How Would You Shunt This

[Chris Dark]

Good evening all,

 

I have been playing around with a couple of ideas for a 7mm end to end. One of the main appeals for me of O gauge is the extra size which for me makes shunting and medium to slow speed more enjoyable, to this end i wanted a terminus setting. I have chosen a non standard terminus (such as Fairford) as some inspiration which means i can shorted the platform (part of it is off scene) and focus on extra siding room etc with the back story of a through station that never was.

 

I'm generally happy with the plan below but as someone who isn't too knowledgeable on the methods of shunting and various scenarios, I am hoping of some input to allow me to build up a picture but  also amend if requierd.

 

 

This is a sketch in Scarm before the final plan is drawn up in Templot. The train would enter from the left. Passengers trains would stop at the station, move forward into the loop, run around and roll back into the station (i like this as it introduces movement of the coaching stock i wouldn't get with a conventional run-around). I have also added an engine shed on the loop for extra visual interest.

 

Goods traffic would enter from the same side and the yard is labeled as above, but this is where i can't visualise the movements. the arrangement is more akin to a through station (as per my description above) but i want to shunt it as a terminus. the mileage siding is a dock siding, taking inspiration from this picture of Claverdon from the fantastic Warwickshire Railways website.

 

 

the other siding is general goods, the final siding i imagine to be a headshunt.

 

I do feel i would like to add another siding off the goods yard but it's the constant issue of adding too much takes away from the 'quiet rural station' i am going for.

 

I hope i have explained my thoughts clearly and would welcome any input.

 

Thanks

Edited February 14, 2023 by Chris Dark
misstype

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Just some thoughts, as the layout I'm currently building (Shardlow) has some similar elements to your design.

1. Is the station platform long enough? Remember it has to accommodate a loco plus x number of coaches - unless you are totally using push/pull auto coaches or "motor" trains (as the LMS called them).
2. To me, the run-round loop would be better on the other side of the line (the goods yard side) . This would greatly facilitate shunting moves. 

 

Edit  Just realised the trains will arrive from the left, rather than the right, so disregard my first point...

Edited February 15, 2023 by Peter Kazmierczak

[Dungrange]

An inbound goods train would stop in the station platform and the brake van would be uncoupled.  The rest of the train would then traverse the crossover into the head-shunt.  The arriving locomotive would then proceed to shunt the incoming wagons into the Goods Shed Siding or the Mileage Siding as required. 

 

The same locomotive would then form the outbound goods train from these two sidings and propel this back to the station platform and then draw the train into the loop.  It would then run round the wagons and proceed to the platform to pick up the brake van, passing the outgoing rake once again to get the brake van on the rear of the train.  It would then run round and couple up to the front of the train ready to depart.

 

There's probably not a great need for the Engine Shed, as this would probably be a one engine in steam scenario.  However, it could be used to stable a locomotive overnight for an early morning departure.

 

If you wanted to add another siding, you could always add a short siding from the station end of the Run-Around Loop to allow end loading from the platform onto a Lowmac or similar such wagon.

 

[Gordon A]

As Dungrange above. If your first departure is a passenger move, then you will need to store the coach/es  over night in one of the loops.

No signal box?

 

Had you consider an additional crossover at the engine shed end of the sidings to main line?

 

Also potential for the line to continue off scene as a "long siding" to an industrial site.

 

Gordon A

[Chris Dark]

10 hours ago, Dungrange said:

An inbound goods train would stop in the station platform and the brake van would be uncoupled.  The rest of the train would then traverse the crossover into the head-shunt.  The arriving locomotive would then proceed to shunt the incoming wagons into the Goods Shed Siding or the Mileage Siding as required. 

 

The same locomotive would then form the outbound goods train from these two sidings and propel this back to the station platform and then draw the train into the loop.  It would then run round the wagons and proceed to the platform to pick up the brake van, passing the outgoing rake once again to get the brake van on the rear of the train.  It would then run round and couple up to the front of the train ready to depart.

 

There's probably not a great need for the Engine Shed, as this would probably be a one engine in steam scenario.  However, it could be used to stable a locomotive overnight for an early morning departure.

 

If you wanted to add another siding, you could always add a short siding from the station end of the Run-Around Loop to allow end loading from the platform onto a Lowmac or similar such wagon.

 

Thanks for that. In terms of the shunting, in my mind, if I shunted the incoming wagons first , I wouldn't be able to access the loaded wagons, therefore I was thinking that the incoming wagons would need to be left somewhere where access to the sidings would allow the shunting of the loaded. The rest of your description makes sense and was largely what I had in mind.

 

I did think about this, I will sketch it up and see how it fits.

[The Stationmaster]

The goods sidings are really the wrong way round for simple shunting - maybe someone thought the tline would be extended to the right and didn't bother to put in the connection to make shunting simple (and quick).

 

Firstly I think you area bsolutely right to keep the goods yard spacious and just have the two sidings although the position of the goods shed on the siding does waste siding space.  Before we look at shunting it's useful to consider the way freight traffic would work.

 

Freight traffic - as you have provided for, came in two basic categories - full wagon loads (charged at mileage rates - hence a mileage siding) which in turn divided into various categories siuch as 'coa' or 'minerals'.  The other category was goods small - consignments uner 1 ton and usually dealt with in a goods shed unless there was so much it over-flowed to a siding in the yard.  These two types of traffic will influence the formation of an arriving train and the shunting.

 

Normally the goods small will be the ,most urgent traffic - the goods shed depends on them for work and delivery vehicles - be thatey horse drawn or motor oe even a carrier, also relate to them.  Then don't forget there will be yesterday's wagon(s) in the goods shed and they will need to be moved out before the arrival(s) can be shunted in.  At a small place like teh shed might only hold one or two wagons but if the shed can't hols d all of them they need to be worked through it as the day progresses - this would be easily done by a few men using a couple of pinch bars.  So you might needa short length of siding beyond the goods shed (back to the position of the goods shed on the siding) and use the space before the good shed for mileage traffic.

 

Again empty mileage wagons need to be shunted out before the new arrivals can be shunted in - it's quicker to do it that way and it is the least interference with pei opk le - such as coal merchants - working on wagons in the siding.  So shunting has now got a bit more complicated than where we started upthread.   Not difficult but could be time consuming, so (on your original track layout) -

 

1.  Hoping there's no gradient) the ariving freight trip stops short of the platform and the engine detaches and goes and shunts out any empties and outwards loaded wagons.  

2. These are propelled out towards the platform and then drawn into one of the loops, the engine runs round.

3. The engine now picks up the wagons of it arriving train (leaving the brakevan), draws them into the yard and shunts them into positions - goods shed wagons first.

4. when this wot rk has finished the engine returns to the platform line and collects the brakevan and with brakevan attached runs round the outwards wagons (which means you need enough headroom for an engine and brakevan on the spur beyond the loop).

5. Brakevan then pt ropelled onto the back of the departing trains, engine runs round and attaches to front of trains, train can depart.

 

 

There is a quicker of doing it but it means that manpoewer, or a horse, had s to be used to move wagons between the two yard sidings and the goods yard headshunt (which amouns to a lot of wasted sidings space).

 

This line might have Mixed Trains but as the layout stands they are near impossible to shunt without fly shunting in the yard.  If an additional crossover was provided, as suggested n by Gordon A, a Mixed Train could then be shunted - with a lot of messing about as you need to run round twice to get the engine on the right end to shunt the goods yard sidings.

[Chris Dark]

2 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

The goods sidings are really the wrong way round for simple shunting - maybe someone thought the tline would be extended to the right and didn't bother to put in the connection to make shunting simple (and quick).

 

Firstly I think you area bsolutely right to keep the goods yard spacious and just have the two sidings although the position of the goods shed on the siding does waste siding space.  Before we look at shunting it's useful to consider the way freight traffic would work.

 

Freight traffic - as you have provided for, came in two basic categories - full wagon loads (charged at mileage rates - hence a mileage siding) which in turn divided into various categories siuch as 'coa' or 'minerals'.  The other category was goods small - consignments uner 1 ton and usually dealt with in a goods shed unless there was so much it over-flowed to a siding in the yard.  These two types of traffic will influence the formation of an arriving train and the shunting.

 

Normally the goods small will be the ,most urgent traffic - the goods shed depends on them for work and delivery vehicles - be thatey horse drawn or motor oe even a carrier, also relate to them.  Then don't forget there will be yesterday's wagon(s) in the goods shed and they will need to be moved out before the arrival(s) can be shunted in.  At a small place like teh shed might only hold one or two wagons but if the shed can't hols d all of them they need to be worked through it as the day progresses - this would be easily done by a few men using a couple of pinch bars.  So you might needa short length of siding beyond the goods shed (back to the position of the goods shed on the siding) and use the space before the good shed for mileage traffic.

 

Again empty mileage wagons need to be shunted out before the new arrivals can be shunted in - it's quicker to do it that way and it is the least interference with pei opk le - such as coal merchants - working on wagons in the siding.  So shunting has now got a bit more complicated than where we started upthread.   Not difficult but could be time consuming, so (on your original track layout) -

 

1.  Hoping there's no gradient) the ariving freight trip stops short of the platform and the engine detaches and goes and shunts out any empties and outwards loaded wagons.  

2. These are propelled out towards the platform and then drawn into one of the loops, the engine runs round.

3. The engine now picks up the wagons of it arriving train (leaving the brakevan), draws them into the yard and shunts them into positions - goods shed wagons first.

4. when this wot rk has finished the engine returns to the platform line and collects the brakevan and with brakevan attached runs round the outwards wagons (which means you need enough headroom for an engine and brakevan on the spur beyond the loop).

5. Brakevan then pt ropelled onto the back of the departing trains, engine runs round and attaches to front of trains, train can depart.

 

 

There is a quicker of doing it but it means that manpoewer, or a horse, had s to be used to move wagons between the two yard sidings and the goods yard headshunt (which amouns to a lot of wasted sidings space).

 

This line might have Mixed Trains but as the layout stands they are near impossible to shunt without fly shunting in the yard.  If an additional crossover was provided, as suggested n by Gordon A, a Mixed Train could then be shunted - with a lot of messing about as you need to run round twice to get the engine on the right end to shunt the goods yard sidings.

Hi Mike,

 

Thanks very much for your detailed reply.

 

I take note from your and Gordans comment relating to an additional crossover, my reluctance to add this in is that I think the goods loop would be quite short (I can look at this later) and may limit the length of the train. Also would it be reasonable to leave wagons for unloading on the track between the mileage point and the good shed point? or you you leave this clear for access for each?

 

Reading through your step by step shunting, it does appear that leaving incoming goods 'off scene' whilst a light engine appears, shunts the outgoing goods and then goes to retrieve the incoming goods answers my question. This clears the issue in my head where I was thinking where can departing trains be left whilst the incoming gets shunted.

 

I can always add a three way point but my reluctance (maybe naively) is to avoid these for a rural station. to give some sense of size the layout shown is 20ft x 4 ft.

 

Edit - Sorry when you say the good shed wastes siding space, what is this referring to?

Edited February 15, 2023 by Chris Dark

[The Stationmaster]

Chris,

 

Adding that crossover definitely shortens one loop as you fear but it doesn't shorten the other although it might be slightly shorter to start with.  The real problem with adding the crossover is that it starts to look more like Clapham Jcn than a quiet branch terminus having points everwhere.  

 

However I as far as I can work out that extra crossover is only essential if you run a Mixed Train which inevitabluy means you would have to run round an addiving train twice in order to be able to shunt the wagons off the rear off it (run round once on arrival. then shunt the wagons to the other loop then run round again to get on the right hand end of the wagons)>. But Mixed Trains, while likely on such a line, aren't essential to its operation and the track layout preventing them being shunted is a good reason for no running them in the first place!

[RobinofLoxley]

Chris what is the total length of your layout? Armed with this info anyone with the inclination could play with the design in other formats in case something more efficient is possible

[Chris Dark]

14 hours ago, RobinofLoxley said:

Chris what is the total length of your layout? Armed with this info anyone with the inclination could play with the design in other formats in case something more efficient is possible

The layout would be 20 x 4 ft of scenic, as drawn out in my first post. there is no chance I can create a scale length terminus layout but I am wanting to achieve a realistic compressed approach, by which I mean avoiding sidings and loops which look cramped. The loop is circa 1.9m point to point and the goodshed siding is circa 1.8m along with the headshunt, to me this allows me to hold 5-7 wagons and a loco with wiggle room.

[Chris Dark]

16 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Chris,

 

Adding that crossover definitely shortens one loop as you fear but it doesn't shorten the other although it might be slightly shorter to start with.  The real problem with adding the crossover is that it starts to look more like Clapham Jcn than a quiet branch terminus having points everwhere.  

 

However I as far as I can work out that extra crossover is only essential if you run a Mixed Train which inevitabluy means you would have to run round an addiving train twice in order to be able to shunt the wagons off the rear off it (run round once on arrival. then shunt the wagons to the other loop then run round again to get on the right hand end of the wagons)>. But Mixed Trains, while likely on such a line, aren't essential to its operation and the track layout preventing them being shunted is a good reason for no running them in the first place!

Morning Mike,

 

What are the chances of passenger stock being stored at this type of location during the day. i.e, a fictional timetable may be morning passenger service from my station to the junction station then return, next passenger working may not be for a few hours so passenger stock is stored whilst the loco shunts the yard. Loco then departs with next passenger trip before the goods arrives, goods loco shunts the incoming wagons and takes away the pre-shunted wagons from the prior loco?

 

What I am getting at with this, could I reasonably add a siding to hold passenger stock (I'm thinking off the loop to the rear of the platform). Or am I falling into the trap of trying to add too much?

 

 

[RobinofLoxley]

3 hours ago, Chris Dark said:

Morning Mike,

 

What are the chances of passenger stock being stored at this type of location during the day. i.e, a fictional timetable may be morning passenger service from my station to the junction station then return, next passenger working may not be for a few hours so passenger stock is stored whilst the loco shunts the yard. Loco then departs with next passenger trip before the goods arrives, goods loco shunts the incoming wagons and takes away the pre-shunted wagons from the prior loco?

 

What I am getting at with this, could I reasonably add a siding to hold passenger stock (I'm thinking off the loop to the rear of the platform). Or am I falling into the trap of trying to add too much?

 

 

I wondered about this, given that there are three parallel tracks already in the location. It seemed more apparent when I drew it in Anyrail. The loop can hold passenger stock, if its not going to, why is it there, the goods lines would otherwise be laid out differently. Looks like last move at night is train arrives, passengers disembark, train moves to loop and loco moves to shed. In the mornign loco runs around and departs.

[The Stationmaster]

7 hours ago, Chris Dark said:

Morning Mike,

 

What are the chances of passenger stock being stored at this type of location during the day. i.e, a fictional timetable may be morning passenger service from my station to the junction station then return, next passenger working may not be for a few hours so passenger stock is stored whilst the loco shunts the yard. Loco then departs with next passenger trip before the goods arrives, goods loco shunts the incoming wagons and takes away the pre-shunted wagons from the prior loco?

 

What I am getting at with this, could I reasonably add a siding to hold passenger stock (I'm thinking off the loop to the rear of the platform). Or am I falling into the trap of trying to add too much?

 

 

For some reason this reply of mine didn;yt appear earlier so here it is running rather late, sorry

Morning Chris - the simple answer is 'maybe'. Practice varied a bit amongst companies and, of course, over the years but I don't think it was very usual for spares stock to be held at a small branch terminus - more likely perhaps ay t the junction.

 

You have quite a lot of track in a small area but it gives you all the most likely facilities except end loading (easy to add to the mileage siding or in place of the engine shed) and a cattle dock (which could be located on the 'north' side of the loop - yes, some really were sited in that way).   I think  that adding more track would tend to over-egg the visual aspect of the layout but it's your railway and your decision

 

3 hours ago, RobinofLoxley said:

I wondered about this, given that there are three parallel tracks already in the location. It seemed more apparent when I drew it in Anyrail. The loop can hold passenger stock, if its not going to, why is it there, the goods lines would otherwise be laid out differently. Looks like last move at night is train arrives, passengers disembark, train moves to loop and loco moves to shed. In the mornign loco runs around and departs.

That wasn't what Chris asked about - he specifically mentioned spare passenger stock stored there during the day.  If such stock, even only a single vehicle, was left on the loop no train could be run round. and freight taisn can no longer collect outwards traffic and get a brakevan onto the rear of the outwards train.

 

 

[RobinofLoxley]

3 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

For some reason this reply of mine didn;yt appear earlier so here it is running rather late, sorry

Morning Chris - the simple answer is 'maybe'. Practice varied a bit amongst companies and, of course, over the years but I don't think it was very usual for spares stock to be held at a small branch terminus - more likely perhaps ay t the junction.

 

You have quite a lot of track in a small area but it gives you all the most likely facilities except end loading (easy to add to the mileage siding or in place of the engine shed) and a cattle dock (which could be located on the 'north' side of the loop - yes, some really were sited in that way).   I think  that adding more track would tend to over-egg the visual aspect of the layout but it's your railway and your decision

 

That wasn't what Chris asked about - he specifically mentioned spare passenger stock stored there during the day.  If such stock, even only a single vehicle, was left on the loop no train could be run round. and freight taisn can no longer collect outwards traffic and get a brakevan onto the rear of the outwards train.

 

 

That question was for you, thats why I didnt answer it!

[RobinofLoxley]

Im not quite sure of the size relationships in 'O' - how much track is required for a particular formation, although the length of the passenger train hasnt been given - I hope I've allowed 2 coaches and something like a Prairie. The third track bothered me in the original, although the end result has more turnouts than before. 

 

Chris, I dont know about SCARM but Anyrail files can be loaded up into an app called trainplayer, when the layout can be populated with stock and movements can be checked on the layout.

[Nearholmer]

If you have 20ft x 4ft for the scenic area, you have a bag of space.

 

I think your “problem” is the headshunt, which I can’t see the need for, and if I was to do something like this I would instead have a siding that could be used in several ways, something like this:

i ran out of paper er in the left, so the platform continuation and overbridge can be there. I’m pretty sure a 500mm “unit” works for Peco medium radius points (it does, they are 416mm long), and a 500mm loco release allows up to a Mogul, 4-4-0, or 0-6-0, even I think a Light Pacific if you follow southern practise, and you can certainly have three, probably four 48ft, bogie coaches.

 

A siding like this can be used to hold goods wagons that would otherwise be in the way during shunting, to allow a passenger team to visit and run round while the goods is at the terminus, and maybe a spare coach for the school train can be shoved down the end on the stops. If you run an auto train, that could layover in the siding at lunchtime while goods shunting continues, and if the branch passenger train sleeps at this terminus, the coaches can go in there.

 

Small turntable on the loco shed road? You’d have to draw it out to scale to check, but I think it might fit.

 

My concern about this layout is that it could look realistically uninteresting! The bridge and station area will look good, the loco shed too, but n between you get about two metres of not much. Maybe you could beak it up a bit with some hymnody, a stable and cart shed, that sort of thing.

 

Edited February 20, 2023 by Nearholmer

[The Stationmaster]

Oddly the idea of three parallel roads at a branch terminus is not as unusual as is being hinted at by some people.  Yes, the goods sif dings rthe 'wrong way round' isn't what we're used to but long stretches of at times parallel empty roads did happen in the real world - Fairford being one example.   And it sits very comfortably with a backstory that it was originally intended to extend the line beyond this station but that never happened because the company ran out of money  - as at Yealmpton.

 

So nothing wrong in my i opibnion in modelling something  a bit different and getting away from slavish devotion to more common, aka 'conventional', ideas and approaches to a track layout.  Incidentally one advantage of this plan is that most of the shunting is fully visible in the scenicked area whereas if the goods sidings were the other way round that wouldn't necessarily be the case.

[Harlequin]

When looking for something a bit different, Fairford is a very brave pattern to go for, though. ("Brave" in the Yes Minister sense... 😉)

 

There are lots of other GWR BLTs with quirky features that are not so long and thin and which thus are more amenable to compression into the kind of space available here.

 

BTW: At 4ft wide you need to have access to both of the long sides of the layout so you can reach the centre, Chris. Hope you're already on top of that!

 

Edited February 20, 2023 by Harlequin

[kevinlms]

There is a prototype layout described, which combines the features of the plans by Nearholmer and RobinofLaxley. It is described by Bob Essery in Model Railways in 1993 Jan & Feb issues.

 

The main difference is that the passenger platform is at the far end, but has a long siding where a 2nd passenger train can be stored until it is shunted into the main (and only) platform. It meant that there could be 3 trains at the station on occasion, a mixture of freight and passenger and sometimes 3 passenger services, remembering that there is only 1 platform!

There is a dock road, but it is not signalled for passenger services.

 

It is naturally for Bob Essery for this to be a Midland location - Ilkeston Town, a short branch near Trent.

[Chris Dark]

Thanks for all the extra comments since my last post, lots of very interesting input, picking up on a few points.

 

@Nearholmer thanks for the alternative track plan, I like having the rear siding, but this would mean the loop would need to be clear at all times. also from a visual i wanted to have a headshunt/siding raised with a road/river (indicated by the brown/green) which is actually routed parallel to that. I will have a play with this idea and see how I get on.

 

@Stationmasterthanks for your input again, the point you make regarding shunting being on scene is exactly what i am wanting to achieve, hence part off scene station, thus allowing for more siding and shunting space.

 

@HarlequinIt became clear early that the relation to Fairford is limited, largely just the principle of a once through station stunted with a non conventicle layout, if you can provide examples of others it would be good to look at, this is still development stages so happy to keep adjusting. the 4ft depth has been thought above, bending the line and having goods facilities at the front hopefully limits the requirement to lean over or access from both sides, ideally access would just be from the front.

[Harlequin]

Chris,

Think about cleaning the track, moving stalled locos, re-railing after derailments, coupling and uncoupling (if using 3-link chains).

And It's not just operating that will need access to all parts of the layout - you need to be able to build, maintain and update the scenery, ideally using both hands and not straining your back, without damaging the front of the layout.

 

The basic relationship to Fairford is that the platform and goods yard are in sequence along the running line rather than in parallel. Even with a partial platform that eats up valuable length.

 

I'll get back to you on suggestions of other quirky BLTs.

 

[Izzy]

I've done a quick and crude version in Templot at 2FS which is the scale I'm most familier with at present, and I've added a second crossover and set both lines at the standard siding distance of  15'2" rather than the normal 11'2". 

 

 

It would work nicely with the second crossover added, because otherwise a lot of the shunting operations would be in/out of the fiddle and thus off-scene. Adding this also allows the back loop to be used for carriage stabling at times if desired. The points are all B6's except for the engine shed which is a B5 to keep things near where you had them. Not sure how you intend to add the fiddle, the space available, but while going off at an angle  is nice you might need a straight exit into the fiddle.

 

Bob