Would this be a ridiculous track layout?

[AyJay]

When I designed my layout, I allowed plenty of space for locomotives, but now I have more locomotives than I have space for in my engine yard and I am considering laying an additional siding, as shown by the bottom track in this photograph. The entrance to the engine yard is over points to the right (off picture). But the entrance to this new length will be via the turntable. This solution means that I don’t have the expense of a point and motor; it also means that I don’t lose a locomotive space for the point. This proposed solution will give me space for 4 or 5 locomotives; I will also have to put in a retaining wall on the edge to prevent accidents. But would this be prototypical / sensible?  Thoughts please

[ITG]

Well, it’s a nice problem to have, and my view (and indeed my solution were I in your position) is…. Go ahead with the track plan and extra siding you intend…. It’s your layout!

[Jeremy Cumberland]

Prototypical? Probably not, since such a siding would probably be used for parking locos out of use, but it can only be accessed by locos running under their own steam. However, it does not look obviously wrong to me, and it is probably better than other options.

[Downer]

Sorry, but it just looks too unlikely for me.

[wirey33]

If it’s just storage you are looking for, why not add a point into the road just above and don’t have it connected to the TT?

 

Somewhere before the water crane would seem suitable.

 

As to being ridiculous; space would always be at a premium, so I’d imagine adding another road would be pretty prototypical.

[fulton]

I did something very similar on my now gone garage layout, in practice it only seen use an as out of service storage road, better the locos on view rather than hidden away, I fitted a Perspex protection strip as the track was close to the edge, as yours is.

[Nick Holliday]

13 hours ago, Jeremy C said:

Prototypical? Probably not, since such a siding would probably be used for parking locos out of use, but it can only be accessed by locos running under their own steam. However, it does not look obviously wrong to me, and it is probably better than other options.

Since every roundhouse loco shed worked on this principle, it is entirely prototypical.  This would also apply to the many sheds where access to the shed itself was via a turntable, such as Nine Elms, although in that particular instance there does seem to be a way that, with a lot of shunting, a dead engine could be recovered.

From a quick search it seems that the southern lines were happier with the turntable feeding cul-de-sac tracks, including Slade Green which matches the OP proposals.

I could only find one instance on the GNR, GER and NER, which was Swaffham on the GER, with a very strange layout, at the right hand end, that no modeller would dream of!

The GWR weren't averse to providing blind sidings off turntables, such as at Cheltenham in 1892

or the Midland, such as St Albans

[Phil Himsworth]

58 minutes ago, Nick Holliday said:

Nine Elms, although in that particular instance there does seem to be a way that, with a lot of shunting, a dead engine could be recovered.

I wonder if it's just for an elaborate version of pranking a new apprentice... "hey, can you bring the loco on the far road to the coal hopper? The turntable isn't working right now, but we're sure you'll find a way..."

[Steven B]

Add the extra siding as you have it, but if possible link it in to the rest of the depot sidings on the right hand side otherwise anything trapped at the dead end is unlikely to get used on your layout.

 

It looks like there's also space to add a line running off the turn-table at the 2 o'clock position - possibly enough for a tender engine or a couple of tank engines.

 

Steven B.

[DLT]

2 hours ago, wirey33 said:

If it’s just storage you are looking for, why not add a point into the road just above and don’t have it connected to the TT?

 

I agree with Wirey, a point on the existing line, straight off the turntable would do the trick.

You could do it as you illustrate it, but the two roads would be converging so close that you wouldn't be able to use that space for loco storage.

[RJS1977]

13 minutes ago, Steven B said:

Add the extra siding as you have it, but if possible link it in to the rest of the depot sidings on the right hand side otherwise anything trapped at the dead end is unlikely to get used on your layout.

 

It looks like there's also space to add a line running off the turn-table at the 2 o'clock position - possibly enough for a tender engine or a couple of tank engines.

 

Steven B.

 

Yes, I'd agree with that.

 

In addition to making it easier to get out locos from the dead end of the siding, railway companies also preferred where possible to have another route on to roads served by a turntable, in case the turntable became unserviceable for some reason (e.g. silly old Gordon falling in a ditch, or Oliver being "goodgracious"!).

[RJS1977]

In terms of the boundary wall (not a retaining wall in this instance), Scale Model Scenery do a very nice Victorian brick wall kit which my father has used to good effect as a barrier in a similar situation on his layout.

[AyJay]

Well there's some interesting options.

I am in favour of the alternative exit option, so have just done some measuring.  I think that by slightly reworking the right end of the lowest existing 'road', I can put a 'large Y' point just right of the water tower, the opposite end to connect to the turntable.  This will give me space for an additional 4 locomotives.

Since I have already got some lengths of code 75 rail and a few spare cobalt levers, the only cost will be an additional point and cobalt point motor at £40, or £10 per loco.

An additional line at the turntable's 2-o'clock position?  Yes that should work, and its effectively for free :-)  Thank you for that Stephen.

As for the retaining wall, I have plenty of brick paper from scale model scenery and so can build a fairly rugged wall that I can fix into the board with some thick coffee stirrers I have, for support.

Well now all I have to do is just wait until the next exhibition.

[melmerby]

If you want odd layouts look at Satfford Road (GWR):

 

http://www.historywebsite.co.uk/Museum/Transport/Trains/gwr/factory3.htm

 

Plenty of dead ends off turntables

[Steven B]

Those are square "round" houses - a fairly common design (with either square or round building surrounding the turn-table. I don't recall seeing a double or triple one modelled.

 

The Great Hall of the National Railway museum used to be configured in a similar way; Barrow Hill still is. Some, such as Old Oak Common, had an outdoor version. Elsewhere, you could find a full round house, half round house and standard linier shed - Leeds & Thirsk Railway shed at Leeds for example.

 

Steven B.

 

 

Edited June 15, 2022 by Steven B

[melmerby]

41 minutes ago, Steven B said:

Those are square "round" houses - a fairly common design (with either square or round building surrounding the turn-table. I don't recall seeing a double or triple one modelled.

 

The Great Hall of the National Railway museum used to be configured in a similar way; Barrow Hill still is. Some, such as Old Oak Common, had an outdoor version. Elsewhere, you could find a full round house, half round house and standard linier shed - Leeds & Thirsk Railway shed at Leeds for example.

 

Steven B.

 

 

OOC was a block of 4 turntables all under cover under one roof, the only one on the GWR.

The rear turntables were accessed either over the front turntables or via the separate entrances to the rear ones on the sides:

 

The traverser is for the attached workshop

 

 

Quite a few GWR sheds had two side by side.

Stafford Road had a complex history leading to it's arrangement.

Edited June 15, 2022 by melmerby

[DCB]

On 14/06/2022 at 09:56, wirey33 said:

If it’s just storage you are looking for, why not add a point into the road just above and don’t have it connected to the TT?

 

Somewhere before the water crane would seem suitable.

 

As to being ridiculous; space would always be at a premium, so I’d imagine adding another road would be pretty prototypical.

Agree, see pic.

 

This is a nice arrangement, very much like ours, locos come down one side of shed, turn, and go back down the other, that way if the sidings hold 6 locos you can move 5 in sequence down them.   Dead end Roads off the TT are a PITA.   You have to separate a loco from its tender and use a small 0-4-0 or swb 0-6-0 as pilot to extract a dead loco, Thinking Inverness. Basingstoke or get the entire shed staff  with pinch bars to bar the loco along.. 

As originally drawn the siding would inaccessible and might as well be filled with non runners as it would completely disrupt an OS to extract a loco from the far end.   wirey33s suggestion as drawn out by myself and tweaked would allow stored locos at the siding ends, quite often locos withdrawn quite a while previously..

Maybe not Lion but...

[RJS1977]

I'd still be inclined to curve it round to the turntable if possible - it maintains the possibility of being able to park two locos on the siding without either being in the way of the other, and even if used as a siding for scrap locos, in all likelihood it would have connected to the turntable in a previous life rather than being laid specially.

[Steven B]

23 hours ago, melmerby said:

OOC was a block of 4 turntables all under cover under one roof, the only one on the GWR.

 

Was being the key word. The old GWR depot building was demolished in the mid 1960s with only one turntable left in situ.

Scan 345 Old Oak Common Turntable by Kevin Whitehurst, on Flickr

 

 

 

Steven B.

Edited June 16, 2022 by Steven B

[melmerby]

42 minutes ago, Steven B said:

 

Was being the key word. The old GWR depot building was demolished in the mid 1960s with only one turntable left in situ.

Scan 345 Old Oak Common Turntable by Kevin Whitehurst, on Flickr

 

 

 

Steven B.

As you didn't qualify what you meant and quoted other "had beens", I think my post was entirely appropriate.

I could quote Tyseley as that suffered the same fate as OOC with the building demolished and one turntable surviving (and still does) but it's not as it was built, neither was OOC.

[DCB]

Square Round-House?  I don't think the GWR was mad enough to call them Square Roundhouses.   Probably the Midland did.  Didn't the GWR call them Turntable Buildings?     Or Turntable Units when at the planning stage.    If you want a really mad roundhouse see Inverness pre WW1.     Down Wiltshire way Roundhouses was Canal workers dwellings on account of they was round like.

[AyJay]

Copper strip laid along board edges. Cork sheeting glued in place. Point and motor on order from shop. Track, joiners and pins dug out. Time to put my feet up 😎

[Right Away]

On 13/06/2022 at 18:36, AyJay said:

When I designed my layout, I allowed plenty of space for locomotives, but now I have more locomotives than I have space for in my engine yard and I am considering laying an additional siding, as shown by the bottom track in this photograph. The entrance to the engine yard is over points to the right (off picture). But the entrance to this new length will be via the turntable. This solution means that I don’t have the expense of a point and motor; it also means that I don’t lose a locomotive space for the point. This proposed solution will give me space for 4 or 5 locomotives; I will also have to put in a retaining wall on the edge to prevent accidents. But would this be prototypical / sensible?  Thoughts please

 

 

Many modellers are in a similar situation.

Personally, I find I always have more locomotives on storage cassettes than in service, otherwise it might seem I was trying to re-create the 1955 strike!

For example ......

 

 

[Rivercider]

Exmouth Junction shed in Exeter, before the rebuilding in concrete in 1927, had two through bypass roads to the south of the shed, and four through roads to the north, leading to a turntable at the rear (east) end of the shed.

 

cheer

[DCB]

 

Too Many locos, I used to dream of owning too many locos, now I dream of owning a few reliable ones and persuading other people (through eBay) to buy the dross I have accumulated.  

MPDs can become visible storage yards in the same way stations become visible fiddle yards if we're not careful.

My layout design parameters envisaged each main line passenger train would need 3 engines, one for the outbound leg, one for return and one for the next outbound leg, principally to ensure all the fleet got used,  while most of the heavy freight moved at night so the freight locos would be on shed during the day while passenger locos came and went and the shunters and pick up goods locos departed early morning and returned in the evening.  So I could have 2-8-0s and mixed traffic 2-6-0s and 4-6-0s on shed  during the daylight hours I modelled and just a few spare small tanks around, notwithstanding a depot of the size I modelled may well have 25 small tanks and just a hand full of big locos allocated. Then again locos have wheels and move around, so maybe half the locos arriving on shed may be from other depots.   Its very easy to get that Rail Strike effect.

Towards the end of steam serried ranks of withdrawn locos clogged many depots, and even much earlier some (Mainly ex LMS)  depots had lines of useless or nearly useless locos stored waiting for the scrap man or a reprieve for the summer service.    Generally less is more with fewer locos looking more real, and less variety looking more real than more.   Duchess of Atholl, Flying Fox and King Henry VIII round the turntable will always scream "Wong" to me.