More track design help please!

[MartynA]

After a bit of time out due to Summer commitments I have modified things a bit more whilst taking on board your suggestions. By having a low relief station building and goods shed a turntable will just fit. It's all a bit tight but would give lots more scope to model and run trains. The mainline needs to leave as close to top right as possible as it will head to a balloon loop and return. The coal merchant and engine shed on the right belong to the exchange siding company. Thoughts please....

Attached Thumbnails

IMG_5977.JPG

Edited November 22, 2018 by MartynA

[DCB]

That's one heck of a big turntable for a small terminus. I would suggest building your own turntable, maybe by cutting down a Dapol deck to around 9" for small

0-6-0s and the like as the turntable will just overpower the scene

[Junctionmad]

Would an engine shed have relied solely on turntable access like shown , surely there would be a relief road

[Harlequin]

Too much.

[The Johnster]

No doubt there were places that relied on turntable access, but as a general rule it is not a good idea; a problem with the turntable is capable of effectively putting the whole engine shed out of use and perhaps trapping locomotives as well. 

 

My feeling, FWIW, is that the turntable is a luxury in this situation, and that the space could be better utilised in other ways, such as bending the station around so that the building doesn't have to be low relief.

[Pete the Elaner]

The curve on the right looks very tight & also exits the board at quite an acute angle.

If you have more of the layout off to the right, would the engine shed & turntable be better off there?

[JST]

No doubt there were places that relied on turntable access, but as a general rule it is not a good idea; a problem with the turntable is capable of effectively putting the whole engine shed out of use and perhaps trapping locomotives as well. 

 

My feeling, FWIW, is that the turntable is a luxury in this situation, and that the space could be better utilised in other ways, such as bending the station around so that the building doesn't have to be low relief.

 

I tend to agree, but there were and awful lot of loco sheds that were roundhouses. Old Oak Common had four! I wonder how they coped if a turntable failed. Must google it! 

[Nearholmer]

Personally, I'd put the whole thing on a diet, and move the TT to the RHS.

Without measurements, this is the sort of thing I'd aim for.

And, TT's are fun, and were used at some small termini, although probably not such big ones, so if you want one, treat yourself!

 

And, and, loco-sheds accessible only via a TT were by no means unknown. Swanage is I think the classic example.

Edited November 26, 2018 by Nearholmer

[Flying Pig]

The curve on the right looks very tight & also exits the board at quite an acute angle.

If you have more of the layout off to the right, would the engine shed & turntable be better off there?

As explained in the OP's earlier topic, the track at the front is part of an industrial system, so the sharp curve is quite appropriate. Nearholmer's mods would lose this part of the layout completely, which would be a shame. I agree that the turntable is overpowering, however. I'd be inclined to move it off scene.

[chuffinghell]

sometimes less is more

[Nearholmer]

I confess to having missed the point of the spur curving-off at the lower RHS.

 

Without drawing it properly, its hard to be sure, but it might still be possible to fit-in an industrial spur ......... the issue is how elaborate that connection can be made without making the whole thing unfeasibly cramped.

 

There would be no shame in a very basic exchange facility, where a little industrial loco simply shoves a couple of wagons in front of it as it comes on-scene, and drags a couple after it as it leaves. there were plenty of places like that in reality.

 

Particularly cramped exchange in the map below. This is at Deptford Wharf, where the LCC ‘industrial’ line to the foreign cattle markets interchanged with the sidings of LBSCR. I’m not sure what loco the LCC originally used, but from c1903 they had an early internal-combustion-engined steeple-cab. Later, during WW1, this connection was reconfigured and the industrial line was worked through by LBSCR D1 locos.

Edited November 27, 2018 by Nearholmer

[The Johnster]

I tend to agree, but there were and awful lot of loco sheds that were roundhouses. Old Oak Common had four! I wonder how they coped if a turntable failed. Must google it! 

 

Old Oak and similar places were in trouble if a turntable failed, until it was fixed, especially if it failed while not being set for the outlet road of the roundhouse, but were not completely incapacitated as there was plenty of other accommodation and locos could still be coaled and watered, and could still drop fires into ashpits.  All of MartynA's shed facilities depend on turntable access and his shed is thus particularly vulnerable to turntable failure.  It happened in real life, of course, and Swanage has been quoted as an example.  I doubt that turntable failure was a common thing, but manual operation of one that was supposed to be steam, vacuum, or hydraulically operated was fairly common and required two or three hefty blokes to get it moving.  The problem was providing manpower to turn the table if this happened and took a while to fix; on a big shed the blokes could be found easily enough but of course their other duties suffered.  

 

Get a few in on overtime and the accountants'll be on your back fairly quickly!