Danfilm007

10 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

 

Yes, and following Simon's clarification that it is a schematic not a scale drawing I don't see a problem.

You can always do an "over the top" style station like Nottingham in this situation to minimise the buildings on the platforms?

Anyway, today's "brainwave" is followed by seeing Hornby Magazine's Grand Central layout. As prev suggested, I could use scenic up the fiddle yard area, to do something similar like the bottom of their layout for the sidings? 

https://www.keymodelworld.com/article/building-great-central-railway

50 minutes ago, simon b said:

The length of everything in that plan is wrong, as I said it is only to give an idea and isnt to scale.

 

There is nothing wrong with the Oxford road plan, just trying to offer some alternative ideas that might lead to a more pleasing design.

I certainly appreciate it (and am enjoying the debates going on too!) and I like the ideas - all are welcome!

2 minutes ago, simon b said:

 

The great thing about this plan is that you dont need the outer crossovers oxford road has, all reversals are done in the bay roads. You can have your freight and loco hauled passengers going around the circuits via the outer platforms, then bring out a multiple unit from the bays, do a few circuits and bring it into the opposite end bay platform. No need for multiple units to use the fiddle yard at all, saving space for freight trains.

 

I've drawn it with a freight loop on each side, so you can overtake trains. The real station had more loops than that but it's up to you if you want to keep them or have none at all.

Food for thought! It does flow quite nicely. I must admit I'm a bit of a sucker for the way Oxford Road flows with its point works and tightness but it does obviously work better your way

6 hours ago, simon b said:

 

I know Leicester central was mentioned a few posts ago, I wonder if something like that might better suit your stock? This is just a quick go in anyrail to give you an idea, it isnt to scale at all.

Interesting idea! Certainly is an interesting concept. Part of my reason for an Oxford Road style station was the variety of running but this station is more flexible in terms of reversal bays etc! 

On 24/01/2024 at 18:16, simon b said:

Dan, what sort of trains are you planning to run on this? Mostly multiple units, or longer loco hauled passenger trains?

Mostly DMUs/EMUs and a couple of Loco hauled passenger stock

1 hour ago, TravisM said:

 

I like this plan over your latest creation as everything flows nicely.  By putting in carriage sidings, your creating more work for yourself if your running it as a one man band, or if you have others in to help run it, do you have enough space in the operating well without getting in each others way?

You are right, I think I'll abandon the idea od the sidings as it seems a bit much. I think I'll steal the changing heights aspect though!

Me again!

I had some thoughts the other day. There is a layout on here that I can't recall the name of but it's a Northern modern image layout with some carriage sidings outside the station, plus layouts like Bradfield Gloucester Square where there is a mix of both station and sidings. I've taken some inspiration from Stockport station, so I have added in both another through platform at the top (which I may "dead end" or put a point on the lift-out section for it) and some basic sidings and a headshunt. The station at Stockport is also a bit easier - it starts in a bit of a cutting and ends on a viaduct so it could be a slightly more practical thing to model. Finally, it gives some more storage in the scenic area. Do you think I am slightly mad to incorporate it? 

1 hour ago, simon b said:

 

Curved points are your friend to get the maximum length from the loops, use them on the left side of the yard and you could fit a pair of stub end tracks on the righthand side.

I'll give it a go! Really, the fiddle yard entrance is just too tight to fit any more points or changes in - this layout gives me a few extra loops and growth opportunities on those ends!

Very interesting topic (thanks to Accurascale guys and gals, you have some wonderful models!). As a modern-image ish (2000s onwards) modeller, Electrostars are a key part of the modern railway and have always seemed a huge gap given the variety of models, locations etc. Even for North West modellers, a substantial number of them have been tested and run up here. I would love more Voyagers and Turbostars. In fact, one of my first models I was given was a 3 car Voyager!

Ultimately, for me the biggest gaps are 185 and 360s (although why Bachmann haven't done them yet surprises me), plus the new CAF units seem to be quite a gap too which could be filled fairly well...

Growing up on the East Coast I have a soft spot for the 365s too, maybe worth doing?

1 hour ago, PaulCheffus said:

Hi

 

Be aware the measurements of buildings are usually the outside ones and the inside could be a lot shorter especially with adding insulation, etc.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

Thank you! I can fit a 15ft building in the space (this is all long-term!!) so even accounting for insulation and smaller interiors 14ft inside should touchwood be fine. Obviously we can take length out if needs be!

1 hour ago, MichaelE said:

I like your track plan except the tight curves (for the amount of room you have) in the upper left corner past the yard. 

 

Many times I wish I had built an around-the-room layout instead the current layout I have. I'm not about to start all over, but I do wish I had broader curves than 24".

I'm readjusted the top-left curves slightly so they are looser but even on the right hand side it is relatively tight (20"). It is all a compromise in one way or another - this version has fewer sidings but is 100% accessible from all sides, whereas the other one had more but not all were. I won't be running trains at super high speed either so I don't think it is "as much" a problem?

8 hours ago, Chimer said:

At the risk of keeping you going round in circles 🤪, you could take a couple of stub sidings off each end of the shortest storage loop, which would give four more storage roads (for locos or two-car DMUs) at the cost of keeping the loop itself clear.

 

Other than that, I think you've got the best FY solution in your latest iteration.

I'll probably add one or two in - it's why I quite liked the more unconventional format as it meant there was a lot more space in each of the sidings but this is much less complex and I feel happier with it, length aside!

6 minutes ago, simon b said:

 

If I honest I think this design would work better for the space you have, loose all the stub end sidings and you can make the loops longer. Seems a more flexable design.

It is simpler! The curvature on the ends means that you can't really fit many more points in, but I have lengthened them quite a bit so you can store multiple units in the main loops and a longer train or two too. Means it is all accessible from all routes too, and it could be managed on one board controller with a Megapoints 12 point controller for example!..

21 minutes ago, simon b said:

Is 8 loops going to be enough? Have a think about how many you need and design it around that number.

I would think so! It seems to fit the available space quite well. My only challenge is trying to get the right hand side accessible from all directions (so far, you can go west to east, but can't reach the longest two sidings from the east to west direction, which is hurting my head to rectify!)

2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

By flipping the FY over trains running on the through lines now have to negotiate ladders of multiple facing points, which increases the risk of derailments.

 

Does this look better in your eyes, then? Now you can access all of the fiddle yard sidings from the facing direction, plus a special bi-directional siding for freight stock. Min of R19 curves (but 20, 21 mostly!) for a bit looser and smoother travelling

1 hour ago, Harlequin said:

By flipping the FY over trains running on the through lines now have to negotiate ladders of multiple facing points, which increases the risk of derailments.

 

That's a fair point, and something easily fixed by putting an avoiding line underneath the points!

1 hour ago, stivesnick said:

Hi 

 

I have been folowing the discussion, especially with respect to the fiddle yard with interest. I guess the questions that need to be answered are:

 

1. How many freight trains do you want to run and how long will they be? Whilst some freight and PW trains can be quite short, for example nuclear flask trains, others are much longer say 15-20 bogie wagons. Is having 8-10 wagon trains reasonable or go for longer?

 

2. As noted in the post above, how many passenger trains will want to reverse in the fiddle yard? That might depend on how much stock you have. If there is enough to have trains running in each direction then the amount of reversing will be reduced. On the other hand, if there is only one IEP train, then that would have to reverse. 

 

Hope this helps.

 

Nick  

Thanks Nick! I appreciate everyone's feedback and it is an interesting debate on the fiddle yard. I have inverted it, so trains can more easily go into and out of the sections in the fiddle yard. I have added one dead-end siding that more easily allows for Bay platform shuttling, plus an elongated headshunt and crossover. To me it flows better, allows simpler use for in and out units, plus a proper way of reversing trains without being too silly. Simpler? Also means most are 5ft long - easily long enough for 2x 2 car DMUs, 1x 3 and 1x2, plus freight, a 67+Mk4 set etc.

Freight - not massively long (as you can tell, space is at a bit of premium!), a smaller container train and maybe some PW too, my main interest is passenger services but a lot of interesting trains in my part of the world!

Most items would reverse in the fiddle yard. As a lot of trains in the real operations go towards Piccadilly and Manchester Airport and reverse, so you get a reasonable level of churn both east and west. The other benefit to this this way means if I just want to chill out with some trains trundling round, I can just do that. We all like to play trains now and then!..

On 13/01/2024 at 12:43, Harlequin said:

Here's my idea for an improved fiddle yard:

 

• The storage loops (blue 1-8) are all set up as trailing crossovers so a train in any loop can leave in either direction on the correct line.
• The shortest loops (2 & 3) are 1667mm long between turnouts, enough for a 5 car train and clearance at both ends.
• The longest loop (8) is 2167mm long but the usable length would be restricted in practice by the nearby R3 curve.
• The two through routes are very smooth apart from a short section of R3 radius (red) in each.
• The through routes encounter all the loop turnouts in the trailing direction. Only the loop entry crossovers are facing.
• Turnouts are all Streamline Medium (brown) and Curved (green).
• There's room in the top left corner for further storage spurs if needed.
• FY baseboard width is 650mm so there are no reach problems.
• One entry crossover is mounted on the lifting section to make use of this valuable space.

 

Using your efforts, I've come up with the attached! What points did you use? I wasn't able to accurately capture it but I think it wasn't a half-bad job for a first go. It allows any train to run through, or reverse back from any direction (apart from the last two loops, but you can always run those through the other direction!.. 

Thank you as always to everyone for their views! Today's idea for the fiddle yard is to add some reversing points on the lowest and top points - i.e you COULD get into the fiddle yard from the running lines but maybe is making it more complex? Harlequin, I'm modelling your fiddle yard type now, it looks a great idea too :)

33 minutes ago, Happy Hippo said:

But if you combine the traverser avoiding lines previously suggested, and then use the branches off the avoiding lines to serve the traverser for terminations of slow speed trains that should negate any horror issues.  Traversers work well with planned and scheduled running where one has an operating schedule.  Once you go down the ad hoc route of running trains as you feel without any forethought then, welcome to trouble.

 

The late Iain Rice also advocated vertical traversers, which combined with the through running  avoiding lines, also saved a lot of horizontal space.

 

Another of his ploys, rather than a full double junction was a leading crossover that incorporated a single slip to allow trains on the down line to access the up and vice versa.

 

With all the trackage and point work in the fiddle yard, why not make the fiddle yard a proper scenic marshalling yard in it's own right?

All good thoughts - I liked the idea of Bradfield Gloucester Square where you had the carriage sidings too (I can't remember the name of the Northern modern image layout which had one plus a station too, it is on here, really wonderful layout!) but I think if this was going to be my first "proper" layout in my own space, keep things simple where possible.

The slip sounds interesting - you may have noticed but I had one in the scenic section many iterations ago but that is a long time ago now. In a fiddle yard potentially less problematic? I am still conscious that I have 3rd or 4th radius turns which are nice but not super generous and if I ran IEPs or Mk5s then it could cause some issues?

28 minutes ago, Happy Hippo said:

Just going to lob a stick grenade into the room:

 

Think how much more storage space you'd get if you used a traverser.

Interesting idea, I imagine it's simpler to run etc! Have thought of them or cassettes on terminus layouts but never a roundy roundy. As Harlequin says it is a big risk. At least this way, there is plenty of storage for units and freight, plus run round options while leaving trains running (although it does mean you could knock items off the bottom running line...) 

On the point of fiddle yards, I took some inspiration from an online fiddle yard model, this seems to be a bit more flexible? 6 roads in the middle and two continuous outer loops for running. Seems a bit tight but maybe also quite efficient? All the radius are 20/21" to make it a bit less tight!

I've taken some inspiration from your plans Robin and the advice of others, so please see the new attachment! I haven't updated the fiddle yard yet but I have one or two ideas. And yes, my top crossover is still there!!

I think in the examples previously given there was through running from Platform 1 to Piccadilly so wrong line running does happen and at the least there is a way of switching on either end.

3 hours ago, RobinofLoxley said:

There is a train just off on the LHS comprising 6 Mk2's, 2 locos and a tank wagon (??) and it would be hanging slightly out at both ends, but yes the 6 coaches look as if they would fit.

Thank you for your advice and plan, it looks great! It is a good idea so I'll have to go away and mock it up in my template. Does feel like I am getting closer to a resolved layout and your advice and others is handy. Fiddle yards etc are easy enough to design, I haven't really iterated on it as I wanted to get the layout to flow nicely. It isn't critical to have the second turnback, as you say, it isn't really used much whereas the ones in Deansgate are used a lot.

The island platforms generally can squeeze in a 6 car train - from some testing videos, a 68 and set of Mk5as really dominate the island platform. There is a prototype for everything, even trains the same length of the platform!

7 hours ago, DavidB-AU said:

If possible, moving the main lines a bit might help eliminate some reverse curves.

I'll give it a go! It then goes back to the previous curving in that area effectively

2 hours ago, jools1959 said:

 

Hi there, this might be better.

 

 

Thanks, it has given me some more inspiration! I managed to get a lot better flow through the layout by re-reversing the layout (west to Deansgate, east to Piccadilly). The biggest platform should hold a 5 car IEP or a TfW 67 & Mk4s, and the rest should hold 4 car trains comfortably. The big green blob is the central operating space (ignore the bit over the running lines!). Does it feel a bit more natural to you? I expect I could get more curves through the platforms but best to start conservatively again after all my revisions and overthinking.

Just now, jools1959 said:

I've quickly drawn out the track plan on AnyRail for Oxford Road, using images from Google Maps.  I'd also like to suggest that the station goes where the fiddle yard is, and that moves to the station location.  I will admit that the plan is modern day and can obviously be altered.

 

 

Thanks! That is really helpful. I was studying onboards of the layout to get it right - the last one I've just posted makes me a bit happier and your guide there helps a lot too, thank you!