Loco Shed Plan

[JST]

Hi,

I am now at the stage with my layout when I can think about planning the loco shed and would appreciate a few views on this. A few facts first:-

 

1 It is an 00 gauge DCC layout using Peco code 100 track and Electrofrog points (medium for the shed area). I use 3 way points to save space where appropriate. I would like to use a double slip but unfortunately Peco do not do an Electrofrog version.

 

2 It will be a joint LSWR and GWR shed (a bit like Weymouth, Yeovil Town etc.)

 

3 The available area is 2400mm x 600mm. The whole layout is about 9.5 metres x 2 metres.

 

4 I am all about running trains for fun and not too precious about being correct to prototype.

 

5 I like lots of track work and want to create a busy looking area

 

6 I am looking to have a 6 lane shed using Metcalfe kits

 

7 One constraint affecting design is the immovable fact that the shed entry lane is about 600mm into the length of the shed area.

 

I don't have any track design software on my Mac and I cannot draw to save my life but have drawn out an initial plan as below. It may not be exactly to scale but I know what I have drawn will fit in the space. The Heljan TT is the one thing drawn to scale (350mm). I am aware that the design means a lot of zig zagging around to get to the coaling stage (to be Scalescenes kit) but to me that adds operational fun.

 

 

 

Maybe a couple of pics of the area may help...

 

Sorry about the crap drawing!

 

The Metcalfe kit gives a bit of perspective

 

 

The 3 way point shows the shed entrance.

 

Thanks

 

John

[Free At Last]

I would like to use a double slip but unfortunately Peco do not do an Electrofrog version.

They are simple to modify...

[DCB]

I tried nit in AnyRail and it does not work, the angles are much more shallow than your sketch..    see Pic I tried a couple of other configurations and still can't make a 6 road shed work..

[bike2steam]

Some what cramped for a 6-road. If it was a busy shed the t/t would have direct access to the main-line (no reversing) to reduce 'conflict of movements'. Easy access to coaling, water, and ash disposal, ease of movement for quick turn-round.

[Harlequin]

Yes David is right - the track plan you suggested doesn't fit but I'm pretty sure all the elements can be rearranged and made to fit by using the space more efficiently. (And that rearrangement could take account of bike2steam's notes if required.)

[JST]

Thanks for the comments and suggestions - really helpful in crystallising my thoughts/plans.  A four road shed now looks more likely especially using DavidCBroad's plan which I like. Good use of the 3 way point leading to the TT and coaling plant.

[bike2steam]

I'd be tempted to put the turn-table in the top l/h corner of that plan and have a coaling road parallel to the shed throat. 

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Reminds me a bit of the north end of Camden shed.

[bike2steam]

Or to use an smaller exGW example, something like a mirror image of Leamington Spa shed.

http://warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrls2166.htm

Edited August 13, 2018 by bike2steam

[Gordon A]

Where are the coal wagons and empties being held for the coal stage?

How do you envisage shunting said wagons?

Edited August 13, 2018 by Gordon A

[JST]

I'd be tempted to put the turn-table in the top l/h corner of that plan and have a coaling road parallel to the shed throat. 

 

 

I think you may have a point. I will get the templates out and have another look.

 

 

Where are the coal wagons and empties being held for the coal stage?

How do you envisage shunting said wagons?

 

 

Hmm.. I wondered if someone would spot that. There are sidings off to the right of the plan but I agree, not ideal. If I put the TT at the top left withe the coaling stage parallel to the shed throat it may gain a bit more space.....  Back to the drawing board!

[Harlequin]

I said I thought it would all fit and so I was honour-bound to have a go! (Sorry everyone!)

 

bike2steam pointed the way with Leamington Spa:

 

This is pretty rough and I have abandoned the headhunts on exit from the depot to make enough room for everything. Since the depot connects to a branchline I hope it's OK to use that as a headshunt. If the design were tidied up it might be possible to include a short headshunt within the depot. 

 

(P.S. The three-ways are the asymmetric Code75 geometry version so everything would need to be tweaked if the Code100 symmetric versions were used.)

Edited August 13, 2018 by Harlequin

[JST]

I said I thought it would all fit and so I was duty bound to have a go! (Sorry!)

 

bike2steam pointed the way with Leamington Spa:

JST5.png

 

This is pretty rough and I have abandoned the headhunts on exit from the depot to make enough room for everything. Since the depot connects to a branchline I hope it's OK to use that as a headshunt. If the design were tidied up it might be possible to include a short headshunt within the depot. 

 

(P.S. The three-ways are the asymmetric Code75 geometry version so everything would need to be tweaked if the Code100 symmetric versions were used.)

 

 

Thanks Phil. This is starting to look really good and do-able! I may abandon the two lane shed in favour of sidings to deal with Gordon A's valid point and looking again at the layout, I may be able to jiggle things round a bit to keep the headshunt.

 

I knew this forum would be able to sort out my crappy drawing!

[Gordon A]

If the shed exits directly to a running line then you will need a trap point in place of the head shunt.

 

I would be tempted to lose the two road shed an put a cross over towards the end of two of the three sidings, leaving the third siding for storage.

[JST]

They are simple to modify...

Frog 2.jpg

S Slip.jpg

 

Interesting. How exactly is it done and what parts do you use?

 

Cheers

[JST]

Just an update on progress. I have taken a print out of Harleqin's design up to the railway room and started messing about with some Peco templates and a TT size piece of cardboard. So far so good!

 

 

 

I have found that I can make a bit more room for coal truck sidings by dropping the 2 road shed to the left. It seems I have room for a 6 road shed to the right.

 

 

At the moment I have been able to retain the headshunt ( the Castle is on it). We will see how it pans out when I trial fit track and points but we have summer visitors at the moment and I get gamma rays from "Management" if I hide away too much! :-)

[The Johnster]

At the risk of muddying the waters, I'd say that losing the shed's headshunt is a retrograde step; you cannot shunt between the front roads without blocking running lines, and are going to have an argument with the signalman every time you try to do it.  You could leave sufficient room between the first shed turnout and the actual exit, but that eats space up.

 

I'd be tempted to ditch the turntable by moving it off scene; a road disappearing behind something down which locos venture to return facing the other way few minutes later.  Or you could assume the presence of a local triangle that can be used for turning engines; after all you've already got a junction in the area between the GW and LSW.  This releases room for a workshop with a sheerlegs, great for evoking the feeling of a major depot and an excuse for oddities to visit for attention from Lyme Regis or somewhere...

 

Your main issue is proportional, in that the site isn't really long enough for the depth, and you might be able to do something about that by making the running lines curve in towards the shed; this sounds very counter intuitive but will mean that the shed access from them is more towards the lateral centre of the site and the curve will leave room for facilities at each end of it as the site broadens out.  It will also create the optical illusion that the two ends are both further away from each other and wider than they really are.

[JST]

At the risk of muddying the waters, I'd say that losing the shed's headshunt is a retrograde step; you cannot shunt between the front roads without blocking running lines, and are going to have an argument with the signalman every time you try to do it.  You could leave sufficient room between the first shed turnout and the actual exit, but that eats space up.

 

I'd be tempted to ditch the turntable by moving it off scene; a road disappearing behind something down which locos venture to return facing the other way few minutes later.  Or you could assume the presence of a local triangle that can be used for turning engines; after all you've already got a junction in the area between the GW and LSW.  This releases room for a workshop with a sheerlegs, great for evoking the feeling of a major depot and an excuse for oddities to visit for attention from Lyme Regis or somewhere...

 

Your main issue is proportional, in that the site isn't really long enough for the depth, and you might be able to do something about that by making the running lines curve in towards the shed; this sounds very counter intuitive but will mean that the shed access from them is more towards the lateral centre of the site and the curve will leave room for facilities at each end of it as the site broadens out.  It will also create the optical illusion that the two ends are both further away from each other and wider than they really are.

 

 

I agree your point about the headshunt. It will stay. I had set my heart on the turntable but it is becoming more of an issue as I spend hours laying the thing out so maybe it has to go. The main problem is trying to make the coaling stage gradient look OK. I have mocked up a wooden bank and it looks... er.. steep!  I have been looking at the coal stage on the "Wakefield West" layout in the June edition of Hornby Magazine and it seems to be an optical illusion! The bank does not look steep but if you look closely at the track plan and compare it with the photos the gradient must be about 1 in 12! I have yet to build the branch line terminus which will be sort of based on Minehead so I can have a turntable there.

[DCB]

As said above you really need headshunts to keep loco movements within the MPD without fouling the main lines. Also ideally the movements need to flow.

At a Terminus most locos will need to turn, less so at through stations where the Shedmaster may prefer to send locos out in the same direction as they were going when they arrived

I designed this shed originally a three road but yu couldn't see any locos in the shed so it was replaced by a 2 road Metcalfe leaving a stabling road in the open.

Locos come on shed at he left hand end, coal, pass behind the shed turn and pass in front of the shed before stabling. The short road in front of the coaler is a pit road and usually houses the next couple of locos due out while the far left stub can hold 2 locos waitingto enter the complex. The red tracks are part of the main lines and sidings, it is drawn from memory so not to scale

[Harlequin]

Hi John,

 

As the Johnster says, the shape of the site is challenging. If you could conjure some extra length from somewhere it would help. (What's to the right of the area shown in the photos?)

 

I think the main problem to solve is the embankment for the coaling tower, not the turntable. Make that work and you might find there's still room for the TT if you want to keep it.

 

The embankment tends to cut the site in two because it needs to be long enough to reduce the gradient and you can't connect to or through it once it's started to rise.

 

One solution would be to abandon the embankment and go for a simpler timber platform style coaling stage. That would be easier to position and less of a view blocker - but less impressive and might not be appropriate for the size/busyness of the depot.

 

Another possible solution to make the coaling tower work would be to use a switchback embankment. Sounds unconventional, I know, but it's perfectly rational and I think it would look sensible.

So the idea would be:

• Send a line to a small headshunt in one of the far corners.
• Reverse the line and start to rise along the back edge of the space to another small, level headshunt.
• Reverse again and rise in front the of the previous embankment up to the coaling tower.
• Both headshunts would be long enough for a small yard loco plus a few wagons.
• Then the embankment(s) would no longer cut the space in half and would not obscure other elements of the space.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Harlequin

[bike2steam]

Referring to post#12, I'd replace the 2-road shed with the coal stage, and link the 4-road shed to the turntable doing away with it's own headshunt. 

[Harlequin]

Referring to post#12, I'd replace the 2-road shed with the coal stage, and link the 4-road shed to the turntable doing away with it's own headshunt. 

That's logical and would work well operationally but it puts the coal stage and its embankment in front of the rest of the depot, partially obscuring it (assuming that the normal viewing position is as shown in the photos).

[JST]

Thanks guys... more time in the railway room needed to assess all this.

[DCB]

If your layout is quite short avoid putting the Engine shed parallel to the baseboard edge or backscene, ideally you should be able to see right down the shed roads from a normal viewing angle

The diagram I drew does not really achieve this so the locos might just as well be in a shoe box which is why we went for a smaller shed and more outside storage.

However we can see both sides of a train snaking its way round the reverse curves into the terminus and it is one of my favourite views.

Ease of operation and good viewing angles is the optimum for models.

On the full size cramming as much track and stock as the site will hold and then a bit more was not unusual. Edinburgh St Margrets was such a nightmare where locos would languish at the buffer stops deep in the shed for weeks before dire necessity forced their removal along with five or six locos blocking them in,

One good reason for not having long straight sheds, you need as long a headshunt clear of the points as the shed is long to get the first in out.

On the other hand it was not much fun for a gang of blokes to push a big dead 4-6-0 with no steam onto the turntable in a GWR Roundhouse either.

GWR Roundhouses make excellent models, just a wall with a hole in it to model and you can have a FY for locos behind

Edited August 22, 2018 by DavidCBroad

[bike2steam]

That's logical and would work well operationally but it puts the coal stage and its embankment in front of the rest of the depot, partially obscuring it (assuming that the normal viewing position is as shown in the photos).

 

True - if the layout is eye-level.