MattWallace Posted May 13, 2013 Author Share Posted May 13, 2013 Good stuff, your top yard is reminiscent of reading yard, which was kind of an east / west yard interconnected a bit like that. Seeking further inspiration google earth is great for real life track plans or the quail map books are brilliant for real life stuff. I've been there with the gauge thing - tampered with N, OO and O. I keep returning to OO though because there is so much more available in the popular scale. N gauge is great for in the scenery stuff with funny little novelty trains ( my dad loved it), O is great for highly detailed small shunting stuff, not much good for expresses. Runs for cover... Thanks Rob, Google Maps is a fantastic resource and I've been using it a lot recently to check out pointwork, track runs etc. I'm definitely sticking with OO on this one - "Modern Image" (especially the period I'm modelling which is effectively from 2011 onwards) only appears to be really catered for in OO (and yes, I'm aware there are a few 66's out there in N ) but even then it seems to struggle - take a look at Hornby and Bachmann release lists for this year, its the "compulsory" 66s and 60s - the only rather nice surprise from Bachmann was 20901 otherwise, not much going in the way of 155's/156's or the other DMUs that you see out and about. The 220s appear to have suffered at the hands of the marketing people and eBay doesn't appear to be holding much either... Anyway, rant over, back to work... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJS1977 Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Looking at the plan, two things strike me: 1) The fiddle yard looks very awkward - most of the points will be difficult to get at under the terminus and the sidings facing both ways like that loses quite a bit of length. 2) The double track dropping down between the other two lines seems very reminiscent of CJF's "Fore Street" (PSL Book of Model Railway Trackplans) and similar, the main difference being that on Fore Street the four tracks continue right until they disappear back under the terminus, where the two outer tracks burrow down to form a low-level reversing loop. Of course, the snag with this in a GW environment is that the GWR main line is paired by speed, not direction! If a similar arrangement could be achieved, I'd be inclined to increase the facilities at the top station and replace the fiddle yard sidings with simple loops. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 Plans look good!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted May 17, 2013 Author Share Posted May 17, 2013 Looking at the plan, two things strike me: 1) The fiddle yard looks very awkward - most of the points will be difficult to get at under the terminus and the sidings facing both ways like that loses quite a bit of length. 2) The double track dropping down between the other two lines seems very reminiscent of CJF's "Fore Street" (PSL Book of Model Railway Trackplans) and similar, the main difference being that on Fore Street the four tracks continue right until they disappear back under the terminus, where the two outer tracks burrow down to form a low-level reversing loop. Of course, the snag with this in a GW environment is that the GWR main line is paired by speed, not direction! If a similar arrangement could be achieved, I'd be inclined to increase the facilities at the top station and replace the fiddle yard sidings with simple loops. I agree that the FY could be easier to access and that I've lost some length in the sidings, however I just don't have the space to put in a points ladder for loops *and* curve back on to the mainline. The longest sidings will still allow for a "loco+6" or 5-car HST as far as I can tell, and that's plenty long enough for me (at the moment the longest "passenger" set I have is just one each of power/dummy car HST set and the longest freight is a 66 + 4 intermodals). I have a cunning plan for access to/monitoring of the FY though, but it needs testing out first... Thanks for the feedback Plans look good!! Thanks, can't wait to get started on it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted May 17, 2013 Author Share Posted May 17, 2013 The loft is complete: I didn't realise that those water tanks were satying so I might have to do something "interesting" to get around/past them without blocking the hatch (which I also thought would be moving to a more central location), however I'm really pleased with the work and I can't wait to get started on the layout! The next step will probably be to revive the Blockwall Junction baseboards and get a proper sense of size and then the real work will probably start sometime in mid-late June once various family things are complete. I'll post some pics of the Blockwall boards once they're up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
d winpenny Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Lofts looking nice an neat looking forward to see the next phase, david Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdw7300 Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Really interested to see how you get on with the loft space. The pitch / height looks exactly the same as mine & I had almost discounted the loft space on the grounds on limited head height. The boarding out looks really smart. All the best Sam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beresford Junction Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Hi Matt Looks like a great space you've created there and I look forward to Blockwall Junction making a re-appearance. Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted May 17, 2013 Author Share Posted May 17, 2013 Really interested to see how you get on with the loft space. The pitch / height looks exactly the same as mine & I had almost discounted the loft space on the grounds on limited head height. The boarding out looks really smart. All the best Sam Hi Sam, The pitch of the roof does make things interesting (for example I don't think there will be much of a Backscene for this layout!), in the "centre" of the room the clearance is just shy of 6ft so I have to duck slightly (I'm about 5'10/5'11) but the plan is to have a seat to operate the layout from to avoid RSI in my neck from being bent double all the time. One thing I want to do is try to build a pull-out workbench into part of the layout for soldering etc, but we'll see if that's something that happens as part of the early build or a "retro-fit" as I go along. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted May 17, 2013 Author Share Posted May 17, 2013 Hi Matt Looks like a great space you've created there and I look forward to Blockwall Junction making a re-appearance. Phil Thank Phil, Blockwall will make a very brief reappearance (or at least a couple of the boards that weren't damaged in the move will ) and then I'll probably re-use the timber to make the new baseboards. We were living in rented accommodation when I built started Blockwall (this is the first house we've ever owned!) so it had to be portable and the baseboards were designed with that in mind. Now that this is a bit more permanent (we plan on being here at least another 18 years!) I can make the baseboards a bit more solid and take the lessons I've learned from blockwall into account. Matt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold fishytrains Posted May 17, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 17, 2013 The loft flooring looks very good. Having a good floor down makes quite a difference, as I know from experience! The roof is quite shallow, certainly compared to the roof in my loft, but it does not stop you from setting up a good layout. Will you need access to the water tanks from above? If not, could the boards not just go on top? I don't have that issue, no water tanks in the loft! I look forward to seeing further progress. Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted May 27, 2013 Author Share Posted May 27, 2013 So following a relaxing holiday and two days of digging in the garden and moving stuff from the garage into the loft, I managed to remove the legs from the blockwall Baseboards and run all three of my locos up a 6` length of track. Unfortunately I can't find the connector to provide power to the merg kit, so i had to make do with my ezCommand (glad I kept it after all!). I'll pop to maplin tomorrow and try to pick up the correct connector so I can test out the merg system as well... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted May 28, 2013 Author Share Posted May 28, 2013 Forgot to say last night, the legs needed to come off the baseboards because they were too tall to comforatbly work on in the loft! I'm going to reduce the legs to 2' high and see if that's any better. Looks like I've going to be sat down to work on/operate this layout... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted May 29, 2013 Author Share Posted May 29, 2013 IT LIVES!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amFuX2wxblI The MERG electronics have survived the move and I can regain control of my locos from the Raspberry Pi. Next step, world dominiation! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold McC Posted May 30, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 30, 2013 Wow - looks like a fantastic space!! Can't wait to follow! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted May 30, 2013 Author Share Posted May 30, 2013 Thanks. I'm, hoping to get up into the loft again tonight and start to measure up properly for the layout. It's looking like it will be a 16' scenic with a 10' "secondary-scene" that leads to a FY that's approx 10' the "secondary scene" will be modelled, however it's mainly there to prevent two 90 degree curves and a straight to linke the FY and the main scenic. If I do get up there tonight I'll probably post yet another (!) revised track plan in the next couple of days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 So I managed to get into the loft last night and take some rough measurements to complement the "proper" ones I took previously. The result is: The shorter "arm" will be the FY, with a maximum bay size of 6', the curvature will have some scenics to break between the FY and the main board and the long arm (16' in total with approx 13' for the "main" scenics) will have a raised terminus station at the back and a container terminal at the front - I'm starting to think that this layout should be called "50 Shades of Blockwall"... The terminus will probably only be raised approx 2" from the baseboard to give a nice gentle slope from the split points that connect the "main line" with the freight area. All comments welcome as always! Matt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold fishytrains Posted May 31, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 31, 2013 Looks like there is plenty of operating potential there. Why the name change? Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 Looks like there is plenty of operating potential there. Why the name change? Mike Why not?! It stemmed from one of the earlier posts on either this thread or my one about traction between reading and didcot in which someone suggested that if I moved the station to the Appleford area of Oxford (i.e. North of Didcot) I'd be able to have a wider variety of traction. That seemed sensible at the time, and I changed the name in my head. I'm now probably going to re-locate the whole thing closer to London and fast forward about 3 years from now so I can run my 92 with OHLE *and* keep my HST set (let's be honest, the new Intercity Express trains won't be in service until at least 2017 and the 43's, 20's and 66's will still be going strong until well after that date!), however "Appleford" is generic enough to be placed anywhere in the home counties IMHO so it stayed as the name. I agree with the operating potential, I'm looking forward to the point at which I can tell JMRI to send a 66 with a rake of intermodals from the FY to Road 4 in the freight and watch all the points change and the train move "magically"... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted June 6, 2013 Author Share Posted June 6, 2013 And another track plan change: The main change is a cross-over at the station throat instead of the double-slip, and I've then rearranged the fiddleyard to fit into the reduced space that I have available (now that I've measured up, it turns out those water tanks were bigger than I had hoped!). The main change to the FY is the addition of a headshunt with storage capability for multiple locomotives meaning that I can have a number of services prepped in the FY and run a loco around the train to pull it out and on to the layout. I've also got two shorter sidings in the FY for EMU/DMU traffic and two long sidings for freight/HST sets. The final thing I did last night was play with some of the levels: In the "goods area" is 66701 with an intermodal service, 92032 (or at least it will be once I've renumbered and re-liveried it!) running LE and a rake of tanker wagons in the background. an HST set with some (very!) old coaches sits on the upper level in the "station". I think the overall effect is quite nice and I'm really starting to look forward to all the work involved! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ess1uk Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 great layout, like it alot Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted June 8, 2013 Author Share Posted June 8, 2013 so instead of buying some wood and starting on the baseboards, I bought and fitted a loksound4 to my class 66 today. :-) Ah well, maybe next week I'll start the woodwork... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted June 9, 2013 Author Share Posted June 9, 2013 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted June 12, 2013 Author Share Posted June 12, 2013 Tonight I managed to get into the loft for a couple of hours and put together the first attempt at frames for my baseboard. The idea is that I have narrow supporting framework that the baseboards then lower into before being secured in place with a latch. This means that I can then lift out individual baseboards to either work on or to access the boxes etc. in the eves behind that section. I've also discovered that due to the slope of the eves, I need to loose half a foot from my layout somehow on the width of the scenics... I'll work out whether I'm going to sacrifice a siding in the frieght yard or a platform on the station tomorrow... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted June 13, 2013 Author Share Posted June 13, 2013 I'm wondering if this might solve my lack of baseboard width: I'm concerned that it looks a bit crammed in now though and I haven't got a clue what to do with the FY - any ideas? I've attached the XTrckCad file to this post, please feel free to download and suggest! Thanks, Matt ApplefordJunction5.xtc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.