Titanius Anglesmith

+1, the real railway uses them in abundance Naturally the proper ratcheting tool is used, and the crimping dies are checked annually

Stunning. I disagree about the deforestation, I like the trees

I've not paid much attention to narrow gauge before, but this layout has made me take notice. Simply stunning

I like the way the water tower is leaking all over the track On a serious note, I really like that sketch. Not just for the “technical” aspects, but for the atmosphere it conveys. Very good!

Thanks, I'll give this a look

Thanks, Flying Pig. That's the sort of thing I was imagining. I like the use of the station building as a view block. I'd guess that passenger trains will need to shunt to depart, as the layout isn't locked and signalled for departures from the lower platform. You could always resignal, but it would only reduce the play value. There won't be that many trains - just the branch service, or a reduced passenger service to a the last station on a route that has been truncated for some reason. I think the latter scenario is better as it gives a reason for the goods to reverse too and not run through to the next large yard. In this plan, I'm in two minds about having a wrong-road starter and FPL'ing the crossover (economical, of course), or shunting ECS from one road to the other. Like you say, both prototypical.... six of one, half-dozen of the other. As much as I like the goods shed on the loop, it's not absolutely essential; there were of course lots of dead-end sidings on the railway. I like the dock leading from the double-slip too, my local station had that feature too. I agree that the plan doesn't offer anything more than a BLT, but I'm not expecting anything more from a layout this size (that is, without going to a shunting or industrial setting). I haven't been here long enough to get away with saying such controversies, but............. Edit: I can't figure out how to get rid of that empty quote above

What a brilliant concept, and that track plan! Lots of goods workings, lots of shunting....... right up my boulevard Watching with interest

What a magnificent reply, thank you!! How clever to repurpose a relay mechanism, that's not what I expected at all. My own (rather more agricultural) ideas revolved around having a solenoid whose armature is received by a hole in the tappet (for want of a better term) attached to the lever. Based on my (fairly extensive!) experience so far, for frames (say up to 75 levers) such as these, mechanical locking is much "easier" to accomplish than relay locking (not least because of the need to explicitly provide all the reciprocals with a relay design) and if building mechanical locking is beyond one's skillset, or for anything much bigger, I would go a software route - not least because mods are easy! It's been many years since I touched a mechanical frame whereas relay and solid state interlocking is my daily bread and butter. That's my excuse for wimping out on a fully mechanical frame and going electric. As you say, the ease of modding software is a nice safety net. Personally, I would build the layout first!! Yes, that would be a good idea Thanks again for the reply, most interesting

Thanks Flying Pig. Just to be clear, I never expected to model the whole platform, just enough to run a branch train or the local goods into. However if you still think it's too short to do anything useful with then I'll go back to the drawing board. With regards to the crossover, I don't think it was that uncommon to see it in between the platforms. It would have to be protected by the home though instead of the starter. It would of course be towards the end of the platform not the middle. I'll see if I can find a prototypical example before I stick my neck out on that though. Yes Minories allows for simultaneous movements, but my point was how often is it actually operated like that, apart from at exhibitions with several operators? I agree that Pl1 is superfluous in a modelling sense as I can't run a "through" train through it. However I cite KNP's Encombe Town as precedent!

That's a very clever idea I've seen it used to great effect in gardens, and even in Ally Pally. Might give the loco driver a bit of a shock as he enters the platform though

Hi Phil, thank you for your reply. Sorry I can't figure out how to split the quote up, so...... Thus the double track is only really in use by one train at a time - so more like a single track in reality... Does that make sense? Perfect sense. But how many end to end layouts are operated as one-engine-in-steam, even multi-platform termini like Minories? I don't really see that as an affront to reality. My local station* on the LT&SR was built as double track but initially only saw a 1hr 30min frequency. The line's terminus at Shoeburyness was built with two platforms, but only one was generally used (it now has three!). Conversely, I wonder how many BLT layouts are pictured with a train in the platform, another in the bay, and a third shunting the yard...? I notice that there’s very little room for the loco between the “buffers” and the crossover. Noted, should be easy enough to correct. Or use the off-scene traverser as also suggested. Is the fiddle yard joined to the front of the 8ft boards or the end? I.e. is the total length 8ft or 9ft6in - 10ft? Have you thought about the curve needed to go around the corner? Sorry I didn't put that very clearly. Joined to the end, to make 10ft (the fiddle board can be a little wider than the scenic boards that way round). I think a 2nd radius curve will just fit? *Curiously enough, the layouts I proposed earlier are very similar to my local station (before '60s rationalisation), even though I never meant them to be. I guess it goes to show that when we design a layout to achieve certain aims, we shouldn't be surprised if we reach the same conclusions that the real railway did

Many thanks for your reply, Flying Pig. Funnily enough I tried that on anyrail this morning, for the exact reason of it being quintessentially Midland. Unfortunately though, even if the running line end of the crossover is at the very edge of the board, it still only leaves something like 6" of siding between the points. I'm very glad to see that I'm thinking on the right lines though!! i have an extreme lack of confidence with Anyrail, and very little experience with model railways. So if anyone can create a similar plan with more elegance than my ham-fisted fumblings, I'd be most grateful!

Good afternoon All, Although I find the Piano Line discussion very interesting, I'm still not convinced that it's what I want right now. At least, not yet...... Until recently my sole knowledge of model railways was my late Dad's layout; a permanent, built-in behemoth. It's come as a bit of a revelation that a layout can also be built across several modular boards and moved when necessary. With that in mind, I think I can manage two scenic boards at 4' x 18" each. That would however mean that the fiddle board would have to turn a right angle to form an "L". With the extra length to play with I'm considering my original idea again, a two-track through station with goods yard, but operated like a BLT (i.e. it's the "other" end of a branch service). I've knocked up these crude drawings of what I imagine, plus an attempt at Anyrail. Essentially the two plans are the same, just with the direction of the sidings reversed. I imagined ending the platforms being truncated at the left hand end to suggest something longer, perhaps using the passenger overbridge as a scenic break. I can live with the crossover being modelled "mid" platform rather than off-scene where it belongs. Please take the signalling with a pinch of salt, I was just getting carried away! Any thoughts please? I am acutely aware that it's too easy to try and cram too much in.

That frame really is a work of art, very impressive!! If I may be so bold to ask, how do you intend to make the electric locks? When I eventually build my layout I intend to signal it from a frame, but cheat by locking it electrically (à la Westinghouse L Style). I trained on mechanically-locked frames many moons ago, but since then all I've touched is relay-interlocking and solid state.......

No need to apologise, I'm enjoying the discussion

Following with interest - your scenic work is stunning

Afternoon All, Sorry for my late response. I've been waiting for a chance to reply from a real computer, as I struggle to post from my phone. Alas, the wait continues.... Anyhow, thank you for the replies. With regards to operation, I prefer shunting but would like a limited passenger operation too. I find Minories is visually very impressive but I don't think I'd enjoy the operation. I dislike push-pulls (too much like running the EMUs I see all day long!) so that means having a run-around. Im intrigued by the piano line, but to my untrained eye it looks very unprototypical. Can anyone cite a real world example? It's piqued my interest nonetheless. Ive been following the Barnoldswick thread; it's an interesting track plan but I wouldn't be able to model the coal yard, which for me is fundamental to the character. I look forward to seeing your interpretation. I have got a simple track track plan in mind; I've sketched it in Microsoft Paint (about the limit of my CAD skills. I've tried Anyrail without much joy). Next time I'm on a PC I'll try to upload it. Thanks!

Amazing!

That weathering is amazing!

All hail the Hypnotoad!

Thank you for the suggestions. I've not come across a piano line before, so I'm not sure I understand the concept? I will have a read of that thread, hopefully it will shed some light.... I've been keeping an eye on Bleat Wharf for some time, Rob's scenic work is nothing short of amazing. I wasn't aware of Mutton until now though. I've just read through that thread and I'm very impressed by what has been done with the space; quite inspiring. On a side note, I'm developing quite a soft spot for that Adams Radial. Dad has / had one in LSWR green but I think I prefer it in BR black. It never occurred to me to do a Minories. I'm not sure it's the kind of operation that I want (i.e. loco A arrives with train, loco B takes the train back out, and so on), but it does demonstrate how platforms of a half-decent length can still be modelled in a small space. I think that's my biggest concern; a two-track station with two 12" platforms would look silly. Thank you for the replies so far, you've got me thinking!

Greetings all, This is my first post here and I come seeking your sage wisdom. I have a little experience with my father's layout but otherwise I'm a complete beginner (having said that I do have a background in signalling on a "real" railway........ ) Sadly my dad passed away late last year and left his (eye-wateringly vast ) OO layout and collection to my brother and I. Dad was unashamedly interested in anything from pre-grouping steam to BR diesels, and had no qualms about buying and running a loco just because he liked it. However my childhood memories are rooted in a mainly Midland Railway / LMS layout, so that is where my main interest lies. I would like to build a layout of my own so that Dad's railway can live on in some small way. To begin with I can allocate 6' x 18"-24" for the scenic area; I may be able to extend that later. I appreciate that it's not a huge space. Originally I was thinking about a simple shunting layout (e.g. inglenook), but I wonder if I can fit a small BLT into that space? My ideal would have been a simple two-track through station with goods siding(s) (which certainly seems fore Midland-ish), but beggars can't be choosers. One potential idea was to just model the end of a through station and operate it like a terminus. In case I haven't described that very clearly I intend to upload a few sketches of what I mean. So what say you expert railway builders; shunting-only, BLT or "through-station" terminus? Any advice on what to start with would be appreciated. To summarise, 6' x 18-24" scenic area Must be OO gauge so that I can use Dad's stock. I know that N would offer more opportunities in the space but buying more stock would defeat the object. Doesn't have to be modelled on a particular prototype (Dad's certainly wasn't), but I'd at least like something plausible. As I see this as a continuation of what Dad started, I'm calling this Rule 1A: Dad's railway! I intend to run Midland Railway / LMS stock. I can live with branch-sized trains of a coach or two pulled by a tank, but I would like to use an 0-6-0 tender loco on the goods so the run-around has to take that into account (I guess the Beyer Garrett's out of the question.........) I am confident with woodwork, metalwork and electrickery so I'm not too fazed by that side of things. I'll need some guidance on the scenery when the time comes. Thank you in advance!