Layout Plan Advice Update

[DavidB-AU]

I agree about the mirror image to avoid all the facing points into dead end sidings.

 

If you're going to use setrack I'd suggest looking at some C.J. Freezer "spare room" layout designs from the early diesel era. Many of these were designed for Triang track, which although it has slightly different geometry it gives you a feel for what can be done and what should be avoided. They were designed for somewhat realistic operation.

[Chen Melling]

10 hours ago, Dungrange said:

I suspect that the arrangement with the diamond crossing between your 'goods shed' and 'lumber yard' isn't particularly common on the prototype.  I've no idea how such an arrangement would be signalled in the prototype (if such a layout exists).

 

While I can't comment on the existence or otherwise of such an arrangement on the British Isles, it certainly did exist in one station in Palestine / Israel, namely Tel Aviv, as is evidenced by the attached 1944 layout plan (from the archives of the Israel Railway Museum) and excerpt from an aerial photo (by Zoltan Kluger, from the collection of the National Library of Israel).

 

[Rivercider]

There is a lot of good advice already on here, and I would agree that getting hold of a track plan booklet,

or two, would be a good idea. Choose a smaller plan you like the look of then you can let it grow into the space you have.

 

One plan from C J Freezers '60 Plans for Small Railways' comes to mind.

Plan No.20s is drawn for only 6' x 4' for a single circuit  dock layout system which has a number of short sidings spread around.

With the space you have available you could recreate something more ambitious with two circuits.

One outer circuit could have a couple of short passenger stations with a couple of sidings to stable stock or DMUs.

A separate inner circuit easier to reach could be principally to serve the various freight sidings which you can shunt wagons, a connection between the two circuits would allow locos to access the loco shed/siding. A small yard acting as a scenic fiddle yard would give someone the chance to indulge in shunting while two trains circle round.

 

Good luck

 

Cheers

 

[Danknight]

Plenty to think about, thanks everyone @Chimer I’m hopeful for being able to lift it with another however I have still pre purchased a car cover for a worst case scenario until I can sort a better method of lifting. 
 

one thing I’m not sure on is how trains leave a siding once they’ve arrived in them? Would there usually be a return for the train to follow once it had dropped freight off?

[Danknight]

5 minutes ago, Rivercider said:

There is a lot of good advice already on here, and I would agree that getting hold of a track plan booklet,

or two, would be a good idea. Choose a smaller plan you like the look of then you can let it grow into the space you have.

 

One plan from C J Freezers '60 Plans for Small Railways' comes to mind.

Plan No.20s is drawn for only 6' x 4' for a single circuit  dock layout system which has a number of short sidings spread around.

With the space you have available you could recreate something more ambitious with two circuits.

One outer circuit could have a couple of short passenger stations with a couple of sidings to stable stock or DMUs.

A separate inner circuit easier to reach could be principally to serve the various freight sidings which you can shunt wagons, a connection between the two circuits would allow locos to access the loco shed/siding. A small yard acting as a scenic fiddle yard would give someone the chance to indulge in shunting while two trains circle round.

 

Good luck

 

Cheers

 

I’ll check that out. I’ve purchased some of the peco track plan books so will sit down and find it later.

[RobinofLoxley]

53 minutes ago, Danknight said:

Plenty to think about, thanks everyone @Chimer I’m hopeful for being able to lift it with another however I have still pre purchased a car cover for a worst case scenario until I can sort a better method of lifting. 
 

one thing I’m not sure on is how trains leave a siding once they’ve arrived in them? Would there usually be a return for the train to follow once it had dropped freight off?

If the siding is a dead end then a pulling loco is trapped at the head. Just as an example if you look at my drawing there is a headshunt - the loco draws into it then shunts the wagons back into the sidings. 

 

The usual method of entry into sidings evolved somewhat over time. But in relation to my drawing, a train would drive directly in from the inner loop which would normally be running anticlockwise but be shunted (reversed) in from the clockwise outer line, so it could use the sidings on the right. Trace the movement. 

 

To remove stock from the sidings, for example a light engine travelling clockwise on the outer, would reverse up the headshunt then move into the sidings on the left, pick up stock, pull it back into the headshunt then use either exit. For this kind of system the headshunt should be at least as long as the longest siding.

[Dungrange]

51 minutes ago, Danknight said:

one thing I’m not sure on is how trains leave a siding once they’ve arrived in them? Would there usually be a return for the train to follow once it had dropped freight off?

 

It depends on the layout of the facility.  In some instances, an arriving locomotive will be trapped at the buffers and a shunter or station pilot will be required to shunt the wagons and release the locomotive.

 

At other locations, a run-round loop would be provided, so the train arrives in the loop (which has to be as long as the train) and then the locomotive will uncouple, draw forward into a locomotive release, the points behind it would be changed and then it can run to the back of the train and undertake whatever shunting is required.

 

Obviously the period that you're looking at will require brake vans, so they will have to be shunted into the correct place when marshalling your train ready for departure.

 

If there is any place in particular that you'd like to draw inspiration from, then the National Library of Scotland have extensive coverage of old maps, which if you look at the 6" to a mile series, you can see the track plan.

 

https://maps.nls.uk/view/101570878 is an example, of the track layout around March and Whitemoor Yard c1952.

[Flying Pig]

2 hours ago, Danknight said:

one thing I’m not sure on is how trains leave a siding once they’ve arrived in them? Would there usually be a return for the train to follow once it had dropped freight off?

 

If the entire train is bound for the sidings, the loco might leave light engine back to the shed for servicing or it might pick up a return load (e.g. a loco bringing empty wagons to a colliery and leaving with full ones).

 

But many sidings were served by stopping goods trains that conveyed wagons to all the destinations along their route and also picked up wagons along the way.  Once the train had dropped off and/or picked up wagons it would just continue its journey.  Nearly all station goods yards were worked like this.

 

Stopping goods trains usually started and finished at marshalling yards which were sidings specifically intended for sorting wagons into new trains for their onward journey and didn't include loading facilities.  Some were enormous, but they could also consist of only a few sidings.  In model terms a small marshalling yard is useful as a self contained shunting area that also allows you to park any kind of freight train between runs.  If you are keen you can also plan stopping goods trains serving the other sidings on the layout.

[Chimer]

2 hours ago, Danknight said:

one thing I’m not sure on is how trains leave a siding once they’ve arrived in them? Would there usually be a return for the train to follow once it had dropped freight off?

Generally trains don't "arrive" in sidings.  For a drop-off to a single siding, the train will stop on the main line before the siding, uncouple the part of the train behind the wagon to be dropped off, pull forward beyond the turnout, reverse in, drop the wagon, come back out of the siding, drop back to recouple the back end of the train and go on its way rejoicing.  With an obvious complication if there's also a wagon in the siding to be picked up, which has to be pulled out first.

[Danknight]

Okay im currently playing around trying to put everything so it works correctly but I have another question... If locos on the outer line run clockwise and anti clockwise on the inner line, why would the lines be connected? as when a train changes lane it will be going the wrong direction.  

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, Danknight said:

Okay im currently playing around trying to put everything so it works correctly but I have another question... If locos on the outer line run clockwise and anti clockwise on the inner line, why would the lines be connected? as when a train changes lane it will be going the wrong direction.  

 

Because trains sometimes reach the end of their journey and have to reverse, locos need to run round, trains need to reach loops, sidings and bay platforms on the other side of the line.  In real life trains could also be crossed over to allow a faster train to pass (using the other line as a refuge siding) or if single line working was in force, but those aren't usually part of model operation.

[Danknight]

Okay, I'm still fiddling with this one but I'm hoping that I am on the right track now :)

 

I've gone from diesel sheds to engine sheds so I can run steam or diesel or a mixture. This enters with the correct flow on to the inside track. It also has a return that I have linked with a head shunt from the goods yard. I have a shunter here and thought it would make for some shunting fun between the goods shed and siding below and parallel to the engine shed. Ive also linked the good shed back to inside track to allow engines leaving with freight to join the tracks in the correct direction. On the left the third inside track will be storage for carriages. I've tried to make it so they can be dropped off and a engine can then join either direction of track and they can also be picked up from either line. Admittedly I'm not a fan of this section yet so I'm still working on it.

 

I prepare to hear about everything I've done wrong haha but hopefully not.

 

Thanks, 

[RobinofLoxley]

Again Dan, how trains change tracks has evolved over time. You would sort of expect that a train would drive forwards to do it but that entails driving across a facing turnout - meaning that the turnout can face 2 ways and to generate the deflection to the other line the point blades must be 100% correctly positioned. So what is more common is that a train runs past the turnout which is facing the opposite way (designated trailing) and reverses back in order to use the crossing. There are places where crossing moving forwards is necessary though. 

[The Johnster]

Consider that, before 1889 (when universal facing point locking mechanisms on all but the slowest, freight only, permissive block running lines and a Statutory Requirement on passenger carrying lines of whatever speed), there was a dread of unlocked facing turnouts moving beneath fast trains as a result of the general vibration and banging about, and causing derailments.  It was not a completely unreasonable dread, and some very bad high speed accidents were caused in the early days because of exactly this issue.  Even after fpls were commonplace, facing turnouts were avoided (ostensibly because of the expense and upkeep of them but just as much because the culture was antipathetic towards them). and the normal method of accessing a siding from a main running line was to run forward over trailing points and back into it slowly.  Facing turnouts were avoided as much as possible and where they were unavoidable, were subject to strict speed limits on the diverging routes and, if higher speed was neccessary, bespoke high-speed turnouts were used.  In later years these included switchable crossing vees.

 

This is not always immediately obvious to a casual observer, becaue the default speed limit for movements in sidings or yards, and over pointwork that does not have any other speed limit applied to it, is 15mph and there are no indications that this is the case; everybody on the railway is aware of it.  So the normal procedure for entering sidings from the main running line is for the loco to come to a stand at the signal protecting the entrance, then proceed past it when it clears while the shunter or guard stands on the ground near to the shunting signal that will authorise the setting back movement ( or in a postion to give a handsignal if no shunting signal is provided.  The shunter or guard will be informed by the signalman (handsignal or telephone in the latter case when it is safe to call the driver back into the sidign, or the shunting signal is cleared.  The move is 'under caution'; the shunting signal only authorises movement 'as far as the line ahead of the movement is clear' and limited to 15mph.

 

This means that, in most (but not all) circumstances, the loco backs the train into the sidings and will not be trapped at the buffers; it can be immediately uncoupled and released to continue to earn it's living elsewhere.  If it were to be trapped, another loco is needed to remove the train and release it, which is a wasteful way of operating (though often seen at terminus passenger stations; revenue and space limitations at such places combine to make the practice financially viable).  Another arrangement, where both the main line and the goods yard or sidings are busier, is to have loop reception roads; these are entered over facing turnouts, and when the loco comes to a stand it is uncoupled to take up the next part of it's duty.  The yard shunting loco, or pilot, then handles things, pulling the train out along a headshunt so as not to interfere with traffic on the busy running lines, and setting back into the sidings as before.  Yards with reception roads usually also have departure roads, where traffic is made up into trains awaiting their booked locos out of the way of both the running lines and the yard's shunting work.

 

 

Edited February 14 by The Johnster

[Danknight]

Thanks for the knowledge people. Any thoughts of the new layout idea?

 

hoping it’s heading in the right direction

Edited February 16 by Danknight

[Harlequin]

Hi Dan,

 

It's a classic trainset but it's not realistic. It's very hard for us to comment on trainsets because by definition they can be anything you like. So, if you like it, build it.

 

If you want a more realistic model railway then I suggest you look at some model railway plans and read some books about designing model railways before continuing.

 

[Danknight]

6 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Hi Dan,

 

It's a classic trainset but it's not realistic. It's very hard for us to comment on trainsets because by definition they can be anything you like. So, if you like it, build it.

 

If you want a more realistic model railway then I suggest you look at some model railway plans and read some books about designing model railways before continuing.

 

I keep looking at railway plans but I’m struggling to see what I can do to make it more realistic in the space I have. Anything really obvious where I’ve gone wrong?

[Chimer]

I would rearrange the pointwork around the station as shown below - basically I've moved one crossover from the left side of the platforms to the right, and shifted the rest of the pointwork along a bit.  This allows you to bring a passenger train into either station platform, run the engine round to the other end and leave in the other direction, using the crossover to shift to the correct (left-hand running) track.  The shifted crossover is now "trailing" instead of "facing" (that is, you have to stop and reverse across in normal operations) which is in accordance with traditional safety-driven practice in the real world.  (I used Peco Set-track  not Hornby, which is probably why I can't quite match your point formation without a discontinuity).

 

 

Can't help much with the rest and largely agree with Phil.  If you want it realistic, you need to take an awful lot away.  See for example "Rannoch Revisited" in this month's Railway Modeller (sorry BRM!), which is highly realistic, but would give you nothing of what you want! 

 

I just suggest that for now you get some track down without fixing it at all, and do some running, operating the points by hand, and see if you can get what you want out of it.

 

Hope this helps ... feeling your pain.

[Harlequin]

9 hours ago, Danknight said:

I keep looking at railway plans but I’m struggling to see what I can do to make it more realistic in the space I have. Anything really obvious where I’ve gone wrong?

 

Think about the railway in a scene, not just some track on a board.

 

Double track around the outside of the baseboards leaves no room for any scenery outside the tracks so it's really difficult to make it look natural - you'll always see the "edge of the world". Leave room for roads and houses, fields, trees, rivers as well as the railway scenery like station buildings,  water towers, signal boxes, etc...

 

Facing points in main lines. They were avoided as far as possible on steam/early diesel railways.

 

Complex junctions with diamond crossings connecting the outer circuit to your inner loop. Things like that probably happened in the real world but they would have been very unusual and wouldn't have looked anything like what Setrack forces you to do. (If you were using Streamline you'd have more options.)

 

Wiggles. Try to keep it all as smoooth as possible especially on the main lines. Use the corner curves to start your crossovers, don't wait for the curve to straighten out and then have points that turn outwards again - that's classic trainset stuff.

 

Platform length. Not long enough to look right and any train that’s three coaches or longer (I guess) won't fit without looking silly.

 

Loop around the goods shed with short spur beyond. Fine for processing vans efficiently in the real world but the vans would have been moved by hand with pinch bars. Locos were usually not allowed to run through goods sheds (although it did happen). That makes a loop like that difficult to use realistically in a model. You also need to provide road vehicles access to the goods shed. That can actually be across the loop track at a push but it was most common to keep the road and rail vehicles separate for simplicity and safety.

 

Edited February 17 by Harlequin

[chuffinghell]

I’m already working on my next layout and I’ve not finished the one I’ve started.

 

I’ve decided I want something simple, easy to wire and quick to build

 

Based on my normal build speed I’ll have it finished in a couple of years

 

 

 

 

Little Warren

 

 

 

Definitely a two wire system!

 

🤪

[chuffinghell]

Joking aside I wish I had the room for a continuous loop, I’ve even considered N gauge but my eyes struggle with OO gauge as it is

 

 

Edited February 16 by chuffinghell

[Dungrange]

7 hours ago, Danknight said:

hoping it’s heading in the right direction

 

I think it is, but there are a few things I don't understand.  To the left of your diagram, you've got an up line (clockwise) and down line (anticlockwise) and then a bidirectional 'loop'.  What is the purpose of the crossover between the anticlockwise circuit and the bidirectional loop?  The real railway never installs points unless they have a clear purpose.  I'm struggling to see why you need these.

 

Your platforms are very short.  It looks like they won't accommodate more than a 2-car Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) or a one, or possibly two coach train, depending on the coaches.  Are you content with such short trains?  If we assume that you are, then ideally as well as a train stopping and continuing on its way again, it would be good to be able to stop at the platform and then start again in the direction from which it came, crossing over onto the correct track for it's return journey.  This would be best achieved by replacing your facing crossover on the top of your plan with a trailing crossover and adding a trailing crossover on the right of your plan.

 

Again, what is the purpose of the crossover on the bottom of your plan for.  The only movement I could see that would use this would be to get a train from your maintenance area onto your outer (clockwise circuit), in which case I'd expect it to be further to the right.  The sidings in the maintenance area are very short.  Is this just for locomotive maintenance or does it serve another purpose?

 

Apart from that, I think the plan is workable.

 

1 hour ago, Danknight said:

I keep looking at railway plans but I’m struggling to see what I can do to make it more realistic in the space I have. Anything really obvious where I’ve gone wrong?

 

Which comes back to the fundamental question - do you want a train set or do you want a model railway?  They are not really the same thing and neither answer to that question is wrong.  I would consider a train set as something to be played with.  It should be fun and it should meet that childhood desire to be a train driver when you grow up.  It doesn't matter that you don't fully understand how the real railway works, it's a toy to be played with.  It's like a prop for a story that you're telling through movement.  Thomas, Annie and Claribel are going off on an adventure to... arrive right back where they started from, but hey, you're happy to pretend that it is somewhere new.  As a project that is intended to be for both you and your children, there is nothing wrong with that approach.  I'd say what you now have is a workable train set.

 

A model railway, or perhaps a model of a railway is more of a desire to portray a particular location or the essence of an area at a particular point or period in time.  It's more of an artform to create a believable scene.  It's a bit more like a three dimensional painting.  The landscape was there long before the railway came, so it needs to be built to look as though the railway has been built later, crossing over rivers, etc that were there long ago.  The railway was built for a reason, so we need to define what that reason was.  Why did your settlement get a railway?  Was it to transport commuters into London or another large city?  Was it to convey agricultural produce from the local farms to distant cities?  Was it to serve workers at a dock, a coal mine or quarry?  Was it built to assist with the distribution of goods from a major manufacturer or brewery?  That of course means that you can't have everything: there is no point in modelling a dock if you want to run express passenger trains.

 

Ultimately, this is the reason why most people who want a model railway, settle for a branch line and the Great Western Railway tends to be a popular choice.  For me, I'm about to start a layout inspired by Outwell Basin on the Wisbech and Upwell tramway in the pre-grouping period.  I don't need to scour track plan books looking for ideas - I can just copy the track plan that actually existed at Outwell Basin.  However, there is no engine shed.  There is no goods shed.  It was a single track line and there would only have been one tram engine at Outwell Basin at any one time (unless one of the trams broke down and needed to be rescued by another tram).  There wasn't even a platform at Outwell Basin - the passengers climbed up into the coaches from ground level.  There were literally hundreds of stations small stations that you could choose to model and which would fit in your space, but you might find the operation a bit boring.  However, I have to say that I've enjoyed trying to understand how the depot at Outwell basin was operated and to try to find out what sort of goods would have been delivered, and more generally what life was like 50 years before I was born.  Obviously that's not for some, but we're all different.  Ultimately, you need to decide whether the plan that you have meets your objectives.   We're not trying to get to the railway I want - we just want to get to where you want.

[Nick Holliday]

On 16/02/2024 at 10:15, Danknight said:

Thanks for the knowledge people. Any thoughts of the new layout idea?

 

hoping it’s heading in the right direction

Although this is better than some of the earlier iterations, I still don’t think you will be getting the best out of your investment, and the space you have available. One thing that is missing is somewhere to park stock, particularly carriages, when they are not orbiting the oval. There’s plenty of sidings for locomotives, but with perhaps only two passenger sets, and one goods, they won’t have much to do.

Another thing that rather grates is the clumsy looking, and slightly impractical, junction leading to the bidirectional line. I would streamline this area by allocating the centre line as the bidirectional one, saving the diamond crossing, which is a potential conflict point, although I’m not too sure what this extra line is going to be used for.