Thoughts on this layout idea please.

[C126]

Also have a think about where you will put the camera, and the pictures' composition.  Platforms get in the way of showing a loco and stock below the sole-bar.

 

[Flying Pig]

For minimum space passenger operation, check out Westonmouth Central:

 

 

 

[AndyB]

Thinking minimal track work. 

Ian Futer's Victoria Park.

 

https://princestreet.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/ian-futers-victoria-park/

 

https://esngblog.com/2020/10/27/the-three-point-trick/

[Wherry Lines]

I was about to suggest Futer's Victoria Park concept, but AndyB has beaten me to it. Probably an ideal track plan for the space.

[simon b]

Thank you all for your ideas and suggestions, some good points there.

 

I think using a cassette based fiddle yard is definitely the way to go, most will only be 2ft long for an emu and a longer one for parcels trains can just hang of the end of the board when needed. The space that opens up will allow me to have at least 2ft of scenic section between station and fiddle yard, which as suggested will be a better use of the space.

 

I should be able to get some point work in that space to get trains routed on the correct line off the layout. This wasn't needed before as the pointwork was assumed to be off-scene, all platform roads being arrivals and departures hence the design of the fiddle yard. 

 

Lets say I have 2.5ft hidden section for cassettes, that would give me 7ft to play with. I do want to avoid the platforms being too short, so perhaps I could shrink them down to a little over 3ft thereabouts? I do like the idea of an overall roof to disguise the short length of the station, so will see what I can come up with from that. I used a HO scale kit on another layout that looked rather good so will get the measurements and see how that fits.

 

Victoria park is a good shout for a plan, I'll play around with that idea. I do have a plan for making the parcels depot a kickback siding from one of the platform roads, not an ideal situation but might be the only way to get things to fit without squashing the station up too much. I'll sketch this out and post it up soon.

 

Thanks again.

Edited November 26, 2023 by simon b

[simon b]

On 24/11/2023 at 14:09, Harlequin said:

Simon,

 

The more you fill the area with track, the less room there is for scenery and so your hopes of it being a photographic stage become more difficult. I suggest a "Less is more" approach:

 

You could boil the plan down to two platform lines and an old loco release crossover, with the two lines feeding a small cassette fiddle yard. That would give you 7ft scenic and 2ft6in fiddle yard.

 

Then there would be room for some real scenery around the tracks for photography and the rolling stock would be more prominent in contrast.

 

Different combinations of 2 EMUs could be in the station simultaneously at peak times - for about as much operational interest as an EMU can generate (sorry!).

 

At off peak times, the loco-hauled parcels train would trundle in, the loco would run round (using the FY) and then shunt the parcels van(s) into the long spur beyond the crossover. You could leave vans in that spur while EMUs come and go.

 

 

Hi Phil, it's funny you suggest that as I had a similar idea for a Lack shelf along those lines. 

 

I think it was L49 of this parish who had a layout called "Mount Pleasant" based on the city widened lines, part of that was an enclosed station with a peco overall roof which I thought would be a great micro on it's own.

 

That was before the crash so the pics have gone from his thread, but luckily I saved a few. Hope he wont mind me posting them here.

 

 

 

Edited November 26, 2023 by simon b
pics

[RobinofLoxley]

I dont know if its helpful but I've updated my Anyrail and lo and behold the missing turnouts appeared. So I replaced all the SL91 and 92 turnouts I used on the original plan (to save space of course) with the medium size U-1195/6 Bullhead turnouts. (I changed the slip but the dimensions are the same).

 

There were consequences for the placement of some of the features, mainly the spur which was in the classic Minories position; it still could be but it would have to be shorter, tank engine short in fact, so I moved it. Given the direction of the loco release, it may now be simpler to move the released loco to the spur.

 

One or two dimensions changed as well; one of the cassette positions got shorter, but as it is the plan provides for one longer cassette. To keep point motors away from the baseboard join, there are a couple of very small pieces of flexi to insert.

 

With no spur at the top, I could extend the upper platform, and there is room to extend the lower one. However they were already long enough to hold a 2 car EMU, and a bit longer than the example of Westonmouth mentioned earlier. Extending them from v1 (in my world) wasnt necessary.

[simon b]

On 27/11/2023 at 15:37, RobinofLoxley said:

I dont know if its helpful but I've updated my Anyrail and lo and behold the missing turnouts appeared. So I replaced all the SL91 and 92 turnouts I used on the original plan (to save space of course) with the medium size U-1195/6 Bullhead turnouts. (I changed the slip but the dimensions are the same).

 

There were consequences for the placement of some of the features, mainly the spur which was in the classic Minories position; it still could be but it would have to be shorter, tank engine short in fact, so I moved it. Given the direction of the loco release, it may now be simpler to move the released loco to the spur.

 

One or two dimensions changed as well; one of the cassette positions got shorter, but as it is the plan provides for one longer cassette. To keep point motors away from the baseboard join, there are a couple of very small pieces of flexi to insert.

 

With no spur at the top, I could extend the upper platform, and there is room to extend the lower one. However they were already long enough to hold a 2 car EMU, and a bit longer than the example of Westonmouth mentioned earlier. Extending them from v1 (in my world) wasnt necessary.

Thanks for posting that, the more I look at it the more I like it. 

I'll have a play around with that, will see what effect bringing the outbound line closer to the inbound has on the pointwork. The loco spur being in that position is begging to be inset into the end of the platform moorgate style.

[RobinofLoxley]

On 29/11/2023 at 12:22, simon b said:

Thanks for posting that, the more I look at it the more I like it. 

I'll have a play around with that, will see what effect bringing the outbound line closer to the inbound has on the pointwork. The loco spur being in that position is begging to be inset into the end of the platform moorgate style.

Its easily possible, and looks an improvement. That way two spurs are possible and dont look ridiculous. Considered as two bidirectional lines not inbound/outbound, definite echoes of widened lines.