iamjamie Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I also have a thread in the Boxfile/Micro Layout section, which goes in to a little more detail about the overall construction of this layout designed to fit inside two boxfiles. But I wanted to post the track plan in this section as well, just to get any advice on whether the track plan is realistic at all. It is very loosely based on Bembridge on the Isle of Wight, although I've shifted some things around so that it fits on the baseboard. So, this layout shouldn't be considered a faithful recreation of Bembridge. And, with that in mind, I wanted to know whether this track plan is anywhere close to being realistic, perhaps if it was a station that might have been built in a similar location with similar prototypical practices... At the moment I'm undecided about signalling. I've read that Bembridge had it's signals removed in the 1920s, but, again, as this isn't an exact recreation of Bembridge I'd be interested to know where they might be located on this new track layout (just because it would be nice to have them). Unfortunately I don't really have much knowledge of what would be prototypical in terms of track layouts and operations, so any guidance would be much appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennyboy Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 It looks pretty prototypical to me, but then again some of the track plans that you see on the real railway don't look prototypical! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyMay Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 there is a problem insofar as the arrangement was only really used at Bembridge, and therefore screams out as Bembridge. One of the best ways to capture the atmosphere of a prototype is to avoid specifics but use typicalities. For example, a generic common design of signal box is better than a 1-off characteristic of one location. Applying that with its runround turntable fails. It's also impossible to shunt the coalpens with a loco unless the siding on the right is exclusively used as a headshunt, which rather begs the question as to why there is a extra point and extra reversal designed into the scheme. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_1066 Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 If I could make a suggestion. You could avoid the problem of having to keep the siding clear to shunt the kick back siding by using two sets of Y points instead This allows access to the kickback siding from the run around loop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DS239 Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 There is a problem insofar as the arrangement was only really used at Bembridge, and therefore screams out as Bembridge. ??? Although an uncommon arrangement, Bembridge wasn't the only station with a turntable at the end of the run-round loop... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamjamie Posted November 6, 2014 Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 It's also impossible to shunt the coalpens with a loco unless the siding on the right is exclusively used as a headshunt, which rather begs the question as to why there is a extra point and extra reversal designed into the scheme. The reason why I wanted to try and fit an extra siding somewhere on the track plan was to add a bit more operational variation and interest to the layout. Yes, I am aware that it is a very awkward arrangement and the reason why I posted it here was to find out if this arrangement would, realistically, be completely out of the question or not? Or, would this arrangement be workable, even though there would be a lot of double-handling and awkwardness(!) I suppose that would certainly serve the purpose of variation and interest!!! But, seriously, if this kind of arrangement is completely out-of-the-question I would have to find an alternative... If I could make a suggestion. You could avoid the problem of having to keep the siding clear to shunt the kick back siding by using two sets of Y points instead This allows access to the kickback siding from the run around loop. I quite like this idea, I'll have to have a play around and see if I can fit that into the space available... (The total baseboard size is only 720 x 240mm). Like I said above, it would be nice (if possible) to have this extra siding in somewhere to add a bit more interest to the operation. ??? Although an uncommon arrangement, Bembridge wasn't the only station with a turntable at the end of the run-round loop... Yes, I'd agree with this... There were at least a couple on the Isle of Wight at one point, which hopefully fits in with this being a layout based in a similar location, rather than that location exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCB Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 It is prototypical if you like 1850 style modeling, 0-4-0 tender engines "Copperknobs" and the like, 4 wheel coaches but there were very few examples which lasted into the 20th century apart from Bembridge which I believe generally was only used as a sector plate and not for turning locos. At the end of the day its your layout Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold TheSignalEngineer Posted November 6, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 6, 2014 At least two previous threads discussing turntables in such circumstances http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57454-small-turntable-as-part-of-the-run-round-loop/?p=710364 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/91783-turntable-at-a-terminal-station/?hl=%2Bturntable+%2Bend+%2Bline&do=findComment&comment=1637433 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacific231G Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 It's also impossible to shunt the coalpens with a loco unless the siding on the right is exclusively used as a headshunt, which rather begs the question as to why there is a extra point and extra reversal designed into the scheme. Which was why the GWR didn't do that at Ashburton.... except they did- the mill siding was a kick back from the goods shed siding. It was apparently a pain to shunt but for a small layout that could be a virtue. It does though cut the effective siding length Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted November 7, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 7, 2014 Kick back sidings could be shunted using a rope or a chain not easy on a model as it would need the 'Hand of God' Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamjamie Posted November 7, 2014 Author Share Posted November 7, 2014 At least two previous threads discussing turntables in such circumstances http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57454-small-turntable-as-part-of-the-run-round-loop/?p=710364 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/91783-turntable-at-a-terminal-station/?hl=%2Bturntable+%2Bend+%2Bline&do=findComment&comment=1637433 Thanks for those links... Although it's not the turntable that I'm particularly worried about, it's the rest of the track plan and this kickback siding (as I now know it to be called thanks to you guys!). Kick back sidings could be shunted using a rope or a chain not easy on a model as it would need the 'Hand of God' Don I think this is what I'm kind of getting at.... So this sort of kickback siding could be prototypical, if shunted by hand? (As an aside, I don't know if coal would generally be avoided being shunted by hand as it is quite heavy? or did that not really come into it?). But, for the purposes of making it work in model form, would sidings that were normally hand shunted ever be shunted by loco if there were occasions when it was possible to have access with a loco? I know this would create some awkward movements, but I'm not too worried about that if it was something that is a possibility in real life... The alternative is having this as a hand-shunted siding which is merely a decorative feature on the model, if that is the only real-life possibility, or just getting rid of the siding altogether. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted November 7, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 7, 2014 Shunting by hand would be done using a pinch bar and some effort but used mainly for a short move such as moving a wagon into the goods shed. Rope or Chain shunting is done with the loco running along a parallel line with the rope or shunt attaches to the wagon so the loco drags it along. It is quite a dangerous move as the chain is exerting a sideways pull on both the loco and the wagon so slow speed only. The hand of god refers to the fact that such an action would need the operator to attach the chain by hand. Touching the models to coulple or uncouple is commonly termed 'The Hand of God' as a large full sized hand from above looks just like that to a viewer. Personally in 0 gauge I use three links couplings which I connect up with a hook so it wouldn't bother me, but a lot of those who favour automatic couplings feel it destroys the illusion. For me it is better than having large lumps of metal or plastic couplings which were not there on the real things. That said I do use auto couplings in 2mm, three links in that size are too difficult for my eyesight. The Kickback siding is fairly common in full size where siding lengths were often longer. In a cramped model you will find the access siding will need to be cleared to get wagons in and out of the kickback so it is not very convenient. Jon idea in post 4 would be more useful. A lot depends on whether you enjoy operating or building if it is the building of the layout that interests you any awkwardness in operating will not matter so much unless you are stuck with it for a two day exhibition! Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
flubrush Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 Trevor Nunn uses chain shunting on the dock section of his East Lynn & Nunstanton layout. There's a short clip of the chain shunting on this Youtube video, starting at 7' 8" in. Trevor started chain shunting on his previous layout - Wicken - and it was quite an enjoyable session to handle two or three wagons with a tram engine and a chain. :-) Jim. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted November 8, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 8, 2014 A lovely illustration of what I meant by the hand of god but quite acceptable to me. It was Trevor's previous layout Wicken where I first saw a chain shunt. Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamjamie Posted November 8, 2014 Author Share Posted November 8, 2014 That's a really great video! I've got to say I've never seen chain shunting done on a model before. I've always assumed that automatic couplings would be my preferred choice, but I've never really thought that hard about it before. I must say the "hand-of-god" doesn't really bother my as much as I thought it would do. In fact I quite like it. I suppose real railways ran with a great deal of human interaction, so it's quite fitting that model railways should do as well. I should have mentioned earlier that I'm planning to build this in 2mm Scale, either using Finetrax N Gauge track or Easitrac. Currently the points I'm using are from the Finetrax CAD Drawings (A5 size). I'm not sure how readily they can be substituted for the Easitrac equivalents (in terms of geometry I mean, I'll know I'll have to adapt the locos to the correct gauge). Anyway, certainly lots to think about... So back to playing about on the computer and seeing what I can fit in! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted November 8, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 8, 2014 If the turnout is A5 you should be able to change it for an easitrac one although being rather on the tight side I do not expect the 2mmSA to make an 1:5 cast crossing. I have been trialing a test turnout using the same principle for the 2mmSA but it was a B7. Actually it isn't hard to build your own the association has some helpful jigs. If you can I would use an A6 the curve is a little easier. Although you make start with small locos the urge to run a big one even if a bit out of place is hard to resist. Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamjamie Posted November 17, 2014 Author Share Posted November 17, 2014 This is a much rougher sketch of what I'm now thinking of doing... It means that there's quite a bit of ambitious track work to do. Everything is based on the geometry of B6 turnouts, and I'll now be going down the 2mm SA route rather than Finetrax. The reason for this is that this kind of track work isn't possible using the Finetrax kits at the moment, and I've always wanted to do a 2mm layout anyway! Instead of several standard turnouts I'll need to make a tandem turnout and a slip (single or double? I think it might be double). Some of the curves and angles aren't quite right, but I'm confident that there is enough space to fit everything in. I've been trying to use Templot to generate all the track work, but I just can't get my head around it at the moment... It does mean that the siding for the coal pens is very short however... I'm not sure if this will be a particular problem or not? It will probably become a little longer when the geometry around the slip is made more correct anyway... The three-way turnout and the slip are reminicent of Ventnor station, so although I've certainly departed from a faithful reproduction of Bembridge I'm still confident that this could be a fictional station located somewhere on the Isle of Wight. If I ever get my head around Templot I might try and re-do this on the computer. More likely, when the baseboards arrive (which should be very soon) I'll try laying everything out by hand using paper templates. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold russ p Posted November 17, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 17, 2014 I believe Alston had a turntable until DMUs took over in late 50s early 60s Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamjamie Posted January 30, 2015 Author Share Posted January 30, 2015 I haven't updated this thread lately... I've got another thread in the micro-layouts section, but I thought I'd post my current idea for the track plan here, as I'm about to commit to it and start on the track work. I've posted the original track layout for Bembridge too for comparison. The right-hand side of the layout is faithful to the prototype, it's the left-hand side where I've changed things slightly. This is so I can compress the layout into the space available. Rather than having the coal siding in the space before the platform, I've incorporated it into the platform as a bay siding and relocated the coal pens. I understand that generally coal, because of the dirtiness, would be kept away from the station area which is why I've relocated them away from the bay platform. So although this makes it less "Bembridge" prototypical this is, in fact, more generally prototypical? If there's any examples of coal staithes being incorporated into a bay siding then I might go down this route instead. I'm tempted to post this track plan in the signalling section of the site, but I don't really want to make a third thread on this layout(!) Although the line was operated as one engine in steam, it was fully signalled when it opened. I haven't been able to find any pictures of the signalling for this station, so any hints or ideas would be much appreciated. Of course, this is section of the layout that I've changed most from the prototype, so it may be completely different anyway! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG John Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 If you did want to avoid the turntable, you could hide a sector plate under a train shed, like I've done. It saves a lot of space without making it look like Bembridge. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/70418-small-broad-and-totally-pointless/page-2&do=findComment&comment=1034672 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyMay Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Which was why the GWR didn't do that at Ashburton.... except they did- the mill siding was a kick back from the goods shed siding. It was apparently a pain to shunt but for a small layout that could be a virtue. It does though cut the effective siding length No, sorry Mr knowitall they didn't. The siding at Ashburton was shunted by a horse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 3, 2015 No, sorry Mr knowitall they didn't. The siding at Ashburton was shunted by a horse. Not exactly friendly. Are you claiming it was never shunted using a loco? I have heard different. Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacific231G Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 No, sorry Mr knowitall they didn't. The siding at Ashburton was shunted by a horse. I don't doubt they would have used a horse- if one was available, would a station that small have had a horse? - or a chain as Mickey says from prototype knowledge. As to who is being a knowitall I'll leave that to others to decide. I do know that I was told the station was difficult to shunt when I was volunteering on the Dart Valley in 1967-68 before the line from Buckfastleigh was lost to the A38 and Asburton was still intact though derelict. I was by the way introduced there to manual shunting with a pinch bar so I'm well aware that shunting didn't always involve locos. The OP's question was, could this trackplan be protoypical and, given that this particular siding arrangement DID exist at Ashburton then the answer has to be yes. Whether it's a good track layout is another matter and that depends on whether you want a station that is straightforward to shunt or more of a shunting puzzle. If you've ever looked at John Allen's classic "Timesaver" you'll have noticed that it has, coincidentally I'm sure, the same track arrrangement as Ashburton. The kickback siding isn't impossible to shunt with a loco, just very difficult. Update: A local group is working to prevent Ashburton Station from being demolished for development and eventually reconnected to the South Devon Railway. They seem to have the support of the local councils and It is such a classic branch line terminus that it surely deserves to be supported. https://friendsofashburtonstation.co.uk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.