Harlequin

Thanks Keith!

It's a little bit lumpy but the important points are:

• Platform line has a clear run of 915mm (after leaving the R2 curve) - just countryside in front.
• The main line continues around to the loco release spur, and...
  • All loco facilities and the run round loop are below it, inc. 55ft turntable. (Loco movements need the run round loop to be kept generally free.)
  • All goods facilities are above it. Staggered turnouts at the release end give some headshunt space for the goods loop.
• I allowed the release spur to get close to the end of the layout because it's obscured by the engine shed.
• Stubby end loading dock - just long enough for one van.
• Minimum radius turnout: Medium (i.e. ~3ft).
• Cassette connection on hidden curve board (so no need for another baseboard rail joint) and away from the back edge of the cassette table.

Edit: I forgot to point out that there's no dedicated carriage siding in this plan... Is that a huge flaw?

I think cassettes still have the edge in this context because they can be slid, lifted over each other to shuffle their order and turned more easily than other solutions should you wish to do so. Any solution with a fixed axis requires that axis to be away from the wall (or furniture) and the arc swept out by the deck can take up a lot of space in the operating well. There might be the physical space to rotate the deck after the operator has stepped aside but it's just awkward to live with in a small space.

Cassettes can be rotated in a kind of three point turn that doesn't require the operator to leave the room...

And away from the layout there are the added benefits of transporting and storing stock.

BTW: For extra flexibility I would suggest not having the cassette connection at the very back of the board. You can then slide a cassette into place from both in front and from behind.

Keith, I've got some suggested tweaks to your "Fairford-ish" plan. Is it OK to post a drawing here? That's the simplest way to explain them.

Hi Keith,

Suggestion regarding supports and cantilevering over the bed and desk:

Use 4 of those cheap, lightweight, folding work stands:

Place 4 beams on top:

The two long beams at the top are hinged in the middle. They are connected by cross pieces and hinges with L-shaped removable pins. Use as many cross pieces as you like, possibly some diagonals for rigidity.

(Notice that I've shown the two long beams extending further over the bed than the original envelope.)

Baseboard modules on top:

The three main scenic baseboards in this drawing are all the same size, 22in by 44in. On the left one of the long boards and the smaller hidden curve board are bolted together at the joint to support each other.

Hi Jonathan,

How does your trackplan work? The lower part between the tunnel mouths looks ostensibly like double track main line but the upper part allows routes that seem to be incompatible with that.

28 minutes ago, Tony Davis said:

I have built the supporting frame for my 60" x 36" layout and I am intending to pin and glue the surface plywood. I remember my old woodwork teacher telling the class that pins or screws were only to hold the wood in place while the glue set. So, before I go ahead, has anyone had an experience which contradicts this advice?

 

Thanks,

 

Tony

Spot on. If the surface is one large piece then pinning or screwing is probably the best way to bring the parts into contact. The alternative methods: Weights need to be very heavy to compress a large piece of ply and cramps won't reach into the middle.

Hi Keith,

One of the characteristic features of Fairford is the single track against the platform. If you can retain it then it should give a bit more sense of the track in open countryside - at least the scene in front of the station can be countryside.

The composition looks a bit unbalanced to my eye - very developed on the right and not much on the left.

I think you're onto a good thing with Fairford because of it's individuality and the legitimate ability to have several locos on scene at once, as described by The Stationmaster, but you've missed a trick! Many modellers would kill for a reason to have a working turntable in their BLT! Turntables often get shoehorned into inappropriate positions, with sketchy justification and they are always much too big. You have the room, a completely valid reason for having one and the prototype example of small size - either 45' or 55'. This would be a great feature and would add operational interest because locos would need to be turned before the long journey back down the branch.

BTW: About length of run round: Karau says that in the 20s excursion trains were sometimes longer than the run round at Fairford and a cable was used to haul them towards the buffer stops and clear the loop entry points. So there is justification for trains longer than the run round... If you can figure out a way to simulate cable shunting...  Not serious but it's just an interesting point!

About the cantilever over the bed: Remember that you don't need to be able to reach into the very far corner because:

1. Most of the operations at that end (for a Fairford-style setup) will be light engine movements. No need to fiddle with couplings, just the occasional poke for electrical pickup.
2. The beauty of a movable modular design is that you can take it apart to work on the scenery and then things become more accessible.
3. Some of the extra length could be used to give the plan a bit of scenic breathing space and avoid the buffers being up against the backdrop.

P.S. I've asked about goods arrivals at Fairford on "Everything Great Western" because I know there are guys on there who worked the line. No reply yet.

8 minutes ago, checkrail said:

Don't think this one's in L T C Rolt's "Red for danger".

 

Seems that vibrations from the bathroom rebuild going on below had made the fire-devil from the down platform water crane fall onto the track.  I was looking the other way, driving an up express out of the fiddle yard when I heard the crash behind me.

 

Fortunately the signalman was able to slam on the up home signal to stop a King from ploughing into the wreckage.

 

No harm done, I'm glad to say.  But still a lot of dust to get rid of.

 

John C.

This is really not what you want, John. How much longer have you got to put up with the builders below? Do they know about the work of art they are disturbing above them?

I hope it’s not long and you can clean everything up soon!

Hi Keith,

This looks really interesting!

Personally I wouldn't put any scenery in front of the FY because I think it would just be awkward to reach over it when you need to fiddle.

Don't worry about the station building awning - do whatever you like! It's your station and you can find many other prototypical examples of straight awning on curved platforms if you need justification.

One advantage of the cassette table FY is that it could remove the need for another set of rail-crossing-baseboard joins. Just allow the cassettes to reach across the baseboard join in the top right.

Some of the elements get very close to the backdrop at the bottom.

Is the run round loop long enough? Will 3 coaches fit with enough clearance?

To help with the length of the run round loop:

1. Do you need three tracks there? The cattle pens could stand against one side of a simple loop - it's just means that you couldn't leave any vans standing there when you need to run round but that's a typical small station compromise. (In fact reducing to a simple run round loops would make the trapping simpler, too!)
2. Could you lengthen the station boards to cantilever further over the bed? It should be fine if the support is strong enough there's sufficient weight on the other side of the bearing point to hold it up - so long as no-one leans on it!

P.S. I've been vaguely thinking of DIY store "work trestles" as the basic supports - like these: https://www.diy.com/departments/340kg-foldable-saw-horse-pack-of-2/1510279_BQ.prd (They are exactly what I use for my little test layout.)

Then some sort of I-beams across them - all connected together with hinges to keep them upright and to allow them to fold away when not in use.

Then the actual baseboards on top of the I beams.

Here's a quick sketch of a possible setup:

Lots of room for scenery behind

Two "fiddle roads" front right: main line and headshunt

Run round loop starts right after fiddle yard for maximum length. Run round movement uses fiddle yard - and that's fine, because it's part of the scene!

Curving platform can handle 2 60ft coaches

Suggestion: Goods shed at front with loading doors open to the viewer so you can look inside. See the recent photos in Little Muddle. (Imagine that the yard is mainly off scene at the front of the layout.)

Coal staithes behind shed?

The problem with the fiddle yard is that it takes up so much space. It cramps the rest of the scene and it isn't good to look at, even though you need it to be easily accessible.

What if the "fiddle yard" was part of the scene, at the front right? Just a track or a pair of tracks that are fully ballasted and weathered etc. The industry or the engine shed could be behind it.

So when you look at the layout, the full 4.2m would look great - a complete scene.

To use the fiddle yard you just place locos and wagons on from storage manually and drive them into the scene (and vice versa). To give the FY a true sense of being somewhere special that trains come from and go to, it's marked off by simple scenic breaks, like maybe your overbridge or a level crossing, or whatever and with a fence behind it. The rule is you're only allowed to touch your rolling stock when it has driven into the FY area. It might be a good idea to have the rolling stock storage just below the right hand end of the layout, so they don't have far to go. If you didn't want to handle the stock so much you could possibly use scenic cassettes (@Chimer's idea!) but in 7mm scale they might be unwieldy - that would need more thought.

I haven't drawn it yet but that should, fingers crossed, give more room in the layout for the station platform and most importantly, more room for the goods shed and it's yard.

I plotted something to scale using Peco Code 124 parts and assuming a 3 road 1200mm sector plate to check what fits:

This is just a quick hack up and there are no doubt better ways to set it out, but:

You can see that two 60ft coaches can fit within the clearance points (the red-ish circles).

The throw of the sector plate brings it close to the industry track.

Not much room for the goods shed, though.

3 hours ago, WM183 said:

Hi all.

I am ok with sacrificing passenger running, or cutting it down to one coach. My husband *really* wants some passenger capacity though.
 

...

But yes, a busy goods yard? Works for me. Still wondering if 7mm is right.

Well... You are trying to squeeze a lot into the space at that scale... Some serious compromises will be needed.

Hi again Amanda,

Do you really need passenger facilities? What if the layout was just a goods yard?

Then your goods shed would be "centre stage", the focus of the layout, you wouldn't have to allow for the (relatively) big 60ft coaches and you'd have more room for goods sidings.

And you could still have all the non-railway ephemera around the outside, of course.

Or plan it in the computer where you can use electronic versions of the Peco templates and rolling stock, you don't need the full size space available and the templates won't blow away...

I'm thinking Hemyock (again) - a bit like the Rockfield design I did recently. (Run round further Up the line than the platform and in the curve.)

But I think we're all on the same basic wavelength: Trying to do something a little bit different than the Universal BLT...

Hi,

Combining some of the thoughts above you could retain the goods shed but make it low relief at the far left hand side of the layout. Thus, you still have a shed with track notionally running through it, it's just that the door is perpetually closed and you only ever see vans stood in front of it.

Then you don't have to leave room for road vehicles to access the shed because that happens off-scene and there's more yard space in front of the shed for your yard crane.

Access to the fiddle yard is a definite worry. You need to be absolutely sure that you will be able to operate it as required in that position. Just assuming or hoping that it will be OK could lead to disappointment.

Where will locos and rolling stock be stored when they are not on the layout? (The answer to that might make a difference to the fiddle yard design.)

Is there room to widen the layout in the middle so that front edge bows out by, say, 100-150mm? That would give you a bit more area for sidings and/or scenery if it was possible.

57 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

Sadly I don't see there being room for a return loop 

No, but you can turn the cassettes around!

Hi Keith,

Here's a rough outline suggestion:

• The two bottom boards are 3ft2in by 2ft, the two side boards are 2ft11in by 2ft and the fiddle yard board is just under 4ft long but only 18in wide. (Sorry @AndyB, my earlier thought didn't quite work out!)
• I'm suggesting a cassette table fiddle yard because:
  • It avoids a turnout fan.
  • Cassettes allow rolling stock to be moved around the house as easily as the layout itself and safely stored.
  • You don't have to re-rail your stock, you just unpack and connect cassettes, so set up time is quicker.
• The thinner cassette table allows the operating well to be wider.
• No visible tight radii.

And so the best RTR "14xx" is...

A Bachmann 64xx.

Approximate 3ft2in by 2ft modules seem to divide the plan space up very neatly. (No need to make them all the same, as you say, but it's more systematic if you do and they are quicker to build.)

They could be constructed from 6mm ply as cross-braced open-frames, which would be both lightweight and very strong and rigid.

But the baseboards must serve the layout design and that's the most intriguing part of the puzzle...

Hi Keith,

The new arrangement sounds very sensible.

What is your preferred method of getting into the operating well (if there is one)? Would you accept a duck-under if it made the best layout design?

The statement leaves a lot of questions unanswered.

Can someone who knows what is going on tell us why this has happened? That would cut off a lot of speculative nonsense.

On the Moretonhampstead branch, and I suspect many others, the track rose from the mainline at more or less sea level to the town on the moor.

So down was Up and up was Down.

Adam, have you checked how long your platforms will be with those point formations at either end?

Will a decent length passenger train stand fully alongside the platform without fouling the points at either end?

12 hours ago, Aire Head said:

So life is moving in the right direction to be able to get started on the project soon!

 

I have an updated version of the plan as like a clown i managed to delete the previous one by accident 

 

However through a few little changes I have somehow managed to make the fiddle yard work the way I originally intended and bring back the edges of the station as well. Things like table edges aren't 100% confirmed yet but I certainly appreciate any thoughts on whats there so far.

 

 

It's superb! I would say that you have performed something of a miracle to fit this so neatly into the space but I know that it's really the result of a lot of hard work and fine tuning.

I like the new angle at the bottom, which eases the corner curve and gives the goods yard more room.

Only question is about the turnouts on the access bridge: If the bridge is a lifting flap the proximity to the edge might be a worry unless you have a cunning plan in mind.

Have you thought about the landscape profile? It would be lovely to see some undulations, especially if the landscape could fall away from the track somewhere to avoid the billiard table look.