Layout Design Ideas

[GWRDukedog37]

Hi all, This is my plan for a layout in the space available. If possible i would like to avoid increasing its width else ill have to by my granddad a shed lol. I would like to run trains up to 5 coaches long. This has been considered within the fiddle yard. It will be based on a electrified 3rd rail line with EMUS and steam including West Countries and Merchant Navies on the big expresses. I imagine it to be somewhere along the SWML or a spur of it. I am unsure as to the prototypical nature of the plan and if anyone has any amendments or completely different ideas would be appreciated.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

You have enough room at the right hand end to have the line 'disappear' into a cutting with woodland acting as a screen, to avoid the 'between tunnel mouths' cliche.

 

Shunting the modest goods yard will require the through lines to be closed when the pick up drops off and/or picks up the small number of wagons that can be handled. Nothing wrong with that, there really were small stations like this, just so long as you know

[Barry Ten]

You might want to think about making that crossover on the left side of the layout the other way round, so that it's a trailing crossover rather than a facing one.

 

Strictly speaking, it wouldn't be very likely to have a double-slip where you've got one; it would be more likely to be a single-slip, but there could be an argument for

keeping it in view of the extra play-ability. I like the sinuous curve through the station, should look good with those 5-coach trains snaking through.

 

It might be worth getting hold of this book:

 

 

It's got loads of interesting SR track formations in it, and is a good read besides. These books (there are ones for GWR, S&D etc) are really useful if you're

pondering how to lay out a goods yard, even if it isn't always obvious how the real things were operated.

[DCB]

Hi all, This is my plan for a layout in the space available. If possible i would like to avoid increasing its width else ill have to by my granddad a shed lol. I would like to run trains up to 5 coaches long. This has been considered within the fiddle yard. It will be based on a electrified 3rd rail line with EMUS and steam including West Countries and Merchant Navies on the big expresses. I imagine it to be somewhere along the SWML or a spur of it. I am unsure as to the prototypical nature of the plan and if anyone has any amendments or completely different ideas would be appreciated.

RM Plan.png

Looks good as a basic scheme.. I don't like the facing crossover and could not see how to change it for trailing until I flipped the plan left to right.  A Goods shed with access both ends is not unusual, the arrivals side bay, very unusual, becomes a more typical departures bay, ideal for the Emu to lurk between trips, and I re located the goods /coal  roads to the back of the station. It does mean some shunting on the main running line but apart from inner suburban areas this was the norm, plenty of time for shunting in steam days, and with sidings both sides actually shunting the station could be quite interesting.  

[GWRDukedog37]

Thank you very much. I will change the crossover for a trailing one and I really like the idea about having a cutting on the right hand side. I will implement this into and amended plan and see what it looks like

[Harlequin]

Do you have clear access to the fiddle yard? Do you have to reach over the backscene?

[Joseph_Pestell]

Definitely a single slip rather than a double slip (although Tavistock North is an exception which proves the rule).

 

But probably better not to have the slip at all, reversing the goods yard to have shunting neck to the right and goods shed and siding next to the platform.

 

As to location, on the SW main line (to Exeter), steam and electric usually only cohabited on four-tracked route (as far as the junction with the Alton line). But steam-hauled trains were sometimes diverted via Alton and Alresford, so worth having a look at some of the stations on that route (as far as Alton where the 3rd rail stopped). You can look at OS maps on www.old-maps.co.uk

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Do you have clear access to the fiddle yard? Do you have to reach over the backscene?

 It's a good question. I was guessing this is for N gauge in a shed 8 feet long, which would be reachable as drawn.

 

In OO, a tad awkward! But needs must, and all that...

[Joseph_Pestell]

You could also get a gentler curve through the station and get more space for the goods yard by putting it behind the station.

 

If one of the scenic breaks is a bridge rather than a tunnel, the headshunt/shunting neck can go through it. That can be a useful spacesaver.

 

Not electrified, but an interesting trackplan for operation, is Semley.

Edited July 30, 2018 by Joseph_Pestell

[GWRDukedog37]

Do you have clear access to the fiddle yard? Do you have to reach over the backscene?

I will have to reach over the backscene

[GWRDukedog37]

You could also get a gentler curve through the station and get more space for the goods yard by putting it behind the station.

 

If one of the scenic breaks is a bridge rather than a tunnel, the headshunt/shunting neck can go through it. That can be a useful spacesaver.

 

Not electrified, but an interesting trackplan for operation, is Semley.

Thanks for the suggestion I’ll have a look I’m sure a little modellers license could be used

[Harlequin]

I will have to reach over the backscene

That could be a significant problem. The backscene might have to be lower than ideal, leaning over the model will make it difficult to work on rolling stock, there's the danger of damaging scenic items and a huge person arching over the station every now and then could destroy the illusion.

 

What scale is the design for? What are the overall dimensions?

[GWRDukedog37]

That could be a significant problem. The backscene might have to be lower than ideal, leaning over the model will make it difficult to work on rolling stock, there's the danger of damaging scenic items and a huge person arching over the station every now and then could destroy the illusion.

 

What scale is the design for? What are the overall dimensions?

The layout will be 16 feet long by 4 foot and 3 foot in the middle. Although I have been able to make enough space in the garage so it can be 16 by 4 and leave a little space at the back to access the fiddle yard.

[Barry Ten]

You might be able to get away with a stretch of removable backscene if there's no alternative. Another dodge might be to make the backscene quite high, but include access holes in it lower down, which are then concealed by hills, buildings etc. Finally, you could consider putting the backscene at the rear of the layout entirely, and then covering the fiddle yard with removable scenery, if you can get it working reliably enough. I've done just that with my American layout (have a look in my link below) and it can be made to work well, although it becomes more of a storage yard than a fiddle yard by that point!

[Joseph_Pestell]

So, 4mm scale/00.

 

That 3ft depth is a lot to reach over to get at trains in the hidden sidings. Even worse, the pointwork will be where the board is even wider and it is on pointwork that you are most likely to have problems.

 

So I would suggest going for R3/R4 radius setrack curves at each end. That will allow you boards a little narrower than 4'.

 

Don't take the end curves so far round and allow a gentler curve through the station.

 

Going back to my previous comment about Semley, I know that a reasonable model, slightly compressed, can be built in the 12' visible section that you would have remaining.

 

Agree with others that you want any backscene to be removable or hinged so that you can get reasonable access to the fidddleyard. Unless you are remarkably thin, access behind the layout is not going to be a starter. Might be worth having access holes at each end inside the 180 degree curves.

[GWRDukedog37]

After a bit of playing around. This is what i came up with. I've caved in and i'm going to by my granddad the shed he so desperately wants. As a result i have the full garage available (16 X 9) resulting in enough space to walk around the layout to reach the fiddle yard as well as a bit more space on the scenic side. The yellow lines indicate retaining walls.

 

[Harlequin]

Your design is beautifully simple - it's got real potential.

 

Do you need the left-most crossover? And could you align the goods/bay to feed directly into the loop siding instead of having to use the other spur siding as a headshunt? That would make operations much smoother. Something like this, topologically:

 

If you've got the whole 16 * 9 garage (luxury!) then could you build the layout around the outside walls in the traditional way? If so, that would make access to the fiddle yard trivially simple (it would be on the opposite wall to the station) and you could relax some of the curves a bit.

Edited July 31, 2018 by Harlequin

[GWRDukedog37]

Your design is beautifully simple - it's got real potential.

 

Do you need the left-most crossover? And could you align the goods/bay to feed directly into the loop siding instead of having to use the other spur siding as a headshunt? That would make operations much smoother. Something like this, topologically:

DukeDog1b.png

 

If you've got the whole 16 * 9 garage (luxury!) then could you build the layout around the outside walls in the traditional way? If so, that would make access to the fiddle yard trivially simple (it would be on the opposite wall to the station) and you could relax some of the curves a bit.

 

Something Along these lines perhaps?

 

[88D]

Something Along these lines perhaps?

 

RM Plan 3.png

Loop on your running lines (near left tunnel) to ease access to goods yard from that side?

[Harlequin]

Something Along these lines perhaps?

 

RM Plan 3.png

Yes, exactly.

 

Some of the details probably need to be tweaked but that simple, elegant plan will allow you to perform lots of interesting prototypical moves.

 

I would suggest trying to elongate the loop siding if you think you can do it without making things feel too "busy". Maybe push the left hand tunnel entrance back a bit so that some of the end curve is visible and use a left-hand point on the curve, just before it straightens, to branch out to the loop siding. (Does that make sense?)

[GWRDukedog37]

Yes, exactly.

 

Some of the details probably need to be tweaked but that simple, elegant plan will allow you to perform lots of interesting prototypical moves.

 

I would suggest trying to elongate the loop siding if you think you can do it without making things feel too "busy". Maybe push the left hand tunnel entrance back a bit so that some of the end curve is visible and use a left-hand point on the curve, just before it straightens, to branch out to the loop siding. (Does that make sense?)

 

This is what i assumed you were intending. I have made the amendments quickly using paint. (the ultimate planning tool)     with the yellow line representing the rough location for the tunnel portal.

 

[Harlequin]

This is what i assumed you were intending. I have made the amendments quickly using paint. (the ultimate planning tool)     with the yellow line representing the rough location for the tunnel portal.

 

RM Plan 3.png

Pretty much, yes. It depends how much of the curve you're happy to expose and how close you're willing to position the points to the tunnel mouth.

 

But you can clearly see the advantages of making the loop longer:

• More room to store and shunt goods wagons
• More room to run round passenger trains that have terminated at the station before going back the way they came in (in either direction)
• Room enough for slow goods trains to stand aside while fast express trains are allowed to pass.

Paint? Eurgh! ;-)

[Il Grifone]

I'd try to avoid pointwork next to platforms. as it causes clearance problems even on the prototype. I remember seeing two platform ramps end to end next to a crossover in my spotting days (long ago). (Somewhere in LMS territory Derby?)

 

I believe the LSWR was rather partial to double slips. but rule one applies in any case.

Edited August 1, 2018 by Il Grifone

[GWRDukedog37]

Pretty much, yes. It depends how much of the curve you're happy to expose and how close you're willing to position the points to the tunnel mouth.

 

But you can clearly see the advantages of making the loop longer:

• More room to store and shunt goods wagons
• More room to run round passenger trains that have terminated at the station before going back the way they came in (in either direction)
• Room enough for slow goods trains to stand aside while fast express trains are allowed to pass.

Paint? Eurgh! ;-)

 

 

Thank you very much for your help I really like the plan you have helped me achieve. This is the result

 

This is the amended plan. and it includes a longer passing loop to allow the expresses to pass a goods train in the loop. The only down side to this is the radius of the left hand curve is only allows for a Settrack curved point. I'm sure some weathering and a well placed tree could solve that. By moving the platforms closer to the right hand side I can extend the goods yard slightly. However, with the new and improved size of the garage would allow me to move to a more suburban location. (Food for thought)

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

You are now at a track plan that will look decently spacious thanks to the large radius curvature in the centre of the scenic section, while offering good operational potential. There's nothing preventing you treating this station as the country end terminus for a modest suburban service. A terminating arrival can be held in the goods loop to allow other traffic past, before going onto the other platform for its return trip.