RMweb Premium Jason T Posted June 28, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 28, 2011 As reported elsewhere, I have had to scrap my layout, http://www.rmweb.co....ntry226315]Moor Road[/url] as the baseboards were warped something rotten, making running unreliable and the uneven track standing out like a sore thumb. So, whilst very frustrating, it means that I have a clean sheet and lessons learned to draw upon. As such, I've been browsing around and have come up with the below plan. I really like the look of Bacup as a location, with it's single central platform, carriage sidings, kick-back goods yard, etc. For info, the top siding a carriage siding and the sidings to the left are envisaged as serving a warehouse or other private sidings. Period would be mid - late 60's. Are there any glaring errors that spring out? I did think about including a shed and turntable in the top right hand corner but am worried that it would just make it too crowded with track, in an area that could be used for non-railway related scenery (a better use of this space in my mind). Any advice, criticism, etc., would be greatly appreciated. All I have so far is most of the pointwork and a few buildings left over from it's predecessor (most of which won't be of any use whatsoever) so a total re-plan isn't out of the question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the penguin of doom Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 Hi Sandside. It looks like an ideal plan to me. Just up my street. You can get to each platform and siding from both the up and down lines which is important I think. Cheers. Sean. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 I'd not go with the turntable/shed, imo less is more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Blandford1969 Posted June 28, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 28, 2011 I'd not go with the turntable/shed, imo less is more. I agree, its easier to say the shed is off the scene. There are also quite a few photos of Bacup on dissused stations. Looks like a nice layout. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LN Lancs Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 Looks a good plan and very reminiscent of Bacup. The L&Y society prodeuce a couple of booklets on the Bacup branch that are informative and interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Flying Pig Posted June 28, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 28, 2011 As others have said, it's a good plan and an interesting location. Another vote from me to leave out the shed too. You can get to each platform and siding from both the up and down lines which is important I think. Squinting at www.old-maps.co.uk (try zooming in on the 1962 1:2500 map) suggests that the layout was actually more like this: There's no direct access from the down line to the loco release or carriage siding - but when would you need it? You can shunt just as easily along the up line without impeding incoming trains. I'm not sure about the reversed goods sidings either. Granted, that's how they were laid out at Bacup, possibly because of a restricted site, but your baseboard doesn't leave you much space. You might get a more convincing yard if you put it the normal (boring) way round and moved the private siding into the elbow of the layout. BTW the 1962 map suggests a humungous goods shed in typical L&Y style, though it's marked "ruin"! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jason T Posted June 29, 2011 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted June 29, 2011 I had thought about reversing the goods yard but I do like it the opposite way round and I'm a stubborn sod at the best of times; I do share your views on the yard being too cramped, so I had another play with the plan and rotated it. Although the area of the station buildings does seem somewhat crammed in, there is slightly more room available at that end of the baseboards (e.g. there is 9" of space to add an additional bolt-on board) so it wouldn't be as bad as it looks below. Also, with it being angled, it would give more opportunity to view the station frontage (although it was quite austere, it has to be said: http://www.bacuptimes.co.uk/railways.htm). It also gives more opportunity to model the town as a backdrop. I removed the private sidings which, with hindsight, added nothing but more track, and eased out the goods yard somewhat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PWSlack Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 As a principle, consider eliminating all straight track from the plan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Flying Pig Posted July 8, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 8, 2011 Why? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jason T Posted July 8, 2011 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 8, 2011 Yep, the platform roads are pretty much straight: http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/b/bacup/map1910.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katier Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Why? PWSlack has posted a few of those Flying Pig and yeah I agree Why? While it's true track doesn't go straight -> constant radius curve -> straight.. the fact is that railways like going straight.. as straight as possible.. they are like canals - want to get from A to B in the shortest time and distance. Terminus stations are very commonly straight.. usually ruler straight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.