Thoughts on a 6x2 OO GWR Riverside Wharf Branchline Terminus

[the-Prof]

Hi all,

 

Just getting back into the hobby after a very long absence (c15 years!)

 

I don't have an enormous amount of time in my life but I know I want to get back into modelling for the sake of my mental health. The focus for me will be primarily the modelling aspect with "running trains" a secondary aspect.  However, there are times I will want to just "play trains" for an hour or so.  So I'm planning on keeping the layout small (1.8x0.6m (6'x2') should give me plenty of room to work while ensuring that I will actually finish the model one day.

 

What I'm thinking is an Inglenook embedded into a river side wharf fictitious location. Small coal or gravel carrying barges (insert goods of chocie) pull into the wharf and are loaded/unloaded. The goods are then assembled in the yard area (purple) using standard Inglenook rules and then taken up to the main branchline where they are picked up and taken away by an 0-6-0, 2-6-0 or similar. I'm imagining the yard being run by a little 0-4-0 or an 0-6-0 pannier. I've built in a small run around loop in the station and a 2 truck bay platform (cattle dock / post).  I'm trying to use nice flowing lines as much as possible (hence all the curved points rather than small radius straight ones) to make it feel more natural and less track-in-a-box. Passenger services will be a autocoach or similar so no need for turning (although a 50' turntable might squeeze in at the end of the platform line rather than that point and head shunt)

 

I'm not very keen on the 3 facing points in a row for the passenger service into the platform (seems like something that would generally have been avoided if possible) but I cannot see how to avoid them.  I'm imagining that the branchline is going to be some sort of token managed system but I think a signal box would technically be needed given that shunting operations will need to happen over at least the top of the branchline.

 

I'd be interested in your suggestions / thoughts about the layout. Is there something obviously missing? How unprototypical would this be for say late 1930s?

 

John

[Schooner]

Only the second time ever I have started following a thread on the strength of the title alone - any more up my alley and I'd have to offer you a cup of tea - and reading through the post has set bells ringing left, right and centre. Welcome :)

 

Straight up, the premise sounds good, the plan looks fundamentally workable, and all in all you're in a much stronger position than I was when starting out a couple years ago! What follows isn't a set of challenges to the excellent progress so far, but a suggestion of some things to consider to hone it further. Each point is from my own experience of the path from idea to plan to layout, the development of which has seen my model and my modelling become unrecognisable from how/where they started. A very good thing!

 

Setting

• Have you defaulted to Shirtbutton GWR or picked it with intent? Is it the most fit for purpose for your layout? 
• Have you a particular region or location to lean on to help answer questions and provide inspiration? 
• Do you have a feel, an atmosphere in mind? You'll be spending a lot of time there, what kind of place is it?

Track

• If a formation doesn't feel right, try thinking of it as purely a set of connections/routes, 
• I suspect the Peco Code 75 3-way will be your friend
• Other manufacturers are available. Of particular interest are the growing range of British Finescale kits, which get rave reviews and are very compliant for introducing gentle curves etc (such curves can be planned and printed from the Templot software)
• On which...seriously consider other gauges. EM is now as easy as 00 (each have readily available flex track, kit and ready-to-lay turnouts of varied geometry) which makes it easier to weigh up the pros and cons :)

Format

• Two levels - give it a go and rule it out rather than ignore the possibility :)
• 3' width - likewise!
• What happens off to the right?
• Couplings impact what makes a design successful/makes a success of a design enormously. Have you made an informed decision?

Operation

• What do you want from your sessions playing trains? Giving this some thought can help prioritise and ease decision-making elsewhere, eg how much space to allocate to each scene, or even whether to keep or scrap entire scenes and associated track!
• Quayside Inglenooks...are great, I really like them, have planned an awful lot of them, and have one in 4mm with another in 7mm in build (both on a smaller footprint than your proposal above!), and on that basis offer two thoughts:
  • The original called for two stub spurs off a running line
  • The key to its success as a game is the requirement to marshal a train in a specific order chosen at random. 

Sorry, bit of a deluge there but that's two years of enforced planning-only time and year's worth of iterative build process in one hit! Only one viewpoint of course, and everyone has their own balance points on all the various compromises required, but hopefully it helps. Happy to chat through my answers to the above here or via PM if of use.

 

When I started my scheme seemed mad; now I can name at least four of us making inglenookish quayside layouts in  c.6'x2' and I think we're on to something :)

 

Given your starting point, I'd suggest having a look at St Martin's Wharf - it's 7mm but so what, it's still inspirational!

and to help you calibrate all the waffle above, my in-build layouts:

Ingleford Wharf - Gloucestershire in c.1875, 4mm 00

Sorry for the rubbish plan - lost the real one in a computer wipe, the above was a rough working backup but gives a reasonable idea.

 

Victoria Quay - Devon c.1900, 7mm finescale

 

Cheers and good luck!

 

Schooner

 

PS. Oh, and an WIP of a docklands BLT scheme which might also be relevant to your interests:

Edited July 7, 2023 by Schooner

[Harlequin]

You could do something like this:

 

Only two sets of facing points in the passenger line now.

Move the engine shed closer to the scene exit to act as a view blocker.

Put the coaling stage on the line to the shed and remove the fiddly separate siding.

 

What are you planning to do about a fiddle yard?

 

Edited July 7, 2023 by Harlequin

[Flying Pig]

2 hours ago, the-Prof said:

Hi all,

 

Just getting back into the hobby after a very long absence (c15 years!)

 

I don't have an enormous amount of time in my life but I know I want to get back into modelling for the sake of my mental health. The focus for me will be primarily the modelling aspect with "running trains" a secondary aspect.  However, there are times I will want to just "play trains" for an hour or so.  So I'm planning on keeping the layout small (1.8x0.6m (6'x2') should give me plenty of room to work while ensuring that I will actually finish the model one day.

 

What I'm thinking is an Inglenook embedded into a river side wharf fictitious location. Small coal or gravel carrying barges (insert goods of chocie) pull into the wharf and are loaded/unloaded. The goods are then assembled in the yard area (purple) using standard Inglenook rules and then taken up to the main branchline where they are picked up and taken away by an 0-6-0, 2-6-0 or similar. I'm imagining the yard being run by a little 0-4-0 or an 0-6-0 pannier. I've built in a small run around loop in the station and a 2 truck bay platform (cattle dock / post).  I'm trying to use nice flowing lines as much as possible (hence all the curved points rather than small radius straight ones) to make it feel more natural and less track-in-a-box. Passenger services will be a autocoach or similar so no need for turning (although a 50' turntable might squeeze in at the end of the platform line rather than that point and head shunt)

 

I'm not very keen on the 3 facing points in a row for the passenger service into the platform (seems like something that would generally have been avoided if possible) but I cannot see how to avoid them.  I'm imagining that the branchline is going to be some sort of token managed system but I think a signal box would technically be needed given that shunting operations will need to happen over at least the top of the branchline.

 

I'd be interested in your suggestions / thoughts about the layout. Is there something obviously missing? How unprototypical would this be for say late 1930s?

 

John

 

It is at heart a pretty conventional branch terminus, which is imo a good thing.  Here's what I would do to make it even more conventional:

 

1 - remove or at least greatly reduce the reverse curve on layout entry; the inside road of a Streamline curved point is a very tight radius and there's no need here to make it part of the running line - use a different point;

 

2 - make the first point the loop point; this will increase the length of the loop significantly and incidentaly reduce the number of facing points on the running line to 2;  

 

2a - now you have a longer loop, increase the length of the loco release headshunt which is very tight at the moment; try and realign the platform so the headshunt doesn't have to curve in the opposite sense to the station as a whole;

 

2b - you might then be able to lay a siding opposite the loco release and move the loading/ cattle dock there instead of the bay, which could be eliminated altogether if you chose;  as far as I know, either arrangement was prototypical

 

3 - take the loco shed siding off a single slip forming a crossover with the loop point; this way it is accessible directly from the loop and doesn't conflict with wagons parked in the yard;

 

This leaves you with the goods yard and wharf to plan.  RMweb planning folklore has it that you need a minimum of just two sidings - one for the goods shed and one for 'mileage' traffic and coal, but you will want to include an additional line for the wharf.  Make the sidings as long as you can by moving the points as close to the loop as possible - the intermediate track coloured grey on your diagram is just dead space.

 

Kickbacks are tempting, to use otherwise inaccesible parts of the baseboard, but can be tricky to work in model form where you don't have access to a horse or porter with a pinch bar.  Extending the wharf siding to the right along the front of the layout might look effective here though.

 

Finally, if you already have a set of coal 'staithes', kill them with hammers, then fire.  Now launch them into space ensuring you give them solar escape velocity .

[Schooner]

1 hour ago, Flying Pig said:

a pretty conventional branch terminus, which is imo a good thing. 

4 hours ago, the-Prof said:

The focus for me will be primarily the modelling aspect with "running trains" a secondary aspect.

 

Not sure these things square...?

 

Quick and very rough coffee-break special:

TT connections show a 42' table (I'll track down the manufacturer if of use); all main buildings in some form of low relief (will the layout be viewable in the round? How do you feel about modelling interiors...?) River easily has room for three c.80' barges or lighters, the bow of a steamer with a tow line parallel to the baseboard edge to the stern of a tug etc. 

 

Main operational interest is wagons and shunting particularly for the quay. Inglenook not explicit, but pretty sure one could be got in without too much hassle :)

 

Just throwing some other options about in case a conventional BLT wasn't what Dr ordered.

[RobinofLoxley]

The critical questions, firstly, posed by @Harlequin what have you planned for a fiddle yard? Somehow trains need to leave the scene, be exchanged or something, and return.

Second, you havnt mentioned scale, or any baggage of old stock being carried.

If you havnt allowed space for a fiddle yard you could consider a smaller scale. More difficult and time consuming to construct buildings, and more of them to make, due to the smaller unit size.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

is the layout on two 3ft  x 2ft boards? If so, you'll need to think about not putting points over the joints.

I love the way the plan/s are not parallel to the baseboard and curve to obtain the greatest length.

[the-Prof]

Thank you all for your comments and thoughts.  Firstly, picking up on Flying Pigs' suggestion, the staithes have been ceremoniously burnt and replaced with a coal stage like John's here!

In doing so I have taken Harlequin's advice and ditched the little purple kick back siding.  It was there primarily as a headshunt space of length 2 + loco for the Inglenook Puzzle Mode. But when I think that the lower curved point would actually be interlocked off from the rest of the station area, then I figure I can use the space of the point and the approach to the loco shed as that headshunt. Going back to Flying Pig's comment about minimum siding lengths etc., I am keeping the sidings fairly short so that the 3 way fan at the left is basically the 3+3+5 sidings for the inglenook (they are actually 4+4+6 in length but close enough so long as I play by the rules).

 

The fiddle yard question does need clarifying.  In the space where this is going to go I have basically 3m x 0.75m-ish max.  I'm able to get away with (i.e. can carry out through the doors in one piece with help) a board 1.8x0.6m.  Hence the size of the one piece scenic board which also save me having to match board joins in the middle of the scene. This gives me about 1.2m for a fiddle yard at the right hand side.  Obviously I can't do much in that space (I can't build a helix and get below the main board for instance) so I'm going to go for a 5 or 7 line traverser. I'll get out the stepper motors and an arduino to make it easier to work, but this why I need to have the exit road close to middle on the right hand side and why I need the S-curve / reverse curve to be able to use as much of the main board as possible. Fortunately this is going to be run by small locos and won't have things like Castles or Kings going over it.

 

In the version below, I've added some suggested scenery/contours. I'm going for very gentle slopes. I'm thinking that this is some small end of the line village/town (which I'm naming Aelwyd Fach which I believe translates roughly as little hearth aka inglenook) somewhere up on one of the Severn's tributaries (hence the river wharf). The station is right on the far end of the village and you'll be able to "see into the village" via the backscene. The Yard is somewhat level and the exit will either be over a crossing over the loco release headshunt or via the left sidescene.  In fact, a well placed building could mean that this is not quite the end of the line and you wouldn't need to see a buffer on that headshunt so it might go off somewhere else (cogs start turning)???  The right hand end runs into country side / woodland which will help somewhat mask the hole in the wall and I can have some little mini dioramas on the stream (ffrwd fach) running back to front at the right which in the "real world" joins up with the main river just off stage at the front.

 

There is the obligatory pub which will draw the backscene into the main scene and I may see if I can squeeze a couple of small cottages in on the other side of the road. I've kept the cattle dock / sheep pens where they are and I can think of parcels etc. being delivered to that end of the platform.

 

Finally swinging back to Schooner's questions... 00/H0 it is because I have quite a bit of Peco code 100 stuff still in packets from when this was last attempted and I'm too tight to get rid of it! (yes I know that is likely a false economy in the long run). I also have quite a bit of old rolling stock, including an autocoach set and a railcar (some of which is sentimental) knocking about hence the semi-defaulting to shirtbutton (and as much as some don't like that livery, I find it quite appealing).  However, now I think of this more, I can easily see how a layout like this could actually operate well into the BR period without changing much other than the rollingstock.  If I were to add a class D3/6 shunter, would the only thing I need to add to the loco service line be an oil tank/fueler??? I even think that the platform area is probably long enough to take a 79xxx DMU or a class 100 should I acquire one later. With regards couplings I'm seriously considering fitting Kadees almost purely for their effectiveness with electromagnets. I know I don't want the hand of god coming in, nor do I really want giant uncoupling ramps between the tracks. Is this my best option?

 

Again, thanks for the comments so far.

 

John

[Schooner]

2 hours ago, the-Prof said:

I have quite a bit of Peco code 100 stuff still in packets

Well you'll get much better value out of it on the layout than in the box! Although, that said, have you looked at how much it might be worth on eBay etc? If you've already got all the track and turnouts you need for the layout probs not worth considering, but if you have to buy some stuff anyway might it be worth flogging the lot and buying new just what you need for the layout?

 

2 hours ago, the-Prof said:

I also have quite a bit of old rolling stock, including an autocoach set and a railcar (some of which is sentimental) knocking about hence the semi-defaulting to shirtbutton (and as much as some don't like that livery, I find it quite appealing).

I'm convinced! The point is only to double-check that it's what you want...I'm afraid I wasn't going to suggest moving later into the BR period, but earlier into the pre-Grouping :) The reasons for this are 90% practical - shorter stock! I've just had a quick measure, and my longest standard opens are 75mm over buffers, the majority c.65mm as some as small as 55mm. It's a simple way of making a layout bigger, and the reason I drifted from 'Generic 1930s GWR Westcountry' to a specific time and place (just over the Severn from you!). But it's just a case of working out what one wants and then working to maximise the pros and minimise the cons of that set up :)

 

Some thoughts on poking a couple of bits of the plan which didn't sit well:

 

aiming to change

• Loco shed access: now direct from loop (scenic to suggest TT used to be in front of shed?)
• Goods shed: now swapped so looking at the 'front' to see the loading platform with the coal/mileage/whatever road behind
• Inglenook: the quayside road is more forgiving of a random assortment of wagons, and the need for specific order can be reasoned as traffic for specific berths inbound and sympathetic marshalling outbound. So that's now seen as the '5' road. The two '3' roads are now a little more scenically and operationally sympathetic; with the limit imposed visually by not entering (or passing, for the back road) the shed. The allowed headshunt risks fouling the loco shed crossing but not the loop, which seems reasonable. 
• Station: more curve on the cattle dock road to give everything a bit more room; station building moved next to it to increase its importance in the overall scene and give the impression of greater platform length beyond.
• Suggest running loco release right to the edge and have it gated shut - who knows what happens beyond?! Possible secondary traverser connection through loco shed?

I'v used a Code 75 curved turnout in the loop as the radius of the long Code 100 version is too relaxed - I'm pretty sure it's possible to adjust the curve of these without too much hassle, so the Code 75 seemed a reasonable approximation of the sort of thing it might look like.

 

A feature crane, rigged trow etc at the extreme front left would be useful to start the scene, and make the viewer aware of the full depth at the edges - crane to shed to village? The eye can then be drawn to the middle rear by the railway hotel which should highlight how much open space there is for the throat to sit in; the lane and greenery should work nicely to lead the viewer to the loco shed and out of the scene at the other side. The railway links these by alternating between having foreground context (sides) and background context where the depth of scene is least (middle). No expert, but think that should help the feeling of space.

 

Just one option based on one opinion of course, but HTH

[Flying Pig]

5 hours ago, the-Prof said:

Going back to Flying Pig's comment about minimum siding lengths etc., I am keeping the sidings fairly short so that the 3 way fan at the left is basically the 3+3+5 sidings for the inglenook (they are actually 4+4+6 in length but close enough so long as I play by the rules).

 

You can still play by the rules with longer sidings and when you are not in puzzle mode they look more convincing.