limitations.

 

 

I’ve been reading rails through the fells. This station plan was a rough go and is definitely not final.

 

Thanks everyone!

 

The fiddle hard will need more thinking and design, but I hope to have at least one or two siding per line.

[Joseph_Pestell]

If you have Rails in the Fells, I think you have trackplans for all the stations.

 

You will note that all the goods sheds (not all the stations had one) are on a loop off a loop. That does take up a bit of space.

[Joseph_Pestell]

3) Only model one end of the station. I can't remember now which station it is, but one of the S&C stations has a road bridge across the goods loops which can act as a scenic break and save a lot of length.

 

Faulty memory strikes again! I was thinking of Crosby Garrett where the bridge cuts across the platforms. Still a useful space saving though.

[Seanem44]

Hmmm.  So I have the Lyddle End Station, Good Shed, etc for quite some time.  It seems a shame to not use them.  However...  I am not so much interested on operation as I am just watching trains galloping through landscape.

 

Maybe omitting the yard would be a good idea and just add a lay by siding instead.   It would indeed be a bold move to remove the station altogether, but then I would be forced to rely on the strengths of my (untested) scenery modeling. 

 

I'm thinking maybe the removal of the goods yard might be the best approach.  That might even allow me to keep the viaduct as is.   I could put the entire line on a more gentle curve that way as well.  AND, it would also save me about $100  or more in point work.  Not a bad thing in these mad times.

 

Maybe I could even make it a staggered platform station.  What do you think?

 

Edited February 6, 2018 by Seanem44

[Joseph_Pestell]

Those are nice r-t-p buildings, so, yes a pity not to use them.

 

I don't think we have covered the question of era. If you are modelling post 1970s, you could indeed simplify the track layout but leave the goods shed/yard in place with no track through it.

 

Allowing about 14" each end for hidden curves round to the staging yard, you have 11'8" of length for the scenic part. I am sure you can build an S&C type station plus small bridge/viaduct in that space without too much compromise. Your current drawings probably have the platforms a bit long for a small S&C station.

 

I can't recall an S&C (or Midland) rural station with staggered platforms but someone will no doubt come up with one.

 

Keep in mind that other parts of the Midland used similar buildings. So other trackplans could be used that take up less length.

Edited February 6, 2018 by Joseph_Pestell

[Seanem44]

Those are nice r-t-p buildings, so, yes a pity not to use them.

 

I don't think we have covered the question of era. If you are modelling post 1970s, you could indeed simplify the track layout but leave the goods shed/yard in place with no track through it.

 

Allowing about 14" each end for hidden curves round to the staging yard, you have 11'8" of length for the scenic part. I am sure you can build an S&C type station plus small bridge/viaduct in that space without too much compromise. Your current drawings probably have the platforms a bit long for a small S&C station.

 

I can't recall an S&C (or Midland) rural station with staggered platforms but someone will no doubt come up with one.

 

Keep in mind that other parts of the Midland used similar buildings. So other trackplans could be used that take up less length.

Yeah... staggered platforms were just a work around. 

 

As for the era...  Early 60s.  All my stock is BR late Crest.  Jubilee, Rebuilt Patriot, Class 37, Austerity and some LNER (A1/A3/A4) that I would likely run.

[Reorte]

I can't recall an S&C (or Midland) rural station with staggered platforms but someone will no doubt come up with one.

Well, since you mention it... Ribblehead does nowdays, but didn't originally (the staggered platform was put where it was when the station reopened as the original had been demolished for a siding in to the quarry). Footbridges were mentioned upthread, Appleby is the only station on the line to have had one originally, although Kirkby Stephen and Settle do these days. Platform ends close to a road bridge is common for the S&C, although certainly not universal (the same could doubtless be said for a great many lines since it's a convenient access).

 

Yeah... staggered platforms were just a work around. 

 

As for the era...  Early 60s.  All my stock is BR late Crest.  Jubilee, Rebuilt Patriot, Class 37, Austerity and some LNER (A1/A3/A4) that I would likely run.

Early 60s every station on the line had a goods yard (if you include a couple of sidings on the other side of the level crossing at Culgaith, but Culgaith is an exception to just about everything else on the S&C). If you decide you don't have the space there's always Rule 1 though.

[Seanem44]

So I went and did a quick goolemaps look at Dent.  It looks like the platform on the station side is about 250 feet long.  Converting this to inches puts is a right about 20 inches.  So I've got the platforms about a half foot longer than they need to be.

 

I don't think staggered is the right approach either way.  I will got back to Rails in the Fells today and do some more research.  This plan is a good starting point but needs a lot of work.

 

I think I also will repaint my lyddle end station.  I'll likely dry brush on some colors that are a little closer to the S&C stations instead of the battleship grey they chose.

[Reorte]

I think I also will repaint my lyddle end station.  I'll likely dry brush on some colors that are a little closer to the S&C stations instead of the battleship grey they chose.

They are mostly of local stone, so chose a shade appropriate to the general area of the S&C your model is on (e.g. red sandstone in the lower Eden Valley, at the other end Settle is rather more yellow, although all with a reasonable dose of crud).

 

And (hint hint!) you'll be more than welcome in the Settle - Carlisle layouts subforum!

Edited February 6, 2018 by Reorte

[Seanem44]

One last question...  does bumping it up to three feet wide offer me much more over the 2 and a half foot width? 

[Ian Smeeton]

3' width would be great, however, it may be too a long stretch to reach the back.

 

Also, you would be relying on your "as yet untested" scenic modelling skills.

 

It would certainly set the trains in the landscape, and would allow smaller structures/trees etc towards the rear to give an even graeter impression of depth.

 

See Copenhagen Fields for an urban masterpiece which uses forced perspective

 

Regards

 

Ian

[Joseph_Pestell]

2'6" depth should be plenty and 3' too much to stretch over.

 

If you feel up to building curved baseboards, you could use that 3' depth with 30" deep baseboards. Best of both worlds.

Edited February 6, 2018 by Joseph_Pestell

[Wheatley]

So I went and did a quick goolemaps look at Dent.  It looks like the platform on the station side is about 250 feet long. 

 

Dent, Langwathby (I think) and a couple of other platforms were extended to accommodate 2x156 in the early 90s. Two 156s are 92m long, a few metres extra was allowed for over/under braking so they should now be a shade over 300 feet.  

Edited February 6, 2018 by Wheatley

[DaveArkley]

>>I had wanted to gently curve the station but anyrail has its limitations.
 

Unless you are using the free version and have hit the limitation on track pieces there is not a limitation which would stop you plotting curved platforms. If you'd like to PM me your Anyrail file I'll take a look.

 

Cheers

Dave

[Seanem44]

So how about this proposal for the station. It’s basically a shortened Cumwhinton adding a goods shed and omitting one of the sidings. I’m thinking all told I can get this in 7 feet, still leaving room for th viaduct. Thoughts?

[DCB]

I think Ribblehead Viaduct starts right at the end of a station platform so no need for a break between a station on an embankment and the viaduct.  Away from the S&C there are plenty of platforms actually on Viaducts, Stroud GWR being one. Ribblehead is obviously going to take over the whole house but I think it is Arten Ghyll viaduct north of Blea Moor and Ribblehead which is high but fairly short and very dramatic which might provide inspiration, though it would need a fair old drop in baseboard level to accommodate.

[Harlequin]

Do you need to compress that much?

 

I think you could include the back-siding, and run the goods loop and the relief siding parallel to the main lines almost until the tunnel entrance. I think there's room to do that without affecting the lines-in-the-landscape effect too much...???

 

That would then be a more faithful representation of the station and allow more prototypical operation (e.g. goods shunting on the long goods loop and the back siding without using the running lines).

 

It looks like goods were unloaded on the bay platform (and bulk goods on the back siding, of course) so think about whether you really want that goods shed...

 

BTW: Just south of this station on the 1925 map is a fascinating Brick and Tile works and an alabaster quarry with an extensive "tramway". Maybe something to model in a future project!

Edited February 7, 2018 by Harlequin

[Joseph_Pestell]

So how about this proposal for the station. It’s basically a shortened Cumwhinton adding a goods shed and omitting one of the sidings. I’m thinking all told I can get this in 7 feet, still leaving room for th viaduct. Thoughts?

54D0854C-4C72-437E-B45F-0E16E5EA0DF4.jpeg

Well, as I said earlier that is not the right position for an S&C Goods Shed.

[Seanem44]

Well, as I said earlier that is not the right position for an S&C Goods Shed.

It't interesting because from what I've seen in Rails in the Fells, there are quite a few stations where they are placed in a similar position in relation.  While not exactly where I placed it in the drawing, there is usually a short siding...

 

Lazonby is somewhat similiar.  Though I suppose to make it more prototypical to that, another line could be shoehorned in protected by single slips to protect the line.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Seanem44

[Seanem44]

Do you need to compress that much?

 

I think you could include the back-siding, and run the goods loop and the relief siding parallel to the main lines almost until the tunnel entrance. I think there's room to do that without affecting the lines-in-the-landscape effect too much...???

Seanem SandC 1.png

 

That would then be a more faithful representation of the station and allow more prototypical operation (e.g. goods shunting on the long goods loop and the back siding without using the running lines).

 

It looks like goods were unloaded on the bay platform (and bulk goods on the back siding, of course) so think about whether you really want that goods shed...

 

BTW: Just south of this station on the 1925 map is a fascinating Brick and Tile works and an alabaster quarry with an extensive "tramway". Maybe something to model in a future project!

I could definitely do that and run a nice road bridge over that part to form the break.  

 

The real reason I want to use is a goods shed is because I have one mainly.