End of Branchline terminus layout advice

[Nearholmer]

I rather like the emerging "two railways for the price of one" concept, but it would need a lot of care to avoid it becoming implausibly cramped, both at back and front.

 

One option would be to entirely omit one of the sidings in the goods yard, and perhaps lengthen the one that kicks back to the mill railway, so that its extremity can be used for general goods purposes. You might also consider that not everywhere had a big brick goods shed, some had no more than a fairly modest overgrown wooden shack. It depends upon how big/busy the town or village is aside from the mill ........ it might be a pretty small place.

 

To shunt this effectively, the mill's loco (formerly a horse - board the crossings to give it a nice walking path)) will have to venture across the main passenger railway, which probably has precedents in reality but will need careful signal interlocking with the trapping; I think it really needs a trap on railway property on the mill side - I can't imagine the railway wanting anything to do with working a point on mill property as a trap. And/or perhaps a few words in the Sectional Appendix to say that the shunt across the passenger railway can only take place when no passenger train is inside the station home signal, or even that no passenger train can be accepted from the box in rear unless the mill loco is trapped on its own property.

 

PS: If the three way turnout is already fixed, you can still omit a siding by simply not laying any track from the front exit from the turnout, just have a few abandoned sleepers suggesting a siding that used to meander off the front of the baseboard. Its quite a good trick for suggesting the presence of space that isn't there!

 

 

 

 

Edited October 22, 2019 by Nearholmer

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

It depends upon how big/busy the town or village is aside from the mill ........ it might be a pretty small place.

 

As I recall, the layout is meant to be set in the 1960s by which time a lot of general goods had been lost, so limited traffic to the railway sidings would be quite plausible and Nearholmer's idea of an abandoned siding coming off the front of the layout is a good one. 

 

I think you need to go easy on the internal railway system as it would be easy to overpower the layout.  It also needs to be in proportion to the number of wagons your exchange sidings can handle.

[The Stationmaster]

7 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

I rather like the emerging "two railways for the price of one" concept, but it would need a lot of care to avoid it becoming implausibly cramped, both at back and front.

 

One option would be to entirely omit one of the sidings in the goods yard, and perhaps lengthen the one that kicks back to the mill railway, so that its extremity can be used for general goods purposes. You might also consider that not everywhere had a big brick goods shed, some had no more than a fairly modest overgrown wooden shack. It depends upon how big/busy the town or village is aside from the mill ........ it might be a pretty small place.

 

To shunt this effectively, the mill's loco (formerly a horse - board the crossings to give it a nice walking path)) will have to venture across the main passenger railway, which probably has precedents in reality but will need careful signal interlocking with the trapping; I think it really needs a trap on railway property on the mill side - I can't imagine the railway wanting anything to do with working a point on mill property as a trap. And/or perhaps a few words in the Sectional Appendix to say that the shunt across the passenger railway can only take place when no passenger train is inside the station home signal, or even that no passenger train can be accepted from the box in rear unless the mill loco is trapped on its own property.

 

PS: If the three way turnout is already fixed, you can still omit a siding by simply not laying any track from the front exit from the turnout, just have a few abandoned sleepers suggesting a siding that used to meander off the front of the baseboard. Its quite a good trick for suggesting the presence of space that isn't there!

No problem so long as the trap point is on the railway's side of the fence so it is under railway ownership and maintenance although it is a bit tight for space (I've seen worse).  No problem either with the mill's motive power crossing to the exchange siding but it would have to be properly examined, authorised, and 'plated' to allow it to work onto railway owned trackage - a common enough arrangement.  And of course nothing to stop the mill hiring in some motive power from 'the railway' - again a not unusual event. 

 

I can't see any particular need to worry about a passenger train.  Unless there is an additional Home Signal (for acceptance purposes) there is not really any way under normal single line block working that a train can be accepted towards the terminus if the mill engine is working to/from the exchange siding because the Signalman at the terminus won't have a Clearing Point.  Similarly the reverse is also true in that if the Signalman has accepted a train towards the terminus the Block Regulations do not allow him to work a mill engine to/from the exchange siding.  I can't see any immediate problem in allowing the mill engine out if a passenger train is standing in the platform provided that both train and the mill access to the exchange siding are protected by fixed signals.

[kirkheath]

Been slow to catch up on this. But loving the revised plan. Looks very smooth to operate now

[davegardnerisme]

Some months on now, and I need help with the goods yard, and point rodding design.

 

But first, a quick update. In the last few months I've been slowly working on the land form, track laying, point motor wiring, and building the odd thing. Firstly what will hopefully end up as a dilapidated barn:

 

 

Not in intended location yet, but with roof:

 

 

Secondly I've started on the main bridge, which I need to help me figure out the landscape contours:

 

 

And again with a bit more work and an undercoat:

 

 

[davegardnerisme]

Ok so now the bit where I need help.

 

I'm trying to define two things. Firstly, I want to design the point rodding. My plan is to use Wills kits and similar to add cosmetic point rodding / signalling pulleys. The question is what path should these rods take? I've started with the signalling design from my other thread:

 

 

And I've adjusted it (because the design isn't quite the same), and I've drawn in the rods (blue lines) and wires/pulleys (ping dashed line). I've also noted where things are attached to ground frames. Does this seem reasonable? NOTE: in the picture below I've stitched together two photos (fairly badly) and then drawn over the top ... the track is fairly smooth and free of kinks across the two photos (here it looks a little angular).

 

 

The second thing I want to decide is how the goods yard will be laid out. In the picture above, the green tracks are not glued down yet, just balanced on top. Everything else is glued already and can't be changed without much faff (I have no appetite to change). For the goods yard, I've reused a three-way point, pretty much just because I already have it, so it saves me buying an additional turnout. I'm not completely opposed to doing so if people think it would be better.

 

In my design, I was trying to think through how the sidings would be used. I was imagining maybe a goods shed on the top siding, the middle one would be for unloading, and perhaps the bottom one would be to collect empties ready to send back the other way. Does this sound in any way sane? Any other suggestions?

 

@Nearholmer has a great suggestion that maybe one of the sidings could be partially lifted to add to the overall idea of dilapidation/disuse. I was thinking maybe the goods shed siding (and I think someone else suggested there could be a suggestion that the goods shed had at some point burned down -- perhaps just a light scorching on the ground). Regardless, the track would still have to have made sense at some point, and that's what I'm interested in here. 

 

Thanks in advance for any suggestions. I enjoy reading and learning from the experts on RMWeb!