Sellafield North in 6ft x 30ins - No jokes please

[TravisM]

2 hours ago, Schooner said:

Please excuse the presentation - conditions here not condusive to the accurate drawing of neat lines - but hopefully the below is a legible alternative footprint of the same features:

 

I suspect the track formation on the RHS (from the edge: LH curved to double slip and 24° crossing to RH to 12°/24° crossing depending on alignment) would take up significantly more space than on the sketch, but less than you have available.

 

I thought it worth trying something on paper because whilst you have a really good handle on your trackwork I remained unconvinced about the use of scenic space. Not that it's 'better' (whatever that means!), but hopefully it's helpful to see another option for the layout of main scenic elements.

 

HTH

 

Schooner

Interesting plan you’ve drawn @Schooner and when I get home, I’ll have a play with it on AnyRail and see if it fits as you drawn it.  Thanks for the input.

[TravisM]

7 hours ago, Schooner said:

Please excuse the presentation - conditions here not condusive to the accurate drawing of neat lines - but hopefully the below is a legible alternative footprint of the same features:

 

I suspect the track formation on the RHS (from the edge: LH curved to double slip and 24° crossing to RH to 12°/24° crossing depending on alignment) would take up significantly more space than on the sketch, but less than you have available.

 

I thought it worth trying something on paper because whilst you have a really good handle on your trackwork I remained unconvinced about the use of scenic space. Not that it's 'better' (whatever that means!), but hopefully it's helpful to see another option for the layout of main scenic elements.

 

HTH

 

Schooner

 

I had an attempt to copy your plan using AnyRail and Peco Code 75 track.  I couldn't quite manage the plan exactly, so this was the best I could do.  Also, the shortest train I can run is 13 inches.

 

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Hi there.  I've just had a quick read of the thread so far - I have the original Model Railroader Project Layout in a book of 6 HO Model Railroads you can build (all taken from the pages of MRR in the 70s / 80s).  

 

If I could add a couple of things that may help explain the original concept:

 

1.  It was built to modular standards, so the separate track at the front was a through mainline (I don't have access to the book at the moment, but from memory there were two mainlines in the original, with all the pointwork off the third / inner running line).

 

In stand alone mode, the layout was more for photography, though convoluted switching puzzle operation was possible.  It did look very nice, and the complex trackwork appeared quite appropriate.

 

2.  In the original the docks were represented by a small portion of a huge ship on the backscene - which is why there was no water on the module).  The Port of Los Angeles is a massive operation, so this bit didn't try and replicate actual ship loading / unloading, rather some of the big transfer sheds and operations in the environs.

 

3.  Also from memory, the original was also built very quickly - once the pointwork had been figured out it was an easy build.  The layout was mounted on castors for portability.

 

Hope that is of use - basically it was a very nice module that captured the essence of the huge prototype in a 6' length.  Hope that helps, Keith.

 

Edited January 21 by Keith Addenbrooke

[TravisM]

4 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Hi there.  I've just had a quick read of the thread so far - I have the original Model Railroader Project Layout in a book of 6 HO Model Railroads you can build (all taken from the pages of MRR in the 70s / 80s).  

 

If I could add a couple of things that may help explain the original concept:

 

1.  It was built to modular standards, so the separate track at the front was a through mainline (I don't have access to the book at the moment, but from memory there were two mainlines in the original, with all the pointwork off the third / inner running line).

 

In stand alone mode, the layout was more for photography, though convoluted switching puzzle operation was possible.  It did look very nice, and the complex trackwork appeared quite appropriate.

 

2.  In the original the docks were represented by a small portion of a huge ship on the backscene - which is why there was no water on the module).  The Port of Los Angeles is a massive operation, so this bit didn't try and replicate actual ship loading / unloading, rather some of the big transfer sheds and operations in the environs.

 

3.  Also from memory, the original was also built very quickly - once the pointwork had been figured out it was an easy build.  The layout was mounted on castors for portability.

 

Hope that is of use - basically it was a very nice module that captured the essence of the huge prototype in a 6' length.  Hope that helps, Keith.

 

 

Hi Keith,

 

Thank you for your comments and I've also got a copy of the book, and the whole thing was built in two weeks, track, electrics, scenery etc.  I also wanted it to be stand alone, plus portable, but I didn't want to follow Robert Smaus track plan exactly, so I'm trying to 'anglize' the layout if at all possible, and that's why I asked for others input.  I still might stick with the original plan as it does work really well.

Edited January 22 by TravisM
Spelling

[TravisM]

2 hours ago, TravisM said:

 

I had an attempt to copy your plan using AnyRail and Peco Code 75 track.  I couldn't quite manage the plan exactly, so this was the best I could do.  Also, the shortest train I can run is 13 inches.

 

 

This might be a better plan.  The track by the home signal would be the lead into the dock complex from the exchange sidings.

 

 

[Stevebr]

How would a loco run round?

[TravisM]

31 minutes ago, Stevebr said:

How would a loco run round?

 

Oh dear, I thought I had that covered, it can but not as easily as I first hoped.  Oh well, back to the drawing board, or back to the original plan.  As they say 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'!

Edited January 22 by TravisM
Spelling

[tom s]

?

Maybe swapping the double slip for a single slip (slip being aligned to the bottom of the point) would add some extra shunting moves needed to access the warehouse too

Edited January 22 by tom s

[simon b]

Tom has beat me to it, but I came up with a very similar idea.

 

 

 

Edited January 22 by simon b
text

[simon b]

 

 

 

[simon b]

Watching those video's does give you another type of train to run, PGA stone hoppers. Perhaps you could use the Kibri loading plant on the siding above the loco shed.

[TravisM]

1 hour ago, simon b said:

Tom has beat me to it, but I came up with a very similar idea.

 

 

 

 

Good improvement but there's zero room for a head shunt by the yard office.  I need to have at least 13 inches there.

[TravisM]

2 hours ago, simon b said:

Tom has beat me to it, but I came up with a very similar idea.

 

 

 

 

Any better?

 

[simon b]

1 hour ago, TravisM said:

 

Good improvement but there's zero room for a head shunt by the yard office.  I need to have at least 13 inches there.

I assumed that was the exit to the fiddle yard as the signal was on it, and all the others were dead ends? It gives you a usable length run round loop for your class 60 that way, you can always use the fiddle yard as the headshunt.

[simon b]

49 minutes ago, TravisM said:

 

Any better?

 

Just needs a longer loop, but should work great. I'd be tempted to have a second track entering the steel warehouse, and have the traveling crane coming out of the side of the building.

Edited January 22 by simon b

[TravisM]

2 hours ago, simon b said:

I assumed that was the exit to the fiddle yard as the signal was on it, and all the others were dead ends? It gives you a usable length run round loop for your class 60 that way, you can always use the fiddle yard as the headshunt.

Im not planning to have the Class 60 on the layout due to length of head shunts etc, it would be assumed that that it was left at the exchange sidings (as per real life).  Also, as it’s a stand alone layout, there would be no fiddle yards.

[simon b]

33 minutes ago, TravisM said:

Im not planning to have the Class 60 on the layout due to length of head shunts etc, it would be assumed that that it was left at the exchange sidings (as per real life).  Also, as it’s a stand alone layout, there would be no fiddle yards.

In that case your latest plan will be perfect, the loop should be able to handle a decent sized bogie wagon so it all works.

[Mikkel]

 

On 21/01/2024 at 22:39, TravisM said:

I've also got a copy of the book, and the whole thing was built in two weeks, track, electrics, scenery etc.

 

Clearly not an RMwebber then 😉

 

I like the concept, will follow with interest.

 

 

 

[RobinofLoxley]

Been following this with interest - restricted space puzzles are always challenging. The original proposal was very good I thought bar the single track at the front. A couple of other things I thought problematic were

-The Y turnout. Having to cater for the 'half' angle made the track layout around it look a bit un-natural.

-Having a loco available but not being able to fit it on or having any possible movements for it

-the use of medium size turnouts and later a slip; certainly the slip can be a space saver but it didnt seem right in the location to me. The extra length for the longer turnouts could be ill-afforded, which is why I havnt used any in my little suggestion below.

 

 

All the spurs are longer than 13" except of one on the left, where I see the spur only used for a loco or single wagon but not both together. No direct run-around, so it isnt prototypical I suppose, but I thought it might be fun...

[TravisM]

I'm wondering if I should backdate it to the 70's, mainly because the wagons are shorter, so more of them and might look better on the tighter curves, as well as having possibly more shunting options.  Instead of using a BR shunter, using a Sentinel 0-6-0 diesel as the docks shunter as not all docks used BR traction.

[RobinofLoxley]

2 hours ago, TravisM said:

I'm wondering if I should backdate it to the 70's, mainly because the wagons are shorter, so more of them and might look better on the tighter curves, as well as having possibly more shunting options.  Instead of using a BR shunter, using a Sentinel 0-6-0 diesel as the docks shunter as not all docks used BR traction.

I dont think tighter curves are involved really. A shorter shunter wont have a huge impact either. If you had short wagons that might lead to a complete re-design as you would be thinking about shunting a set of wagons at once - all into the headshunt then distributed afterwards.

[TravisM]

3 minutes ago, RobinofLoxley said:

I dont think tighter curves are involved really. A shorter shunter wont have a huge impact either. If you had short wagons that might lead to a complete re-design as you would be thinking about shunting a set of wagons at once - all into the headshunt then distributed afterwards.

 

I think I'll leave it as it is as I've got stock I can use, a Class 08 shunter and various other items I wanted to use on the layout, ie containers, vehicles etc, which focus the attention to it being set in present day.  As this is supposed to be a money saving project and use what I already have, I'm defeating the principle idea and possibly spending more money which I could eventually use on my Cumbrian Coast layout.

[TravisM]

Tim Horn delivered my baseboard for the layout today, fully assembled, which was extremely generous of him.  I've decided to go with the plan I've uploaded, because after playing around with different plans I had drawn by placing track roughly where I wanted it to go, this one worked the best.  As you can see by the pictures, I've allowed 14 inches as the absolute minimum for a head shunt, which equates to one Class 08 and one BYA bogie wagon.

 

I'm planning to use Peco Code 75 Bullhead rail for the visible sections of the layout as I think it will look so much better, but I'm having problem downloading the Peco point templates because Peco send the plan to the printer as a PDF, and my printer won't print them, so I'm a bit stuck at the moment.  I'm sure there's away round this.

[simon b]

Before you pin any track down, try shunting the BYA and 08 around the layout by hand to make sure your happy with how it works. Easy to make any changes now rather than cutting it about later.

[TravisM]

5 minutes ago, simon b said:

Before you pin any track down, try shunting the BYA and 08 around the layout by hand to make sure your happy with how it works. Easy to make any changes now rather than cutting it about later.

 

Oh I plan too 😂.  Learnt from bitter experience not to do that first.  But first I need to sort out my damn printer so I can print out these templates.