Kirkby Luneside (Original): End of the line....

[Physicsman]

Just wonder if the length of head shut is sufficient (“under the shunter shed”)?

 

A good point, Jaakko. The plan is only indicative, but I reckon the actual headshunt will need to be around 80 - 90cm long. This will allow for a shunter and 6-8 wagons.

 

Jeff

 

Maybe like this...

Edited September 1, 2012 by Physicsman

[Physicsman]

Just wonder if the length of head shut is sufficient (“under the shunter shed”)?

 

 

EDIT: Oops! You were faster than me. I did not notice you latest track plan… Sorry!

 

Lol!! Nope, you were quite correct - the headshunt was probably too small. That's why this forum is excellent - it allows all sorts of ideas to be bashed about. Thanks!

 

Jeff

[The Stationmaster]

Jeff,

 

Several points -

1 I think it would be far better if (with no other alterations going on) you took the 'shunter shed' off the headshunt and not off the platform line - that reduces the number of running lines and connections and saves money for the company thus pleasing the Directors and shareholders.

 

2. While I can see the accessibility sense is moving the goods yard to the front you have created other problems - from a practical viewpoint, albeit perhaps theoretically rare - you will be reaching across the much compressed goods yard to get to anything else, but - from my viewpoint - you have moved from an open and well laid out looking goods yard to a compressed one with much reduced visual appeal, and,

 

3. Littl;e or no consideration seems to have been given to how you would service the goods yard in its new location. The original yard could be readily accessed, in typical Midland Rlwy fashion, by trains travelling in either direction and both could shunt the yard clear of running lines.. What you now have is not only a smaller and compressed yard but one which Down (left to right I think is 'Down'?) train can't properly access at all and which an Up train would also be very hard pushed to work in in a sensible manner and would in any case have to block the branchline to do so and could only get back onto the Up line by propeling (as opposed to doing it the proper way and propelling in then a head front departure onto the running line. In summary there is no way a freight can service the repositioned goods yard witthout 'sterilising' the branchline.

 

I can understand that revised pointwork geometry has pushed you in a different direction but what has now appeared as a plan doesn't to me seem to have taken into account how it would be worked in a 'railwaylike' way - of course that might not be your aim but it worries me that you might find it frustrating once you actually come to deal with trains on it.

[beast66606]

Jeff,

 

Several points -

 

[snip]

 

Ditto on all Mikes points.

 

For info - The S&C had very few loops (in the early days, none), therefore facing points were very unusual, the Hawes branch at Garsdale was all accessed via trailing points (the main line part).

[Physicsman]

Thanks to Mike and Beast.

 

I'm looking at a number of options at the moment - I've been playing with the track in close to its original configuration (ie. pre-Thursday!).

 

I like the original plan, if only because it must have worked practically, as it's very close to the Kirkby Stephen arrangement. Now I have the track pieces (rather than just a computer-drawn plan) I can "play" for hours on end to see what is and isn't possible. I appreciate the comments, so - stay tuned!!

 

Jeff

[Physicsman]

OK folks, it looks like we're back to the original plan - this time only slightly modified.

 

I've spent about 6 hours playing with the track, trying "variations on an original theme" (sorry Mr Elgar). In the end, it was possible to solve the right-hand side situation using the Marcway turnouts, to the original plan.

 

Cattle dock has been moved - it's now in its Kirkby Stephen position... Photos enclosed - they ARE NOT exciting, but I know some of you like this kind of thing!

 

I will post a revised plan shortly - please ignore dimensions on the plan - the SMP gear has distorted things. But the track in the photos is positioned as accurately as I can manage without fixing it. Curves were 36"- ish radius around the station, measured using a Tracksetta.

 

Curves at the far end vary out from 36" to 54" at the Main viaduct.

[Physicsman]

Here is the revised plan. The eagle-eyed among you may spot that I've put the loco shed in the wrong place in the photos above!! But you get the idea!!

 

Jeff

Edited September 1, 2012 by Physicsman

[Physicsman]

To illustrate why "the best laid plans of mice and men" were thrown into disarray, here is a comparison between a Peco code 75 left-hand curved point (SL-E187) and a Marcway 36"/60" left-curved point, as used in my layout.

 

Slight difference in size, with consequent knock-on effects...

 

Jeff

[The Stationmaster]

Here is the revised plan. The eagle-eyed among you may spot that I've put the loco shed in the wrong place in the photos above!! But you get the idea!!

 

Jeff

 

That'll do nicely and I hope the locals don't mind standing next to cattle wagons while they're being loaded BTW I seriously wonder if it might be worth your while making a trap point for the engine shed siding if you currently have in mind using one of those large offerings from Marcway - SMP used to do a kit I think.

[Physicsman]

The locals won't mind a sheep or two! They breed them hard up here, you know (the people and the cattle!!).

 

Looking at the plans of the station in the period when a cattle dock was operational, the dock was further to the end of the platform - I don't have the space to do this. The rear sidings were also much longer. Twiddling the plan (see below), this is about the best I can come up with. But it doesn't matter as KL isn't Kirkby Stephen - just a prototypical "copy"!!

 

Jeff

[The Stationmaster]

Jeff what is now the distance between your main lines trailing crossover (that lies between the platforms) and the trailing crossover which is formed by the single slip? They look rather close together in the pics but that could be foreshortening due to the lens?

[Physicsman]

Hi Mike. Sorry it's taken me so long to reply. The distance between the pairs of trailing points is about 80cm. However, I put them in that place because I don't have a pair of curved points (see original plan eg. page 9, post 209) to fit onto the bend. I will buy some if needs be. Would you recommend the trailing points be on the approach curve (between viaduct and station), rather than at the head of the station - to increase the distance?

 

Jeff

Edited September 2, 2012 by Physicsman

[Physicsman]

Here you are Mike. A couple of pics to show where the trailing crossover will fit on the curve, moving round to the viaducts.

 

The 2 platforms will be curved for the last 40cm or so, giving lengths of 120cm and 100cm-ish.

 

Jeff

[The Stationmaster]

Hi Mike. Sorry it's taken me so long to reply. The distance between the pairs of trailing points is about 80cm. However, I put them in that place because I don't have a pair of curved points (see original plan eg. page 9, post 209) to fit onto the bend. I will buy some if needs be. Would you recommend the trailing points be on the approach curve (between viaduct and station), rather than at the head of the station - to increase the distance?

Jeff

I think you definitely need to increase the distance between the two crossovers and there are two possible ways of doing it. First it ti do what you have already thought of and move the trailing crossover out onto the curve - nothing wrong in those days in having pointwork on a curve but you do need to be ultra sure of reliability in that case. And - following local practice - the protecting Down line stop signal will be at the far end of the viaduct to avoid a train being stopped on the viaduct (don't worry about stopping a shunting move on it - what you are guarding against is passengers who think they're at the station when their train is topped at a signal and .... need I say more

 

The possible alternative is to go on straight at the opposite end of the visible layout in the vicinity of the last connection out of the yard - if you have enough straight there to do it?

[Andrew P]

Hi Mate, been away to the Grantham Show for the weekend and lived to tell the tale, STILL CAN'T SEE ANY GRASS but I do like all the squigilly bits, I must try that some time ha ha ha. All the Best Andy.

[Physicsman]

Thanks Mike. Keep the information coming! I generally understand most of it, though the etiquette of track layouts is sometimes beyond me! Especially the signalling. When I have a definitive layout - well, it's kind of that way now, but shall we say when the track is fixed down - I'll send you a plan and ask you to suggest signal positions! I have a detailed track plan of the Kirkby Stephen station set-up to hand, so I may just use that...

 

I like the look of the crossovers on the curves. The only "compromise" the SMP/Marcway has caused is the need to curve the station platforms at one end, but I quite like that.

 

Cheers,

 

Jeff

[Physicsman]

Hi Andy. I was wondering where you'd got to, then remembered you were going over to Grantham. I hope it was a successful weekend!

 

As you can see, no grass but plenty of track laid-out all over the place. I might go for the random look!

 

I'm hoping the basic trackplan will be sorted and the track fixed in place (including a basic fiddle yard) by the end of this month. I know you'd have it all down by tomorrow!!!!

 

Best wishes,

 

Jeff

[Rowsley17D]

Hi Jeff, There's nothing like getting out the trackwork and having a play with it. I bet you're missing the start of the new school year - not! Did you get out of the bunker long enough to go to Peter's Spares? Lovely day here in TS17 now the kids are going back.

[Physicsman]

Hi Jeff, There's nothing like getting out the trackwork and having a play with it. I bet you're missing the start of the new school year - not! Did you get out of the bunker long enough to go to Peter's Spares? Lovely day here in TS17 now the kids are going back.

 

Yes, lovely day indeed! Up at 5, early breakfast, already done some gardening... Just about to post some pics of the (99.5%) completed Branch viaduct.

 

I've had a number of texts from my ex-colleagues - rather them sat in boring meetings than me!

 

Track-playing is great fun. Haven't got to Peter's spares yet, but I will!

 

Cheers Jonathan.

Edited September 3, 2012 by Physicsman

[Physicsman]

Here's a couple of images of the Branch viaduct. It's very nearly finished - the copings and rear arch-rings need a bit of white dry-painted into them - a 5 minute job (and, needless to say, I haven't got any white paint left...plenty of other colours!!).

 

The Branch is a touch darker than the Main - I just couldn't get a total match. But nevermind - I refuse to become a total obsessive!!

 

Jeff

[Mwmbwls]

Forgive if I am duplicating any earlier entry as I have just caught up with this compulsive thread. Two points - I find Alibris http://www.alibris.co.uk/ to be an excellent source of out of print books particularly the excellent structures and diagrams books that used to be a feature of OPC - Oxford Publishing Company. Recently a large number of 1960's publications have come on the market as I assume that sadly the first post war railway modellers have passed on to the great marshalling yard in the sky. It does have ahandy feature whereby if you want a book that is not in stock you can leave an enquiry. Second Geoff Taylor http://gtbuildingsmodels.co.uk/ has written two books Creating Model Buildings Wild Swan ISBN 979 1 905184 79 8 which features Horton and Appleby station buildings - he also does a dandy line in window and door etches - invaluable when building the distinctive waiting hall areas. His new book is has now been published http://gtbuildingsmodels.co.uk/page26.html and is now firmly on my birthday present for Grandpa list.Hope this helps.

[buffalo]

...The Branch is a touch darker than the Main...

You could claim it was deliberate. The main being further away from the viewer should appear a little lighter because of the scattering effect of the haze.

 

Nick

[Physicsman]

You could claim it was deliberate. The main being further away from the viewer should appear a little lighter because of the scattering effect of the haze.

 

Nick

 

Nick - are you a Physicist? I'd come up with a much more mundane reason... the prevailing wind was an easterly and so impacted the Branch first. The Main, being on the lee of the Branch, was therefore sheltered, with less long-term weathering. I DO prefer your suggestion though!!

 

Cheers,

 

Jeff

[Physicsman]

Forgive if I am duplicating any earlier entry as I have just caught up with this compulsive thread. Two points - I find Alibris http://www.alibris.co.uk/ to be an excellent source of out of print books particularly the excellent structures and diagrams books that used to be a feature of OPC - Oxford Publishing Company. Recently a large number of 1960's publications have come on the market as I assume that sadly the first post war railway modellers have passed on to the great marshalling yard in the sky. It does have ahandy feature whereby if you want a book that is not in stock you can leave an enquiry. Second Geoff Taylor http://gtbuildingsmodels.co.uk/ has written two books Creating Model Buildings Wild Swan ISBN 979 1 905184 79 8 which features Horton and Appleby station buildings - he also does a dandy line in window and door etches - invaluable when building the distinctive waiting hall areas. His new book is has now been published http://gtbuildingsmo....uk/page26.html and is now firmly on my birthday present for Grandpa list.Hope this helps.

 

Thanks very much for the links - any kind of information like this is invaluable!! Much appreciated - I will investigate!

 

Jeff

[buffalo]

Nick - are you a Physicist?...

Not since A level and Part 1 over forty years ago, but I've maintained an interest and like to know how and why things like that happen. The increasing grey/blue tint with distance has been discussed a few times on here, particularly as it affects backscenes. It doesn't really have any impact on my little layouts but, with the scale of yours and the landscape in your area, it might be worth thinking about when it comes to backscenes and the more distant corners of the layout.

 

Nick