Moving soon 20x10 N gauge

[Nick Holliday]

17 minutes ago, Camps Junction said:

Hi Chris just one thing, Doing ERA 5 or 6, BOWES PARK didnt exist till 1983, Any thoughts on this?????Drew

Bowes Park station opened in 1880, and the 1914 OS map shows the central reversing siding. Certainly by the time I was commuting through it, the siding could take a substantial set of coaches and a large diesel loco. As far as I am aware, it had to be able to handle a typical ECML train, although there was a second crossover before the platforms which could deal with longer trains, but at the risk of disrupting the suburban traffic on the Hertford Loop.

[Chimer]

52 minutes ago, Camps Junction said:

Hi Chris just one thing, Doing ERA 5 or 6, BOWES PARK didnt exist till 1983, Any thoughts on this?????Drew

 

Eras 5 / 6 ?  1955 - 1972, Steam/Diesel transition ?  I though you were all modern multiple units ....  I just know the way I put things together needs that long siding (and not the facing crossover on the branch by the depot access point).  But it's your railway ...

Edited April 7 by Chimer

[Camps Junction]

Hi Nick do you have any pics of said siding? I read somewhere that the station opened in November 83. Thanks Drew

[Camps Junction]

43 minutes ago, Chimer said:

 

Eras 5 / 6 ?  1955 - 1972, Steam/Diesel transition ?  I though you were all modern multiple units ....  I just know the way I put things together needs that long siding (and not the facing crossover on the branch by the depot access point).  But it's your railway ...

Yes out of the two i will probably do Era 6 as  within my lifetime, Just hoping someone can find a pic of these sidings. Thanks  Drew

[Chimer]

Just search for Bowes Park on Google Earth.  There's a 5-car EMU sitting in the siding taking up less than half of it .... it (the siding!) has clearly been there a long time.

Edited April 7 by Chimer

[ISW]

32 minutes ago, Chimer said:

Just search for Bowes Park on Google Earth.  There's a 5-car EMU sitting in the siding taking up less than half of it .... it (the siding!) has clearly been there a long time.

Although, back in 1999 (according to Google Earth) said DMU was not stabled. The siding was still very long though.

 

Ian

[Camps Junction]

cant see what you mean?

[njee20]

That’s the headhunt. The siding is behind the camera. It’s 330m long (2.2m in N). Look on Google Maps, turn on satellite view, there’s a 5-car unit there, as said. 

[Chimer]

Sorry, should have said Maps not Earth 🙃

[Camps Junction]

This ?

[njee20]

Yes

[Camps Junction]

Best i can do ?

[Chimer]

That'll do it ...

[Nick Holliday]

I have been following this topic since the beginning, as I was intrigued to see how a scheme for such generous accommodation might develop, which it has, although not always in expected ways.  However, even having re-read all the eight pages of posts, there seem to be so many imponderables that haven’t been properly addressed which make it hard to offer any further ideas, as they could impact on how things might be improved.

Firstly, it would be a good if the possible stock to be used could be defined.  As a Luddite the various Eras that have been bandied around are fairly meaningless to me, and seem to be open to interpretation anyway.  A straight-forward date-range could be the answer, with an outline of the stock that will be used – such as whether most main line trains are to be locomotive hauled (diesel or electric, and steam has been mentioned) or EMU’s, and the anticipated length of typical trains, for main-line, local and goods services.

I haven’t understood how the layout is to be perceived.  There seems, at the moment, to be a large oval of track, albeit four lines, around which long trains will orbit, few, if any, stopping at the station (Wood Green/Alexandra Palace) whilst there is a vast depot, the majority of which is undercover, which will see a train of stock arrive (off the Hertford Loop) heading south, to be, presumably, shunted into one of the sheds, to reappear sometime later, to head southward to Kings Cross, although fundamentally circulating in an anti-clockwise direction until arrangement can be made to reverse it in a fiddle yard.  The only breath of fresh air is the use of the Bowes Park reversing siding, but the full impact of the Hertford loop has been lost by turning it into a small branchline, whereas there is potential for using it for freight, specials and diversions off the main ECML, but pointless with nowhere to go but a three coach fiddle yard. 

It would be useful to know what you feel is the most important aspect of the layout to you – construction, operation, rolling stock, scenery or whatever; at the moment it feels as if you want to create a diorama of the area, with trains just running through it for effect.

I also cannot see how the layout is going to be operated to its full potential, unless it is going to be fully automated.  There is a vast central operating well, where I would expect it to be run from, but the two fiddle yards are hidden behind backscenes, or only accessible from outside the layout.  This does suggest that there will be several operators involved, and I wonder if the two-foot wide access along the main line is meant for rows of spectators, who can sit and watch as a parade of trains go past, as otherwise it is a tragic waste of space.  I also wonder how operators are supposed to access the central well.  You have already mentioned that you have a disability of some sort, and we are all getting older, and using a duck-under gets less attractive with every day.

[Nick Holliday]

I’m afraid I think my comments might have thrown a spanner into the works, but I’m now chucking in a complete toolbox, with a few suggestions:-

Rather than having a continuous circuit on which most trains circulate forever in the same direction, why not take advantage of the ability of N Gauge stock to negotiate fairly tight radius curves, and have return loops of around 3 foot diameter at opposite ends. (The EEMRC layout Hinksey Yard is only 2’ 9” wide, and the curves at each end don’t cause many problems.)  This means that southbound stock from the depot subsequently automatically appears a bit later heading north, before completing the circuit and heading south again.  Judicious provision of additional tracks around these loops would allow the sequence of trains to be varied.

The ”external” fiddle yard looks as if it could be a nuisance, especially if the 2 foot space is only used to gain access to it, with a second operator necessary.  The Bounds Green depot is fundamentally a real-life fiddle yard, so I would suggest it could be used as such, reducing the need for a hidden one.  I would get rid of the Hertford Loop fiddle yard as it is not fit for purpose, and propose another return loop arrangement, so that the non-local trains can be replicated without length restrictions.  There is also space on the opposite side for another fiddle-yard/depot – perhaps Hornsey?

For some reason the plan of Bounds Green depot itself, as drawn, is actually considerably deeper than it is in real life, which has exacerbated the access problems, so I have prepared a more scaled version using dimensions off NLS and Google maps. 

If the empty spaces along the station and fiddle yard could be done away with, and the layout taken to the edge of the room, to maximise its size, the mainline tracks running along the edge could be left simple, bereft of pointwork, which would minimise the need to be able to gain easy access, although some arrangement might be necessary at extreme corners of the room.

I apologise for another crude plan; I don’t have the relevant software or the skills and time to use it properly, so I offer this rough draft as a seed pearl for the experts, if they think it has merit.

The reversing loop shown dotted would be at a lower level than the Hertford Loop, so the only gradients will be between Bowes Park and Wood Green/Alexandra Palace.  It might be possible to include an non-scenic link between the two mainline loops across the proposed entrance, with a lifting section for access, to accommodate situations where, in real life, the trains are not turned, such as those  which always have a loco at one end and a driving trailer at the other, and the orientation doesn’t change.

I apologise for the length of this entry, but I feel that this project has tremendous potential to be an outstanding layout, and opportunities are being overlooked.

[Chimer]

As the proposer of the 2' external access corridor, I can state with confidence it's there to make it possible to reach all parts of the layout, given Drew's main aim seemed to be model the depot which he had assessed as needing at least an 8' x 5' board.  So not a spectator gallery, but an operational necessity!  And once the corridor was there, the obvious place to put storage loops was outside the backscene on that side of the layout, so they could be accessed if required - not envisaging there would be lot of actual fiddling.  My mistaken (?) assumption having seen the aerial shots of the depot was that operations would be primarily modern MUs which can happily reverse without fiddling.  When Nick provided the info about the use of the siding at Bowes Park, incorporating this as if the line there was just a branch to a suburban terminus was easy enough (and that's what I thought that line was) and made a simple out of sight reversal for local trains adequate.  Clearly, given Drew's starting point, it couldn't realistically be done as an alternative main line with varied traffic.

 

Nick has now proposed a totally different overall approach - fair enough.  But my general rule when chipping in to these debates is to largely go with the flow of the original idea, not "delete all and insert" ....

[njee20]

I think Nick is probably right to pose his ideas, becuase if I was spending £20,000 and many years of my life on a layout I would want everyone's considerations, even if I eventually ignore them!

 

I think what Drew has come up with is a little bit the 'safe' option for people who find themself with a large space in which to build a layout. Ultimately it's a scaled up version of what you'd build on a 6x4 board; roundy roundy outside, with some sidings in the middle, there's just more of them.

 

Nick's idea really is ripping that up, and probably making better use of hte space, insofar as you couldn't build huge elements of that in a small space. It's a more adventurous approach too, which could be seen as better or worse.

 

I think scale plays a factor here - N gauge is brilliant for watching scale length trains meander through scenery, and less good for lots of nadgery (definitely a word) shunting. If that's what the OP wants then great, sitting back with a tea/beer while your trains circulate around you, or shuffling stuff around in the yard while that goes on is probably quite therapeutic, if not the ultimate operating challenge.

 

I've no dog in this fight - like others I was attracted by the idea of a large N gauge layout, and a lot of the considerations are ones I have had for when I get around to undertaking a garage conversion to give me space for something similar! From a completely blank canvas I prefer Nick's idea, but I fully understand the rationale Chris has employed of evolution versus revolution, and I think where he's got the plan is excellent.

TL:DR: they're both good!

[Camps Junction]

Hi Guys I’m so glad I started this post way back when, I have been around trains all my life even now I have a Narrow Gauge station at the bottom of my garden, ( Well 8ft away) But to this day I have never really looked into the actual operational side of railways, But this is about my child hood in Dagmar Rd , Norh London, I allways said one day I’ll build a model of this despite doing loads of small roundy roundy type stuff as a kid, I think I’ve caught up on all your amazing contributions everyone and it’s nice to see constructive rather than abusive and negativity you get on some sights, So let’s high light a few things PS got our moving date today, 07/05/24 Hoo bloody ray lol, So let me point out a few things and I’ll list them here as I can see you are all trying to help without some clear points (pardon the pun)

1. From my bedroom window what I saw was what I wanted to build, But my very young years early 60s is a bit hazy and can’t remember if the big repair shop was there anyway hope that helps?

2. The main time period I’d like to focus on would be 1955-1970 I know there was still a few steam around at this time but not essential as I want to focus on Diesel, NO ELECTRIC.

3. I know there may be a need to possibly put some countryside in somewhere to possibly create a loop, But open on what.

4. If I need to do a 3ft loop at each end that would be ok or even a carousel unit at either end( sorry can’t remember the proper names for these)HELIX.

5 it’s just for me no spectators

6.At some point I’d like to automate mainline trains and just focus on DMU,s and moving trains and freight around the yard so single operated.

7.Im still open to make any changes if needed, I know this is probably never achieved but would like to get the plan down 1st time to atleast be happy with the track plan, But I would really like to get the ball rolling by the 1st of June,

8. I’m open to any suggestions and allways message if I’ve missed any other important info.

9. The shed is sorted internal size I’m told is 21.9 x 11.9 hope this helps?

10. Thank you all for so much In put, Drew.

11 ps I have a Carpentry and electronics back ground and been building and airbrushing military models for the last 20yrs.

Edited April 9 by Camps Junction

[Camps Junction]

This old pic with red scribble is our house, Far right you can see the rail fly over opposite my bedroom.

[St Enodoc]

5 hours ago, Camps Junction said:

The shed is sorted internal size I’m told is 21.9 x 11.9 hope this helps?

Measure it in real life after it's erected and tell us again!

[Camps Junction]

I know this to be accurate after speaking to the suppliers,But also understand as all 4 walls and 2 roof sections will be over boarded with 12mm ply once the insulation has been added so yes a further 24mm will be gone.

 

 

 

 

[Camps Junction]

I like some of Nicks ideas and really great full of the imput but I see 2 big Downfalls , Which is the 10x5 board needed for the depot section this would be an impossible area to maintain and access for issues, Also the sections by the door access, I don’t think I want visable loops at each end although this is a great idea in the way it would help to run I think it’s 15ft wasted running area, But I’m still open to further ideas, At presant I’m going to stick with the current plan and layout, I like the idea of Helix but that take up a massive amount of room, If a way could be found possibly to do this another way without a massive loss in running space! There is a British Guy on you tube that lives in Aus has helix at each end but has a massive fiddle yard with a set of boards 2ft below the main layout boards that returns trains back to the other end and back up that helix onto the main layout if that makes sense???PS sorry about the RED finger painting writing

[Chimer]

Having done a bit more research, I now understand that Bounds Green depot in it's present form, that we've all been working around, didn't exist in the period you want to model, and there was just a goods yard on the site then, following the closure and demolition of a small steam shed in 1954.  The present depot was commissioned in 1977 (steam long gone) to handle HSTs ..... (this is me believing everything I find on the internet, by the way).  So if you keep the depot, you really need to move forward in time towards the 80s .....

 

If you were to scrub the depot, with its huge footprint and requirement for all round access, you could do a pretty whizzy representation of Ally Pally, the flying junction and the two lines heading north in the 60s/70s.  And I'm sure it would be possible to incorporate dumbbells without , as you put it, wasting 15 feet of modelling space.

 

With so much space available to begin with, it seems weird that you would even contemplate adding the complexity of a helix (or two!)  But you could obviously afford to use generous radii if you did.

 

I found all I needed to know about Bowes Park station and the reversing siding by going to it's Wikipedia entry and following an "external link" to "The History of Bowes Park Railway station".  And a search for "Bounds Green Railway Depot" led me to a Flickr page (owned by Adrian Nicholls) with some authoritative-looking info about the depot.  I can't copy the links for some reason.

 

But depot or no depot is really the crucial question!

 

The saga continues!  I do hope you didn't order all that pointwork ...

 

 

 

 

[Harlequin]

The depot in its current form makes the scene difficult to design because of its sheer size, it will be very difficult to model those large sheds and they are of questionable value anyway because trains disappear into them and become effectively non-existent at that point. (Presumably in the prototype they remain in the shed for weeks at a time...?)

 

Changing it for the earlier goods yard would be more correct for the 55-70 period, would keep things out in the open and would arguably be a more interesting scene with more interesting stock on display.

 

I view helices as the spawn of the devil, only to be used as a last resort when there's no other workable alternative. You have plenty of room to avoid them and in fact if you did need to change levels to reach a hidden fiddle yard (not always the best idea either) then you could do it by building long gradients into the main layout itself, without needing to have dedicated helices.

 

Edited April 10 by Harlequin

[woodenhead]

If I was looking at this model for the period of 1955-1970 I would be considering N gauge I think but your stock will look something like this perhaps listing N gauge manufacturer first then OO.  But with your expanded period from 1955, there would be more available from the OO ranges in terms of variety as some key items are missing in N i.e. the 105 DMU, a class 23 and Gresley suburbans.   You're going to need some tank engines for the suburban services too for the steam period but I'm not too up on what was used out of KX on suburbans.  Once thing for sure, Bounds Green would not exist with a big shed, this might actually make life easier as you can focus more on running trains and less on shunting a shed designed for HSTs, but if you want Bounds Green as it is now you will be purely in the HST period and that also means OHLE with 312 and 313 emus, no dmus and no suburbans, motive power and loco hauled stock would be streamlined too compared to your chosen period

• J50 - Sonic / Hornby
• B1 Farish / Dapol / Bachmann
• A1 Farish / Bachmann
• A3 Dapol / Hornby
• A4 Dapol / Hornby
• Class 23 na / Heljan
• Class 24 Farish / Bachmann
• Class 26 Dapol / Heljan
• Class 30/31 Farish / Hornby / Accurascale
• Class 40 Farish / Bachmann
• Class 47 Farish / Bachmann
• Class 55 Farish / Bachmann / Accurascale
• DMU Class 105 na / Bachmann
• Thompson coaches Farish / Bachmann
• Gresley coaches Dapol / Hornby
• Gresley suburban na / Hornby
• Mk1 Farish / Bachmann / Hornby
• Mk2 Farish / Bachmann
• Mk1 Suburban Farish / Bachmann