This might even get built!

[MattWallace]

Hi all,

 

I visited the Forest of Dean Railway Show over the weekend and I realised something - I'm *way* too ambitious with what I want my layouts to do.  It turns out size isn't everything after all.

 

I have spent hours since playing with xtrkcad and going into the loft to move points around etc. and I have finally come up with the following design:

 

 

This is a freight layout set in the present day with a small wagon works and a fuelling station incorporated into the overall layout.

 

The services arrive from a cassette-based fiddle-yard on the right of the layout and run past the sign-in/mess huts into the unloading/loading areas.  If required, a pilot loco can pull the wagons back into the headshunt that connects to the fuelling point (probably against all regulations but hey, rule #1 ) and the main loco can run back out and away onto the "mainline".

 

The pilot loco can also propel wagons into the wagon works to be fixed and main locos can head for the fuelling point to resupply.

 

The random wobbly line is a road (yeah, freehand drawing doesn't really work in XTrkCad) and I *may* at some-point fit a faller roadway system but that's a long way off yet!

 

Road traffic enters the site from the left and engineers/operatives can park in the carpark before crossing the footbridge to sign in.

 

The only thing I haven't decided on yet is the type of Freight that will be at the site.  I live in South East Wales, so most Freight around here is either containers, oil or coal, however I feel this layout lends itself more to Aggregates or Clay so any advice on these areas would be greatly appreciated.

 

It looks like I may have a whole week to myself at the end of the month to get as much of this done as possible and as the layout uses existing track etc. I'm hoping I can get quite a lot done!

 

Thanks in advance for all the advice that I know you'll give,

 

Kind regards,

 

Matt

[Nick Holliday]

Even with a pilot engine, you may find the lack of a run-round causes problems.

[MattWallace]

Even with a pilot engine, you may find the lack of a run-round causes problems.

 

Yeah, it's a problem but I simply don't have the space for another 2ft to fit one in.

 

I'd cite Rule #1 here but actually it's purely because to run an end-to-end modern image that isn't a MPD you seem to required at least 20ft of space

[jon_1066]

You can fit a run around loop in by putting a cross over in on the main line between 9 and 10 feet (near the portakabin).  That would then let the arriving loco shunt the wagons into or out of either loading siding and depart on the correct left running line.

[LongRail]

Matt,

 

as you have time allocated at the end of the month why not lay the track, connect the power and see how it operates.

You will then know exaclty how easy or not it is to move trains and locos around, you dont want it to easy otherwise you may get bored.

 

You could add a cross over between the two unloading roads beyond the buildings which woudl allow a loco to disconnect and run aroud on the other unloading road

[tamperman36]

If the wagon repair depot is privatly owned then you could use any sort of wagon as they would put out tenders to the wagon owners for repair contracts, so virtually any wagon could be seen.

[DCB]

You have plenty of room for a classic GWR style branch terminus there, or a preserved classic GWR branch terminus to bring it into the 21st century, there is potential for 4 Mk1 coach plus pacific trains  but the concept of a fueling point and wagon works in the 21st century is surely flawed? unless you really enjoy scratch building wagons.  Why not go preserved with class 50s on 4 coach sets a la Bodmin Wenford, and stick a pannier or 42X or Tornado or Beattie well tank double heading with a T9 on when you get bored?  

More seriously I  can see almost no operational interest in the plan at all, probably photograph and look OK but there is not even a run round loop.

[Rivercider]

Barton Hill Depot in Bristol might provide some inspiration for you, there are pictures on Flickr taken in the last couple of years.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/114594256@N07/14785185681/in/photolist-owvWAv-adsCq8-nFzNnb-7NcbYy-jt25U5-ece4eF-9wb5oR-9we8tQ-onb7Xg-ozFb2t-7PzGGn-ozEfmp-oKymVu-coRGns-f8XUUs-5Kf5gL-dtB1kh-azWLyC-haJgjq-8Hfzez-8HiGwm-7YjYdi-6E5zqY-95GMVd-ay6UoS-hXXoDf-kt8enh-ecmqG9-bfv4Ec-odekSD-j2KLC4-ijD5mb-j366bw-jRZ6Y6-5gGFqV-6sR4e5-oA4bSC-fjY5QU-dYPuH7-oE6hkg-8fZrdT-fjHXW6-pd4bDL-ozFb5V-fjHYW6-cBbUGN-fjYb15-7JiCQt-doiq2T-a3F9pB

The whole depot is quite extensive with four sheds, but if you exclude the Voyager maintenance shed it becomes smaller.

It is seven years since I worked there when as well as EWS locos visiting Freightliner locos were also fuelled.

Since the demise of the RES parcels working the depot carried out repairs of EWS bogie coal hoppers and steel carriers.

 

If you exclude the Voyager shed there is no run-round actually within the depot confines, though I agree with Jon regarding provision of a crossover being useful.

 

cheers 

[MattWallace]

Hi all,

 

Thanks for the feedback so far!

 

You have plenty of room for a classic GWR style branch terminus there, or a preserved classic GWR branch terminus to bring it into the 21st century, there is potential for 4 Mk1 coach plus pacific trains  but the concept of a fueling point and wagon works in the 21st century is surely flawed? unless you really enjoy scratch building wagons.  Why not go preserved with class 50s on 4 coach sets a la Bodmin Wenford, and stick a pannier or 42X or Tornado or Beattie well tank double heading with a T9 on when you get bored?  

More seriously I  can see almost no operational interest in the plan at all, probably photograph and look OK but there is not even a run round loop.

 

Green/Blue/Black + Steam really doesn't do it for me, even in preserved form I'm afraid!  I'd usual invoke rule #1 here, but I think that you and the others have a good point about the runaround loop missing.  I need to work out how I'm going to get that in there.

 

Barton Hill Depot in Bristol might provide some inspiration for you, there are pictures on Flickr taken in the last couple of years.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/114594256@N07/14785185681/in/photolist-owvWAv-adsCq8-nFzNnb-7NcbYy-jt25U5-ece4eF-9wb5oR-9we8tQ-onb7Xg-ozFb2t-7PzGGn-ozEfmp-oKymVu-coRGns-f8XUUs-5Kf5gL-dtB1kh-azWLyC-haJgjq-8Hfzez-8HiGwm-7YjYdi-6E5zqY-95GMVd-ay6UoS-hXXoDf-kt8enh-ecmqG9-bfv4Ec-odekSD-j2KLC4-ijD5mb-j366bw-jRZ6Y6-5gGFqV-6sR4e5-oA4bSC-fjY5QU-dYPuH7-oE6hkg-8fZrdT-fjHXW6-pd4bDL-ozFb5V-fjHYW6-cBbUGN-fjYb15-7JiCQt-doiq2T-a3F9pB

The whole depot is quite extensive with four sheds, but if you exclude the Voyager maintenance shed it becomes smaller.

It is seven years since I worked there when as well as EWS locos visiting Freightliner locos were also fuelled.

Since the demise of the RES parcels working the depot carried out repairs of EWS bogie coal hoppers and steel carriers.

 

If you exclude the Voyager shed there is no run-round actually within the depot confines, though I agree with Jon regarding provision of a crossover being useful.

 

cheers 

 

Wow, I'd completely missed Barton Hill as a possible basis for this.  With St. Phillips Causeway (or a variation thereon) to hide the exit for a short passenger line into a FY and the opportunity to convert the road-under bridges to another exit at the other end of the layout, this could be a very interesting area to explore...

 

If the wagon repair depot is privatly owned then you could use any sort of wagon as they would put out tenders to the wagon owners for repair contracts, so virtually any wagon could be seen.

 

So stick up a custom sign and invoke rule #1?

 

Thanks again,

 

Matt

[MattWallace]

OK, two more ideas, these ones based on Barton Hill.

 

Still no run-around but there is a headshunt so that wagons can be pulled away from the delivering loco.

 

I had hoped to avoid a TMD but it looks like that's the only way to do a sub-40sqft layout based around the present day.

 

One day I'll get permission to use the garden so I can model Aberthaw -> Portbury Coal in OO, but until then this will have to do!

 

The ideas are as follows:

 

 

and

 

 

The thoughts with the first one are that the "down" line would need to be clear in order to do any shunting in and out of the yard,so I added the small headshunt in the second version so that I could play around in the yard itself.

 

The large green arc is a dual-carriage way in the style of St. Phillip's Causeway.

 

There are two 5ft fiddle yards, one at either end.  They will use cassettes to store rolling stock so I can get a 66 + 4 wagons in on the layout.

 

The "mainline" will allow me to run 150/153/158/Desiro/Voyagers in up to 5-car configurations and these should also fit into the cassettes.

 

Thoughts and opinions please...

[Flying Pig]

You have the makings of a credible rationalised branchline there.  Originally, there would have been double track, a loop feeding the works with trailing access from both directions and an adjacent station:

 

 

The branch was later singled and closed beyond the goods loop; a new passenger platform was provided a short way up the line from the old station. This is served by local trains only and you'll have to work hard to justify anything like a voyager. Part of the old up line was retained and the pointwork at the down end of the goods loop was rearranged to form a runround.  Trains to and from the works run round here of course, but so can other trains serving different industries up the line if you want more freight variety.

 

 

Edit: the pale lines here are lifted track.  There isn't a crossover from the platform line to the goods loop.

 

 

There wouldn't be any fixed fuelling facilities for the main line engines in a small installation like this, though it's just possible you might see one in the loop being fuelled from a road tanker, or serviced by a man with a van.  There could be facilities for a works shunter within the wagon works of course.  I'd keep the headshunt within the works, but place it closer to the works entrance, so it can serve all the sidings.

 

You could easily scheme this as a revision of your original plan, though it would benefit from more than 1' of width.

[LongRail]

Matt,

 

Looks good to me assuming the this is a mainline (fiddle yards at either end) and not a branch line

The yard is then off the mainline with all access on and off the yard is to the right.

Then you can run your voyagers and shunt the yard

[MattWallace]

Thanks both,

 

I was going for a "mainline" approach rather than a "revised" branch line with the tracks heading right to Temple Meads and left/down to the West Country.

 

I'm not going to be able to make an OO gauge layout prototypical in the space available to me so I think this will probably be as close as I can get.

 

The fun in this for me is going to be getting it all wired up and under computer control so I'm not overly worried about the fact I've only got two tracks on the "mainline" and not four (especially as Barton Hill has a similar arrangement: http://binged.it/1xPgHAH ).

 

Thanks for all the advice.

 

Matt

[MattWallace]

... and I've gone back to the original idea and reworked it:

 

 

The wagon works are gone and they have been replaced by a loading/unloading area for road traffic.

 

I've added a headshunt for incoming services and a double track at the fueling point for stabling the locomotives once they have run around the service.

 

Looking at this, I've realise that the crossover for the loading/unloading is in the wrong place so I'll move that further to the right later on and probably flip it s that you can get from both sides of the loading/unloading area into the fuel point.

 

Freight only for this layout, perhaps I'll do a shelf layout with a small BLT set in the valleys at a later date to justify purchasing a 153...

 

Thoughts welcome on the above

[LongRail]

Matt,

 

personally would move the cross over between the car park and the footbridge and hand it otherwise everything has to arrive on the road furthest from the arrival road. (this is assuming you have only one road connected to the fiddle yard)

This wont allow you to reverse directly into the fuelling point but you need some difficult moves to keep the interest.

If you could fit in a small terminus platform adjacent to the headshunt this would justify the class 153 purchase, this would add further moves to consider when running the freight trains

[MattWallace]

OK, attempt 3 (and I think a much nicer layout!)

 

 

The two lower roads proceed onto the fiddle yard, allowing for a traverser or cassette-based area and both an "up" and a "down" line with ground signals.

 

The crossover has now been moved to just under the footbridge and a judicial use of a double slip instead of a pair of points means that there is access to either loading road from both entrance roads and access to the fueling point from both loading/unloading roads.

 

There is a large area for "goods exchange" between road and rail as well as a staff carpark, rest area in the PortaKabins and access for fuel bowsers to restock the fuel tanks.

 

I've decided that I am going to make this freight only for a few reasons, but mainly because I haven't actually purchased the 153 yet and I think that the Unix philosophy of "Do one thing, but do it well" applies equally to model railways and computer programming!

 

Thoughts?

 

Matt

[LongRail]

Looks good

[trisonic]

I’m glad you have decided not to put a station in. Take up too much room anyway! Freight is far more interesting...

Good luck with your planning and stick to your idea. Btw I thought that your first plan was interesting - the lack of a loop just makes it more so.

 

Best, Pete.

[Chimer]

If your fuel supplies came by rail, not road bowser, that would give you an extra operational twist ..... not enough shunting for me as it stands, but each to our own!

[MattWallace]

The main plan behind the operational part of this layout is to be able to automate the entire thing via JMRI, so shunting etc. can't be too complex.

 

Having said that, I am seriously considering having the ability to add Faller Road System at a later date to enable the movement of road traffic as well

 

Cheers,

 

Matt

[LongRail]

Now your talking having seen what this can do at Minature Wunderland in Hamburg I wish I had a layout that permitted me to add moving vehicles

[MattWallace]

So tonight I've cut out the cork-bases for the layout.

 

Previous attempts at this have been overly complicated with an excellent (but unnecessary!) finish so tonight I've printed out the layout in 1:1 scale from Xtrkcad, taped it to the cork and cut around it using a rotary cutter:

 

 

Next steps are to cut the baseboards to size (they are currently 3x2ft and I need 3x1ft) and then get the cork onto the layout so that it all links up correctly.

 

Cheers,

 

Matt

[MattWallace]

Progress last night and during my lunch break today:

 

The baseboards have been cut to size:

 

 

Double-sided tape has been applied along the length:

 

 

A second print out of the layout has been fixed to the board:

 

 

and finally the cork I cut out the other day has been fixed over the top of the new print out:

 

 

Next to do the remaining two baseboards and then start laying track.

[jon_1066]

Nice progress - hideous rug! 

[MattWallace]

Nice progress - hideous rug! 

 

lol, thanks and...ummm.. thanks?

 

Ikea at its best and three kids means durable is preferable!