Plans for an End to End - Ffarquhar

[splodgestudios]

Hi all, got anyrails opened up and finally got some concrete plans for my end to end layout.

 

I’ll save the history lecture as many have said it before, and most likely better than I can. But FFarquhar (I’m partial to the “Far-kurr” pronunciation, but theres no right or wrong way to say it) was originally created by the late Rev W Awdry, and has roots from the phrase “far away quarry”. 
 

Here is my layout plan as it stands - I’ll be modelling in OO/4mm scale, and with the 2ft fiddle yard it’ll be 7ft by 21inches.

 

 

And here is the original track plan of Ffarquahar by the Rev W Awdry

 

 

I had to modify the track plan slightly to fit my needs but I wanted to keep the general feel and operation of the track. FFarquhar is a branch terminus, with a short tramway leading to Anopha quarry. 
This station sees both goods and passenger traffic. The tramway is an important part of operations and I wanted some representation of it, hence the hidden line looping to the traverser, short trains will be able to come in and out with the appearance of going down farther. 
 

The plan is not final but I’m very happy with happy with how it’s coming out. Any opinions, comments and criticisms are welcome :)

[DCB]

It's interesting, innovative, not bog standard BLT which is refreshing, but its tiny.   In 00 you can just about get two short coaches, 55ft Triang Clerestories etc and a tiny loco into 2ft. Its a bit too small for my liking.  I would have lengthened the traverser 3" and moved the rest of the layout 3" right  shortening the platform road (From 12")  and back road 3" to compensate I think you have drawn one more traverser road than you can use.   But it would be a good stamping ground for Thomas and Annie and Clarabel, or Toby and Henrietta, and Percy and a few troublesome trucks.   Just no good for anything with a tender.

[St Enodoc]

34 minutes ago, DCB said:

It's interesting, innovative, not bog standard BLT which is refreshing, but its tiny.   In 00 you can just about get two short coaches, 55ft Triang Clerestories etc and a tiny loco into 2ft. Its a bit too small for my liking.  I would have lengthened the traverser 3" and moved the rest of the layout 3" right  shortening the platform road (From 12")  and back road 3" to compensate I think you have drawn one more traverser road than you can use.   But it would be a good stamping ground for Thomas and Annie and Clarabel, or Toby and Henrietta, and Percy and a few troublesome trucks.   Just no good for anything with a tender.

On the contrary, I think this is a very neat homage to Ffarquhar, which is supposed to be tiny. The three-way point is a nice space-saver, as is the hidden cut-off to the traverser.

 

I can't quite see your point about the traverser by the way. To me it appears that the top two roads are solely for the quarry while the bottom two are solely for the main line, with the two middle roads available to both. That's a good balance.

 

The only change I would suggest is to run the two left-hand goods sidings separately off the loop, as in the original, which will let them hold more wagons.

[DavidB-AU]

1 hour ago, DCB said:

It's interesting, innovative, not bog standard BLT which is refreshing, but its tiny.   In 00 you can just about get two short coaches, 55ft Triang Clerestories etc and a tiny loco into 2ft.

 

Which is pretty much what the original had!

 

https://trlottte.com/rm-1959-12.htm

[DCB]

47 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

On the contrary, I think this is a very neat homage to Ffarquhar, which is supposed to be tiny. The three-way point is a nice space-saver, as is the hidden cut-off to the traverser.

 

I can't quite see your point about the traverser by the way. To me it appears that the top two roads are solely for the quarry while the bottom two are solely for the main line, with the two middle roads available to both. That's a good balance.

 

The only change I would suggest is to run the two left-hand goods sidings separately off the loop, as in the original, which will let them hold more wagons.

 

Ffarquar was built before the era of RTR B sets and the like, and operated with a 0-6-0 Tank loco and two hand built coaches running as a push pull set.

As drawn the OP traverser is an inch or so too small to take a GWR Pannier and B set or Jinty and a couple of LMS Non Corridors, yet the run round would take those coaches as drawn. and a Pacific or Class 50 diesel beyond the points  Rev Awdrey's version had a loop which looks too short to allow Thomas to run round Annie and Clarabel and they ran as an auto train.   My drawing would let a typical GWR Branch train of a 45XX and B set operate while being the same length. The OP one wont.  See also red marks suggesting a Y point at the top instead of right hand and 3 way at bottom.   Rev Awdrey's track plan is great, a continuous run and end to end layout except as he drew it his run round is too short to run round even his short coaches...   However the picture and his drawing don't 100% agree...

Edited November 9, 2022 by DCB

[St Enodoc]

39 minutes ago, DCB said:

 

Ffarquar was built before the era of RTR B sets and the like, and operated with a 0-6-0 Tank loco and two hand built coaches running as a push pull set.

As drawn the OP traverser is an inch or so too small to take a GWR Pannier and B set or Jinty and a couple of LMS Non Corridors, yet the run round would take those coaches as drawn. and a Pacific or Class 50 diesel beyond the points  Rev Awdrey's version had a loop which looks too short to allow Thomas to run round Annie and Clarabel and they ran as an auto train.   My drawing would let a typical GWR Branch train of a 45XX and B set operate while being the same length. The OP one wont.  See also red marks suggesting a Y point at the top instead of right hand and 3 way at bottom.   Rev Awdrey's track plan is great, a continuous run and end to end layout except as he drew it his run round is too short to run round even his short coaches...   However the picture and his drawing don't 100% agree...

I'm sure the OP will respond directly but the first post gave me the distinct impression that the intention was to build an end-to-end version of Ffarquhar.

[Harlequin]

Hi Splodge,

 

Because the three-way point in the throat is symmetrical you are committed to using Code100 track. Maybe you didn't realise. It's down to personal taste and whether you need to use Code100 because of aged stock. In my opinion, it stands out like a sore thumb in photos and I prefer Code75.

 

The loco release spur seems longer than necessary. and if you can do it, shortening it would do two good things: 1. Move all the run round loop pointwork slightly to the right, making the loop and the kickback sidings a bit longer (not much but every little helps). 2. Allow the spur not to be so angled towards the back and the platform curve to be less pronounced, possibly replacing the curved loop turnout with a straight.

 

Edited November 9, 2022 by Harlequin

[splodgestudios]

7 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

On the contrary, I think this is a very neat homage to Ffarquhar, which is supposed to be tiny. The three-way point is a nice space-saver, as is the hidden cut-off to the traverser.

 

I can't quite see your point about the traverser by the way. To me it appears that the top two roads are solely for the quarry while the bottom two are solely for the main line, with the two middle roads available to both. That's a good balance.

 

The only change I would suggest is to run the two left-hand goods sidings separately off the loop, as in the original, which will let them hold more wagons.

Your understanding of the traverser is spot on. I’ve tried to space it so two lines would always be connected to the layout. 
 

From top to bottom the lines would be organised as such - 1. Reserved for the Quarry shunter (Mavis) who on occasion brings wagons down to the station. 2. No. 7 (Toby) Usually on the “quarryman’s train” but on occasion a few wagons could be brought down. 3. And 4. Are reserved for No.6 (Percy) who worked all goods. The working idea is to have two lines depending on the days workings, considering Percy would occasionally work up the tramway. The top 3 lines would reach the tramway loop, while the bottom 3 would reach the main. Line 2. Would be left for No. 1 (Thomas) who would work the push pull, two bashed coaches fitting perfectly within two feet. (They’re still being built but I’ve kept in mind that I wanted to keep them small).

Line 1 would be kept for the DMU, I have a Bachmann 101 2-car for this purpose which may see life as a single but that’s not decided.

 

In essence this is meant to be a homage and something I could have fun adding my personal touch too. 
 

7 hours ago, DCB said:

 

Ffarquar was built before the era of RTR B sets and the like, and operated with a 0-6-0 Tank loco and two hand built coaches running as a push pull set.

As drawn the OP traverser is an inch or so too small to take a GWR Pannier and B set or Jinty and a couple of LMS Non Corridors, yet the run round would take those coaches as drawn. and a Pacific or Class 50 diesel beyond the points  Rev Awdrey's version had a loop which looks too short to allow Thomas to run round Annie and Clarabel and they ran as an auto train.   My drawing would let a typical GWR Branch train of a 45XX and B set operate while being the same length. The OP one wont.  See also red marks suggesting a Y point at the top instead of right hand and 3 way at bottom.   Rev Awdrey's track plan is great, a continuous run and end to end layout except as he drew it his run round is too short to run round even his short coaches...   However the picture and his drawing don't 100% agree...

And yes I did deviate slightly from the original, far more homage than 100% copy. Overall look and feel is more important to me. FFarquhar is small and I like it that way

 

I do appreciate your points about the well points (lol) the run round needs a bit of editing, and the bottom too sidings could use some added length as well. 
 

Thank you for the feedback
 

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I'm sure the OP will respond directly but the first post gave me the distinct impression that the intention was to build an end-to-end version of Ffarquhar.

Yes! Simply put a small, end to end version of Awdrys original loop. With some inspiration from the end to end he made later (far too big for my space 😅)

[splodgestudios]

8 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Hi Splodge,

 

Because the three-way point in the throat is symmetrical you are committed to using Code100 track. Maybe you didn't realise. It's down to personal taste and whether you need to use Code100 because of aged stock. In my opinion, it stands out like a sore thumb in photos and I prefer Code75.

 

The loco release spur seems longer than necessary. and if you can do it, shortening it would do two good things: 1. Move all the run round loop pointwork slightly to the right, making the loop and the kickback sidings a bit longer (not much but every little helps). 2. Allow the spur not to be so angled towards the back and the platform curve to be less pronounced, possibly replacing the curved loop turnout with a straight.

 

Yes! I run mixed stock some old some new, I’m not that picky with the gauge of the rail. Plus I live in Canada so it’s not as easy to get code 75. (And I’d get bull head if I could but again Canada)

 

those sound like good ideas! I’ll get a mock up when I’m finished with work :)

 

thank you!

Edited November 9, 2022 by splodgestudios

[roythebus1]

I remember seeing this layout at Central Hall in 1961, the first show I'd been to! Hence the inspiration for my Tidmouth junction layout in the mid 1980s.

 

Railway Modeller plans are usually inaccurate as I noticed when I looked at their track plan for my Tidmouth Junction layout. It just didn't look right compared to the photos! I may well post the track plan on another thread on here later.

[splodgestudios]

Hi all again! Taken advice from all the comments I received (thank you very much) and have this mock up 

 

 

Happier with this one, far less awkward than my first draft. The only thing I’m concerned about is the Y-point to “Goods 1” makes a slightly awkward S shape coming onto the tramway but it may not be an issue. 

 

I colour coded the traverser to communicate the upper and lower. 
 

Very happy with shortening the loco spur, as it gives more room for scenery and will make the tramway easier to disguise. Considering a retaining wall similar to what is seen here 

 

 

I am still open to any and all suggestions! 

[DavidB-AU]

Will both leads be able to access most/all traverser tracks? Ideally you'd want empty and loaded quarry wagons you can cycle through in opposite directions. 

[splodgestudios]

8 hours ago, DavidB-AU said:

Will both leads be able to access most/all traverser tracks? Ideally you'd want empty and loaded quarry wagons you can cycle through in opposite directions. 

Yes! As I said before the top 3 lines will be for the quarry, and the bottom 3 for the main. The middle two lines would be shared. 
 

I’m still deciding on how I want to have the quarry loads, the primary export is cut stone. Which may be achievable with removable loads

[splodgestudios]

I think, think, I may be able to start baseboard construction next week, so I’ll most likely be moving to thread in workbench!

[splodgestudios]

On 09/11/2022 at 17:49, roythebus1 said:

I remember seeing this layout at Central Hall in 1961, the first show I'd been to! Hence the inspiration for my Tidmouth junction layout in the mid 1980s.

 

Railway Modeller plans are usually inaccurate as I noticed when I looked at their track plan for my Tidmouth Junction layout. It just didn't look right compared to the photos! I may well post the track plan on another thread on here later.

So sorry meant to respond sooner! I wish I could’ve seen it in real life, luckily I’m not the only with the idea of recreating it. 
 

Please do share! I’d love to see. As well if you have any photos of your layout :)

[roythebus1]

Railway Modeller article. I have a few press photographs as well which I have permission to publish when I find them!  The track plan is correct but the position of the terminal station needs to be moved about a foot to the left. the platforms could take 3 coaches and a tender loco.

 

Thanks to whoever it was who took the trouble to search an online database and found the original RM article. My writings, photos by Len Weal I think. Acknowledgements to Railway Modeller. 

Thomas article page 1.pdf Thomas article page 2.pdf

[splodgestudios]

12 hours ago, roythebus1 said:

Railway Modeller article. I have a few press photographs as well which I have permission to publish when I find them!  The track plan is correct but the position of the terminal station needs to be moved about a foot to the left. the platforms could take 3 coaches and a tender loco.

 

Thanks to whoever it was who took the trouble to search an online database and found the original RM article. My writings, photos by Len Weal I think. Acknowledgements to Railway Modeller. 

Thomas article page 1.pdf 1.54 MB · 19 downloads Thomas article page 2.pdf 1.81 MB · 13 downloads

 

Fantastic use of space. 3 sizeable stations in a 11’ x 5’ is very impressive. Amazing work, does any of the layout still exist?

[roythebus1]

I don't know. The MRC "gave" it to a school in Merseyside, I on't know after that. But I was a bit annoyed as it went without my permission and had my collectable Hornby Dublo station on it and a turntable built by Vic Michel of the MRC when he was a student in the early 1960s.

 

This layout appeared on the Wogan Show during an interview with the Rev.Awdry. This was during exhibition week, so it had to be shifted out of the show one evening, erected in the BBC studio the following morning for the live TV show in the evening, and back in the exhibition for the next morning!

 

The layout had everything, roundy-roundy, branch line, main line terminus, loco depot with turntable, carriage sidings, goods yard and hidden loops. even CJ Freezer said he wish he'd have thought of that one! It could be run as a train set or as a serious layout. And it was all built in about 3 weeks or less.

 

[CameronL]

20 hours ago, roythebus1 said:

This layout appeared on the Wogan Show during an interview with the Rev.Awdry

And here it is.

 

Best wishes.

 

Cam.

[roythebus1]

Thanks for that, the layout looks enormous on TV. It was built in the front room of my house in Mitcham Lane!

[splodgestudios]

Been very busy, so unfortunately not a lot of time to work on the layout. But that’s given me lots of time to think. Rearranged my room a bit and now I have room to extend the fiddle yard 6inches. Not much but it helps. 

In terms of construction I have ideas but nothing concrete. Trying to figure out the best way to have the fiddle yard be detachable, or fold up for transport (planning on bringing to local shows) 

 

Again I always appreciate any and all advice 

[splodgestudios]

Hi all! Played with the design some more and in quite happy as it stands. 

 

the hidden line has some play depending on how I want to space the fiddle yard. 
 

In terms of construction I think I’ll have the fiddle yard on hinges so it can fold under for transport. And if necessary I can have the last foot of the scenic area do the same for a 4’x1’9” foot print. Considering I may be able to extend the fiddle yard by 6inches I may leave the scenic unchanging for a 5’x1’9” foot print for transport.

Edited December 2, 2022 by splodgestudios
typo