WR Freight only BLT potential layout plan

[brianthesnail96]

Vague plan for a new layout: 00, peco code 75, 10' by 20", set somewhere near Gloucester. Mainly ex GWR but might borrow the odd loco from the Midland and certainly a few wagons- both companies had a strong presence in Gloucester after all. The idea is it'll split into four equal length sections that will then make up two boxes for storage, with one board stacked upside down and back to front on another so the backscenes make the sides. The large building hiding the fiddleyard will be removeable, along with the bit of backscene attatched to it!

 

 

The back (low relief) buildings will be permanently fixed to the backscene. The one on the right will be several storeys high, with a canopy over a loading dock as shown. The others I'll make up as I go along! The large building on the left will probably be a "sawtooth" roof (dont know the technical term!) factory, again two storeys or more.

 

As it stands the front line dissapears under a pipe bridge at the end of the factory building into the fiddle yard. This could either be a "branch off a branch" to a small quarry or a long siding to a further area of industry. Alternatively this bit could be sceniced and used as a siding- depends on how it goes when I play with it, sorry, test. The branch off a branch would give more operating potential but at the expense of realism.

 

The main exit to fiddle yard is behind the factory- a covered footbridge between the factory and the building behind providing the cut off- the backscene (probably plain light grey) will cut across here and run along the back of the factory.

 

As a bit of a key, red is buildings, brown fiddleyard, flat grey is concrete/ tarmac and inset track where appropriate, rough grey is ballast and the green is rough, scrubby grass and bushes etc.

 

Idea is a loco + up to 8 wagons + brake will run in, swap wagons for those extant in the sidings and leave again. Motive power likely to be a pair of panniers and a small prarie, possibly an 0-4-2 as well. Mix of wagons, mostly Bachmann vans and 16 tonners, plus a few older wooden bodies opens and the occasional "special" e.g. container. Front right siding should have a crane and loading dock while I think about it! The one behind is mostly there as a headshunt so lack of road vehicle access not really a problem. Siding off the end of the loop is probably for brakevan storage. The other end of the loop will gain a water tower.

 

Feedback welcomed!

[woodenhead]

Looks nice, you've space to put in a short platform for a workman's train. Will add to variety and not cost you anything in space.

[Kris]

What is the 2nd siding on the concrete going to be for? Unless it has a specific reason I think you could do without it.

 

The sawtooth roof is a "northlight".

[brianthesnail96]

That's it- cheers Kris. The second siding on the right is a headshunt for the sidings/ potential sub- branch off to the left. There's likely to be a couple of wagons in the other RH siding most the time and having to move them to shunt the factory siding could get tedious. If the branch becomes a siding it may get shortened and gain an end loading dock but it'll probably stay as it is, as a useful place to dump stock being used to make up the outgoing train without blocking the loop for starters.

 

I did consider putting in a workman's platform but I wanted to leave a bit of space between tracks to stop things being too crammed in- it's pretty cramped as it is. Mostly I just want to be different...

[The Stationmaster]

Nice - plenty of 'shunting about' potential I think. One thing tho' - if set back in the age of steam and busy don't go mad with long grass near the tracks, it trips up Shunters and would be worm away by the constant passage of feet.

[Dave777]

Sorry, I appreciate you've already argued against it, but I agree with Kris - I'd lose the front siding on the right hand side as it was the first thing I thought when I saw the plan. Lose that siding, angle the headshunt further out to give a feeling of more space, also removes the need+cost+complexity of having a slip there. Another reason is that while you've angled the tracks across the baseboard (good, well done *tick* ) you've then fallen into the common trap of keeping the tracks all parallel to each other. If you angle or curve the headshunt out it'll break the whole scene up a bit.

 

The other thing I'd do is to swap around the two sidings on the left. The line going under the pipe bridge isn't going to have the exit hidden very well, so I'd have the front siding ending in front of the building (with or without a loading dock, or going inside the building as you had shown on the original) and then weave the other line (the possible branch) inbetween two buildings so the exit is well hidden - trains will then appear from behind the building (or disappear behind it).

 

It's just about getting some curves in there to break the straight lines up a bit. I think I've comprehensively knackered your excellent diagram here:

 

 

There's also the possiblity that the more open right hand side with the concrete apron expanse contrasts with the more cramped, closed in feel on the left with the line going inbetween the buildings.

 

Having said all that, just to repeat what I usually say when recommending more drastic changes to other's plans: this is just what I would do.

[brianthesnail96]

The original idea was to actually have those sidings at a different angle to the loop but there wasn't room. I think you guys have talked me round to the single siding idea though- and I really like the track dissapearing between the buildings. Only thing is they may be a little narrow, that said I could probably go up to 2ft deep boards which would give me a little more space.

 

Ta for the ideas, much appreciated. Also trying to come up with a more traditional BLT as an alternative idea, also with a "branch off a branch" but this one heading off stage to a colliery, with some form of exchange sidings on the layout, mostly to give me an excuse for some industrials. And a proper station (3 57 footer long plaform) too. Struggling with that one!

 

If I go with this one I think it's likely to look rather like Dave's plan above.

[54Strat]

I totally agree with the suggestions so far, though one potential problem maybe with the start of the loop, particularly where the three way point meets the left hand point. This lies on the 5ft line, where the baseboards will join, and I'd fear the connection across the join will be a right pain to get working satisfactorily, though not impossible but why make life harder for yourself?

Unless there's a constraint on size (actually, when isn't there?) you could make the layout 12ft, (4 x 3ft boards) and so extend the fiddle yard by 2ft. This would shift the baseboard joins to a less cluttered location, and you could increase the capacity of the fiddleyard. There'd even be space for a sector plate or traverser. With the extra 2ft, you could extend the lower left hand siding possibly adding another siding say to another industry or warehouse. Personally. I'd shove an inglenook in there as I'm a little bit obsessed with them.

 

Worth noting; presently the fiddleyard's maximum capacity could only hold a train that would completely fit inside the loop (including the loco). The loop can accommodate a bigger train than this, so a bigger fiddleyard makes sense.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Paul

[hmrspaul]

Brian

 

You could add another three way point and put the extra siding inside the low relief building, giving the opportunity for bringing more stock in, or showing loaded/unloaded wagons.

 

And why not extend the headshunt at the back of the baseboard to link to the other siding in the fiddle yard - would allow longer trains to be shunted.

 

Paul Bartlett

[Kris]

To give a use for the "spare" siding at the front, why not make this run alongside a canal to give the siding a reason?

[Rivercider]

I like the idea, something a bit different with plenty of shunting scope.

As a small child I remember being fascinated by tracks heading off between buildings,

and inset tracks in the road, where did they go, and what trains ran on them? Unfortunately by then most of them were disused.

Were you thinking of Gloucester Docks Branch and Llanthony Rd Yd for inspiration, or possibly something from the Sharpness area?

Both of the above had a variety of traffic I believe, grain, coal, cement and more.

 

If you decide to lose one of the sidings at the right hand end, by reversing the right hand crossover to

be a trailing one you get a usable bit of siding space against the concrete apron.

[brianthesnail96]

Paul- good point, it is juggled so the joint is between the two points but it's still less than ideal- keeping to 10ft moving those points either shortened the loop or the fiddle yard too much. I could just about cope with 3ft boards so that's probably the way to go. As for the loop being longer than the fiddle yard, that's partially a function of the above and mostly to stop me cramming a train that's far too big for the layout on! Gives a bit of space to move wagons about too. I don't want to increase the amount of trackwork much more as I dont want it too cluttered though- will see how it looks when it's up together and another siding on the LHS may be possible but probably not. I'd be more inclined to keep the headshunt on the RHS actually.

 

The short siding at the back will probably extend a bit further back into the fiddleyard but not too far- I'm only thinking of 8 wagon + brakevan trains so dont need masses of stock capacity in the sidings.

 

I don't feel there's space to fit a canal in without it becoming unrealistically cramped unfortunately- a nice idea though, especially as I hope to live on the canal in the not too distant future (no, the layout won't be joining me sadly!).

 

Rivercider, got my inspiration first go! Although it obviously is just that, I'm not making any attempt to replicate any particular place. I suppose it's a GWR version of the Llanthony Rd section, as that was Midland I believe?

 

Well spotted to swap the crossover too, ta!

[Rivercider]

I don't know Gloucester very well, I have passed through by train many times, but only visited the Waterways Museum once.

Your original post and plan just felt right to me, which is a good start.

Checking on tinternet and pregrouping atlas confirms GWR access to docks was via Over Jn and Llanthony Yd.

Midland access was via Barton St Jn and High Orchard Yd. The two railways were linked by the internal docks system.

 

Your 'branch off a branch' idea makes sense if the disappearing siding is supposed to be part of the link to the Midland side,

that way you can justify transfer traffic between the 2 systems.

 

There are several web sites with information and photos, albeit some much after closure, but as you are fairly local presumably

you can do a bit of research yourself. You can pick buildings you like the look of that fit your available space.

Small tank engines and short wheelbase wagons and you can have a busy little set-up there.

[hmrspaul]

I don't feel there's space to fit a canal in without it becoming unrealistically cramped unfortunately- a nice idea though, especially as I hope to live on the canal in the not too distant future (no, the layout won't be joining me sadly!).

Well spotted to swap the crossover too, ta!

 

No need to model the canal, that can be the edge of the baseboard, just model a few of the items which would be on the bank of a canal where a railway and canal had interchange of freight.

 

Paul Bartlett

[brianthesnail96]

You are right, Llanthony was GWR and High Orchard was Midland. Most the photos I have are of High Orchard, in the early 60's. I have found a few of the websites you mentioned, sadly a lot of what was there in the early 90's has now gone. Buildings will be inspired by what I see on a mooch around though- still a lot of interesting architecture left around the canal basin and a lot of it has been nicely restored as well.

 

Based on some of the ideas above, I have rehashed and extended the plan both in width and depth. The baseboard joints are now at 3ft intervals and the pointwork manages to miss them all this time- as do the buildings; the backscene being made up of several low relief buildings which conveniently change at the joints. The far left board should fit upside down and back to front on the far right board, with the middle pair doing the same. Browny grey is inset track, pale green represents canopies over loading docks, the beige is the fiddle yard (a loco lift will be employed here). The grey structure on the far right is a loading dock with crane.

 

My brief dip into Gloucester's industrial past revealed that a branch to a power station ran from the docks. Since I have a thing for 16t mineral wagons, this seemed ideal for me- hence the branch off a branch leads to a power station. Tight curves and a steep bank limit train length to what will fit in the fiddle yard... This adds to operational interest too as a long train will have to be split in the yard and taken to the power station in two trips. Wagons can also be emptied in the fiddle yard to add realism- loaded (or empty) wagons going in and out is a pet hate of mine! As most the traffic on the rest of the layout will be in vans or tarpaulin covered opens this is less of an issue elsewhere.

 

Although it almost looks like it's double track coming in from the fiddleyard, the uppermost track will be going into the building while the main line will be going under a covered footbridge between factory buildings. The branch dissapears under a pipe bridge but this is mostly hidden by buildings anyway.

 

It also gives me an excuse for some interesting motive power, I'll have to have a think on that one. Hoping Bachmann will do the little dock shunter pannier tanks once they've done the Beattie Well tanks!

 

[Kris]

Your fiddle yards look as if they could be very easily converted to cassettes, if you were going to do this, you could ease the curve on the branch.

[Dave777]

The only thing I'd say is that the original (only?) point of having the line disappear between the buildings was to hide the exit/entrance, so trains disappeared behind a building (although my sketch didn't develop this further enough admittedly). By having the exit face on to the front it's going to be in full view, which then renders the point of going between the buildings largely redundant...?

[brianthesnail96]

Unfortunately it seems difficult to get the line to dissapear behind buildings without ending up with very skinny buildings- I want the buildings to dominate the layout, and tall and skinny might not work. Looking again, a better bet would be to get rid of the building with the siding in, and have that line as the branch- but that building hides the main fiddle yard exit! Bit of a juggling act.

 

I'll have another stab at it later.

[Stubby47]

If the track went 'inside' the building, you could extend the roof over the fiddle yard to give the impression it was much larger...

 

Stu

[Kris]

Just a suggestion here on how to hide the problem exit.

 

 

 

If you straighten out curve 1 a little, this will push all of the kick back lines towards the fiddle yard. This would mean making some of the buildings thinner here but would allow you to then push on scene the new building that acts as a view blocker. I see this building as only being part of a much larger warehouse structure. You could either model the inside and allow people to see through and look through the windows, or you could just blank it off. Either way you block the direct view to the exit line. To regain some of the width of the buildings at the rear you could angle the left hand track towards the front corner of the layout.

[Flying Pig]

You'd be better to go back to Dave's original sketch and see how you can work in the kind of acute exit between buildings he envisaged. Relatively slender buildings can still be imposing if seen face on and odd shapes are no problem in a 19th Century industrial environment (the passion for dull rectangles is more recent). Also, unless this is going to be an exhibition-only layout for other people to look at, you'll probably be leaning over them to get at the fiddle yard.

[brianthesnail96]

You are, of course, right. And I also fell into the trap that I said I was trying to avoid, i.e. cramming in too many sidings! I'm most upset no-one noticed the beautifully curved run around loop though.

 

The idea was to actually operate the layout from the left hand end, bizzare person that I am. But will hopefully have a walkabout controller to give a degree of freedom there.

 

Back to the drawing, erm, software...

[Chris Nevard]

These last ones work well. Try to avoid long big buildings along the very front edge of the layout because then you won't be able to see the trains unless the railway is on a high embankment behind. Just keep such at the ends as view blockers as on these last 2 plans. I like the way the industrial siding on the left disappears between the buildings too

 

If you want to photograph your layout try to avoid track right close to the baseboard edge because it will be difficult to get shots without the baseboard edge in shot. Just 2 to 3 inches space will make alot of difference in this respect as well as reducing the chance of that derailed train ending up on the floor