Burnstow Dock (inspired by Ipswich/Great Yarmouth)

[dpaws]

This was the original orientation; the loading hoists in use for the sidings so no steps on the outside of the buildings as they'd obstruct the hoists.

 

"The entrance to the railway sidings at Snape Maltings. The ornate arch was built to coincide with the opening of the railway, 1st June 1859. In front of the arch was a wooden wagon turntable which gave access to sidings to the left and right, in front of the maltings. As locomotives were not allowed on the turntable, horses and later tractors were used to shunt wagons through and in front of the archway.
Goods traffic was generally malting barley, coke and coal inbound, and sacks of malt for brewing outbound. Prior to the arrival of the railway, barges were used for the traffic."

 

Edited January 2, 2022 by dpaws

[Ramrig]

On 20/08/2021 at 00:40, Ramrig said:

Hi Steve. Only just caught up on this thread, the only thing I would say is I’m sure I have read/seen somewhere that if you run PVC coated wiring through polystyrene one attacks the other, something to do with the plasticisers, and you end up with a gooey mess. Might be worth a quick google before you start 

 

Steve aka Ramrig.

 

PS still not finished my Skirted Drewry 04 yet. Still in primer and it’s for a very long in the future Wisbech based layout along with my J70 tram. I will look out who I purchased the 3D printed parts off and post on here if that’s ok with you?

 

On 22/08/2021 at 08:37, chesterfield said:

3D printed parts supplier - yes please

 

Sorry for the delay. I only found the paperwork at Christmas when looking for something else (that's usually the case) No more progress on my Diesel Tram, the Drewry is still in primer, awaiting a slot in the paint shop

Edited January 12, 2022 by Ramrig
Grammer

[chesterfield]

Thank you for this - the kit does not seem to listed at the moment but I have been in touch and we shall see what happens

[SteveyDee68]

Thank you @Ramrig for the information…

 

I was doing quite well this year, having not bought any shunting locos at all in the first 12 days, before crumbling and ordering the newly announced Hornby Sentinel 0-6-0 in MSC livery from Jim at The LocoShed…

 

But now you have given me the details for a 3D kit for another shunting loco I really, really like (and want!!)

 

The urge is strong and the willpower weak!! 
 

Steve S

[SteveyDee68]

There is a saying that you shouldn’t run before you can walk, and it is certainly the case that when building model railway layouts it is perhaps wise to learn to crawl before even attempting to walk! But…

 

Having looked at some other excellent layouts featuring dock areas (such as Cley-on-Sea by @russ p and Millway Dock by @Hampshire Hog) I’ve come to the realisation that 4 foot length isn’t going to cut it visually, at least for me. And that despite me being a massive fan of Canute Road Quay!

 

However, I’ve decided that it is the longer rakes of wagons being shunted onto quaysides or into warehouses that create the proper docks aesthetic (I’ve ‘borrowed’ photos from both Cley-on-Sea and Millway Dock to show what I mean below)

 

 

 

So, I need to think about making the layout longer to allow reasonable length sidings to hold cuts of wagons. Towards that end, I am still thinking in planning terms of an “Inglenook” whereby a train of five ‘units’ is the aim. What I am pondering over is whether each ‘unit’ should be a cut of three or four identical wagons, the ‘cut’ being a single ‘unit’ in the planning for stock movement.

 

This throws up a few interesting self imposed restrictions to my design:

• If a cut (unit) is 3 wagons long, a train would be 5 x 3 = 15 wagons (plus brake van) - this would need to be the length of the main loop used for making/breaking trains.
• Headshunts at each end of this loop would need to be 3 cuts (9 wagons) plus loco in length, especially if a double ended Inglenook design is planned towards.
• A self-imposed rule is that all shunting must be ‘on-scene’ hence the length of the headshunts.
• All sidings would need to be three cuts (9 wagons) long, minimum.

But…

• If a cut is 4 wagons long, a train would then be 5 x 4 = 20 wagons (plus brake).
• Headshunt lengths would increase to 12 wagons plus loco.
• Sidings would need to be at least 12 wagons long, minimum.

 

In my first scenario, I would need to plan for 9 wagons + loco, points, 15 wagons + brake, points and then another 9 wagons + loco. Scenario 2 would increase that total length by an additional 14 wagons in total!

 

Unless any Inglenook puzzle within the plan was restricted to one direction only, of course…

 

I feel a session with a roll of lining paper may be in the cards!

 

HOURS OF FUN!

Edited February 23, 2022 by SteveyDee68
Added links, added photos, corrected poor English (again!)

[Pacific231G]

1 hour ago, SteveyDee68 said:

There is a saying that you shouldn’t run before you can walk, and it is certainly the case that when building model railway layouts it is perhaps wise to learn to crawl before even attempting to walk! But…

 

Having looked at some other excellent dockside layouts

• I’ve come to the realisation that 4 foot length isn’t going to cut it, visually, at least for me. And that despite being a massive fan of Canute Road Quay!

 

However, I’ve decided that it is the longer rakes of wagons being shunted onto quaysides or into warehouses that create the proper docks aesthetic. To that end, I need to think about making the layout longer to allow reasonable length sidings to hold cuts of wagons.

 

Towards that end, I am still thinking in planning terms of an “Inglenook” whereby a train of five ‘units’ is the aim. What I am pondering over whether each ‘unit’ should be a cut of three or four identical wagons, the ‘cut’ being a single ‘unit’ in the planning for stock movement.

 

This throws up a few interesting self imposed restrictions to my design:

• If a cut (unit) is 3 wagons long, a train would be 5 x 3 = 15 wagons (plus brake van) - this would need to be the length of the main loop used for making/breaking trains.
• Headshunts* at each end of this loop would need to be 3 cuts (9 wagons) plus loco in length, especially if a double ended Inglenook design is planned towards.
• A self-imposed rule is that *all shunting must be ‘on-scene’ hence the headshunts.
• All sidings would need to be three cuts (9 wagons) long, minimum.
• If a cut is 4 wagons long, a train would be 5 x 4 = 20 wagons (plus brake).
• Headshunt lengths would increase to 12 wagons plus loco.
• Sidings would need to be at least 12 wagons long, minimum.

In my first scenario, I would need to plan for 9 wagons + loco, points, 15 wagons + brake, points and then another 9 wagons + loco. Scenario 2 would increase that total length by an additional 14 wagons in length!

 

Unless any Inglenook puzzle was restricted to one direction only, of course…

 

I feel a session with a roll of lining paper may be in the cards!

 

HOURS OF FUN!

It is generally accepted in art, photography and even speech and the structure of plays that we find odd numbers of objects more pleasing than even numbers so I'd suggest going for 'cuts 'of 3 wagons.  I think it's no accident (though it may have been subconscious) that Alan Wright went for 5 and 3 as the lengths for his original Inglenook sidings. (dum de dum sounds more complete than dum de dum de but dum de dum de dum also sounds better). I don't know exactly why this should be, there are plenty of theories, but I've always ended up following it. Even on my small layout I find three short coaches or five wagons far more satisfactory than two four or six. 

 

 

[SteveyDee68]

14 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

dum de dum sounds more complete than dum de dum de but dum de dum de dum also sounds better

Curiously enough, you have explained one of the main reasons I changed my surname far more clearly than I have often managed to!

 

My name originally consisted of two syllables (Ste-ven) followed by my original surname, which was also two syllables. Effectively, I ended up with dum de dum de which I found annoying to my sense of musical ‘correctness’!

 

Changed my surname to ‘Sandiford’ (three syllables) and now I am dum de dum de dum - and so much happier as a result!

 

Funny old thing isn’t it, the subconscious?

 

HOURS OF DUM DE DUM DE DUM!

[russ p]

10 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

There is a saying that you shouldn’t run before you can walk, and it is certainly the case that when building model railway layouts it is perhaps wise to learn to crawl before even attempting to walk! But…

 

Having looked at some other excellent dockside layouts (such as Cley-on-Sea by @russ p and layout by name) I’ve come to the realisation that 4 foot length isn’t going to cut it, visually, at least for me. And that despite being a massive fan of Canute Road Quay!

 

However, I’ve decided that it is the longer rakes of wagons being shunted onto quaysides or into warehouses that create the proper docks aesthetic. To that end, I need to think about making the layout longer to allow reasonable length sidings to hold cuts of wagons.

 

Towards that end, I am still thinking in planning terms of an “Inglenook” whereby a train of five ‘units’ is the aim. What I am pondering over whether each ‘unit’ should be a cut of three or four identical wagons, the ‘cut’ being a single ‘unit’ in the planning for stock movement.

 

This throws up a few interesting self imposed restrictions to my design:

• If a cut (unit) is 3 wagons long, a train would be 5 x 3 = 15 wagons (plus brake van) - this would need to be the length of the main loop used for making/breaking trains.
• Headshunts at each end of this loop would need to be 3 cuts (9 wagons) plus loco in length, especially if a double ended Inglenook design is planned towards.
• A self-imposed rule is that all shunting must be ‘on-scene’ hence the length of the headshunts.
• All sidings would need to be three cuts (9 wagons) long, minimum.

But…

• If a cut is 4 wagons long, a train would then be 5 x 4 = 20 wagons (plus brake).
• Headshunt lengths would increase to 12 wagons plus loco.
• Sidings would need to be at least 12 wagons long, minimum.

 

In my first scenario, I would need to plan for 9 wagons + loco, points, 15 wagons + brake, points and then another 9 wagons + loco. Scenario 2 would increase that total length by an additional 14 wagons in total!

 

Unless any Inglenook puzzle within the plan was restricted to one direction only, of course…

 

I feel a session with a roll of lining paper may be in the cards!

 

HOURS OF FUN!

 

I suppose my layout has the advantage of when a train arrives the first thing to happen is to run round and put the van to one side then use the branch which I'm lucky to have the space for as a headshunt.

From a model point of view I only use stay alive fitted locos on the quayside 

[SteveyDee68]

I’ve had a bit of a manic time recently with preparing for a youth theatre production which finished just a week ago, but since then each time I have been in the ‘office’ (loft space!) working, I have had a fiddle around with pieces of track on the baseboard. My eventual aim is to create a longer version but revisiting my “walk before you run” statement prompted me to rethink using the four foot long board.

 

After many iterations, including the main run of track being diagonal across the board, my most recent assemblage has gone back to something very similar to the track plan as originally drawn at the beginning of the thread! The “Eureka!” moment for me was when I realised that the ‘front’ siding formation would actually work better as the ‘rear’ serving warehousing etc.

 

In the current version, I have some tricky point surgery to perform to get things to fit correctly together, so I shall leave it for a day or two before I finally commit Dremel to rail. However, I have managed to incorporate a full Inglenook shunting puzzle ‘hidden in plain sight’ in order to make the layout work as a single board layout, with the option to add either a train length fiddlestick or a fiddle yard proper to one or both ends. 
 

If the design lasts more than 24 hours, I shall do a plan and photos!

 

HOURS OF FUN (SPREAD ACROSS MANY SNATCHED SPARE MINUTES!)

[SteveyDee68]

Well, since I last posted a lot has changed at RMWeb...

 

And looking back through the thread, I suddenly regret having not saved all the photos as posted to it by the likes of @Angliacan and @dpaws - the missing photos are sadly missed.

 

I have some manic days ahead of me again (last week of term plus a residential for a few days) but I am going to try to restore as many photos to the thread as I can, just in case anybody finds them useful. Meanwhile, if anyone who has posted here has the time/inclination to restore missing photos, I for one will very much appreciate it.

 

I know that I find a lot of inspiration simply through stumbling upon other threads - it will be a crying shame if all those inspirational images are lost.

 

And with that thought in mind, I am taking a deep breath and visiting the thread of our departed friend @gordon s ... 🤔

 

 

[john new]

On 03/04/2022 at 22:07, SteveyDee68 said:

Well, since I last posted a lot has changed at RMWeb...

 

And looking back through the thread, I suddenly regret having not saved all the photos as posted to it by the likes of @Angliacan and @dpaws - the missing photos are sadly missed.

 

I have some manic days ahead of me again (last week of term plus a residential for a few days) but I am going to try to restore as many photos to the thread as I can, just in case anybody finds them useful. Meanwhile, if anyone who has posted here has the time/inclination to restore missing photos, I for one will very much appreciate it.

 

I know that I find a lot of inspiration simply through stumbling upon other threads - it will be a crying shame if all those inspirational images are lost.

 

And with that thought in mind, I am taking a deep breath and visiting the thread of our departed friend @gordon s ... 🤔

 

 

At the moment I am only re-posting from 1 June forwards in the hope reindexing will put the others back. If not then …? 

[SteveyDee68]

22 hours ago, john new said:

At the moment I am only re-posting from 1 June forwards in the hope reindexing will put the others back. If not then …? 

 

Thanks, John - I posted my comment before the notice appeared about rebuilding the website meaning that (hopefully) recent images will reappear. Obviously, I am now also awaiting that outcome before attempting to restore photos into my thread.

 

Steve S

[SteveyDee68]

Cannot believe it is nearly two years since I updated anything about Burnstow Dock. But then, things have been happening elsewhere.

 

I am about to have a week’s enforced leave via a doctor’s note, due to Post Viral Exhaustion … which is another way of saying that my body has not recovered from the full blown knock you over sideways ‘flu I had a couple of weeks before Christmas, resulting in me being absolutely exhausted by the end of each week and falling ill over the weekend before recovering enough to start the working week again; it came to a head last week as the periods between full blown exhaustion were decreasing and I got a secondary chest infection to boot!

 

So, my intention is to recover as many of the photos into the thread as possible, as that is something I can do whilst “resting”.

 

Currently, there is rolling stock laid out on my central workbench in the loft as per the sorting roads for the train ferry at Dover, following a photo on a FaceBook group vis a vis -

 

 

However, also to hand are the mock ups I made of the Ipswich buildings. Hopefully enough recovery/rest shall take place that I can revisit the Burnstow Dock ideas and get the little grey cells ticking over once again!

 

Hours Of Fun!

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68

[john new]

20 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

Cannot believe it is nearly two years since I updated anything about Burnstow Dock. But then, things have been happening elsewhere.

 

I am about to have a week’s enforced leave via a doctor’s note, due to Post Viral Exhaustion … which is another way of saying that my body has not recovered from the full blown knock you over sideways ‘flu I had a couple of weeks before Christmas, resulting in me being absolutely exhausted by the end of each week and falling ill over the weekend before recovering enough to start the working week again; it came to a head last week as the periods between full blown exhaustion were decreasing and I got a secondary chest infection to boot!

 

So, my intention is to recover as many of the photos into the thread as possible, as that is something I can do whilst “resting”.

 

Currently, there is rolling stock laid out on my central workbench in the loft as per the sorting roads for the train ferry at Dover, following a photo on a FaceBook group vis a vis -

 

 

However, also to hand are the mock ups I made of the Ipswich buildings. Hopefully enough recovery/rest shall take place that I can revisit the Burnstow Dock ideas and get the little grey cells ticking over once again!

 

Hours Of Fun!

Having had two bursts of medical enforced rest (First in autumn 2007) and on and off over the last 18 months before a prostate op last year and for a hernia op just before the most recent Christmas take care and make the most of the rest. It was the long 2007 break off work after my major heart op that got me back into active modelling.