Titanius Anglesmith

Greetings All,

Despite having a terminus layout under construction, a change in circumstances means I may have the opportunity for something larger.  After much negotiation with the Domestic Controller I may be able to claim a 9' by 10' 4" space in the loft conversion (apologies for the archaic measurements, old habits die hard....)

The space I'm hopefully getting looks a bit like this, dimensions in inches:

The 18" wide section cannot be made any deeper, but the vertical (so to speak) 24" wide section could be made any depth within reason.

As before, I seek the sagely wisdom of RMWeb before I commit myself to some kind of fool's errand!  I've commented before on how Mac Pyrke's Berrow Branch ticks a lot of boxes for me; I find the second station or destination adds a lot of extra interest.  I'd also like to reuse as much of what I've already constructed as possible as scrapping it would lead to some awkward questions from SWMBO!  With that in mind, I've cobbled together a shambles of an idea taking a lot of inspiration from the Berrow Branch, reusing my existing boards with some alterations as a substitute for Berrow .  Gauge is OO and region / era is 1930s LMS.  This is non-negotiable as I want to give some new life to my late father's collection.

Here is the rough idea.  With a little alteration my existing boards could be rearranged into a similar layout to the real Bromley North, a terminus at the end of a double-track line (I prefer double-track if possible).  This would have to go in Area A.  A substitute for East Brent would then go in the 18"-wide Area B, with the connecting line plus hidden sidings / cassettes in Area C:

A close up of the Area A / Bromely North / Berrow-substitute section - 

Just to be clear, the roads from top to bottom are

Goods siding 1, Goods siding 2, Run-around loop, Platform road, (platform), Platform road.  The siding(s) at bottom-right is to replicate Mac's loco shed, with or without turntable.

Area B / East Brent-substitute - 

In Area C I could add some kind of mill etc with private siding, as per East Brent, to hide the entrance to the FY.

Do my illustrious peers have any comment or suggestions please?  Advice is welcome!

Thank you in advance

Watching with interest 

Following with interest, I like the track plan 

IIRC, you took advantage of the track spacing enforced by the short crossing to create space for an island platform. Very cunning! 

edit:  just dug out the thread - nope, it wasn't an island.  But cunning nonetheless, perhaps even more so!

3 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

 

@Titanius Anglesmith I'm glad you like it, this is actually courtesy of @t-b-g 's kind help in showing the throat of Buckingham GC - much simplified of course, the original has a goods line aisle-side infront of the station throat. It's considerably more compact than Minories and generally avoids those reverse curves.

It’s the compactness and gentle curves that immediately jumped out at me. I think I might see how it looks on Anyrail when I get the chance 

3 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

 

The "scissors and slips" arrangement was fairly common practise for cramped urban/suburban stations in the late C19th so, whether you knew it or not, you've hit on something that is convincing, as well as workable.

I quite agree, but rarely modelled? Maybe due to the lack of a readily available scissor crossing?

I can’t advise on the FY situation, but nice track plan! 

3 hours ago, TT-Pete said:

 

My much-missed Minnie would happily sit and watch the trains go by,

 

A hobby which has now also been taken up by Phoebe,

 

I've just taken her to the vet this morning after a run-in with next door's thug of a cat yesterday - blinkin heck - 75 quid for a quick once-over and an antibiotic shot!

 

Your Minnie bears an uncanny resemblance to our late-departed Milly 

....and thanks to this thread I have learnt that the current pair of feline lodgers share more than a passing likeness to Skimbleshanks...

10 hours ago, jamespetts said:

 

One final thing - how would the bays be operating? Presumably, in the early 1960s, much of this would be steam hauled, so either a locomotive would have to release the stock in the bays and then the locomotive, or there would be kickback working. The station pilot (or kickback locomotive) would have to be stored somewhere, and something would have to be done with the locomotives hauling the stock into the bays. Unless there had been a major redesign of the track layout very recently at this station (which is possible - you will have to research this), even if by this period, the bays were mainly used by DMUs, the track facilities (including somewhere for locomotives to go) for steam traction using these bays would have remained. It is possible that some of it may have become derelict (perhaps the station had lost its station pilot - I am not sure whether this happened this early) and the pilot/kickback siding(s) might have been lifted or have become overgrown; but you might want to represent this in some way.

At Wickford it was usual for an up-branch train to run direct into the up bay platform, trapping the loco. Once passengers had alighted the train would back out onto the running line, run around its train, then shunt back into the down bay ready for its return trip down the branch. A lot of shunting, but quite convenient for passengers. 

Even more common was to terminate in the main platform, then run around and shunt into the bay. 

Great little layout, very inspirational! 

Some very nice layouts in that video! 

I prefer the flipped version for reasons t-b-g suggests. Having the departure-only platform on the departure side makes a lot more sense. If there was an (off-scene) advanced starter signal protecting the block in advance, you can shunt to heart’s content as it’s all within station limits. 

Looks great, especially how you’ve blended the scenery fits with the backdrop in such a tiny space! 

Those who are using thinnish 6mm tops, how do you screw components (eg point motors) to the bottom of the board? Do you glue on thickening blocks where required?

22 hours ago, wirey33 said:

I’m currently working towards a new modelling workbench and I was considering using a 635mm deep kitchen worktop.

There’s a very good reason why kitchen units are that depth (and height, for that matter). Any more than 600mm / 2ft deep and it becomes a bit of a stretch to reach the back. Amongst other things I do a bit of wood and metal butchery, and the same rules apply there. My woodworking bench (which also gets used for all sorts of other things) is 2ft deep and 3ft high, much like a kitchen unit. 

17 hours ago, Luke Piewalker said:

The opportunity for big round cartoon bombs with fuses and 'bomb' written on them, the aforementioned ACME anvils, large red sticks of dynamite with 'dynamite' written on them, large trapezoid weights with a big ring on top and the weight in tons clearly marked... And obviously fake tunnel paint.

The temptation is almost too much to bear 

I liked the last post just for using the words windowness and roofosity 

Love this thread  Lego was my life when I was younger

19 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

Yes, absolutely. That should open things up on the right and I might lenghten the local release headshunt a bit and move it away from the backscene on the left.

 

On the other hand, platforms and runarounds far longer than a typical train were prototypically common. Would the long runaround here give an impression of scale and space? I’m just playing devil’s advocate here, I’m not against shortening the loop. 

Regarding the gas works (or alternative private industry), might it be served by a trip working rather than the pick-up goods?

Thanks for the tips 

Some very impressive modelling in this thread. I especially like the Avro York a page or two back, my grandfather was a W/Op on Yorks at the end of the war. Prior to that he did a tour on Lancs with 101 Sqn. 

I have a question (or two) for the experts, if I may? I haven’t really dabbled in kits since my childhood, but I’ve dug a few kits out of the archive that I would like to build. I have become aware of the trick of varnishing before and after applying decals, but I’ve never practised it. Typically I’d expect to use satin for the final coat, but one of the kits (a Mitsubishi Ki-15) has a metallic finish. Would a gloss topcoat be appropriate for this finish?

Second question, the decals with the Ki-15 are probably older than I am. Is there a reliable go-to source for after-market decals where I may look for replacements?

Thanks

Tilbury Riverside, until it closed in the 1990s

Watching with interest - I do like an inglenook, and I especially like the theme of an engineering works, an idea I’ve been toying with myself 

Both ends of 11 crossover need to be worked because they trap the siding. Likewise 13 crossover. 

I agree that the worked yard yard points are unusual, but I can understand the justification on a model. On in my own layout I’ve allocated yard points to otherwise “spare” levers. The levers are white and labelled as “SPARE (HW1)” (where HW stands for hand-worked). I only have a few yard points though so there’s not an unusually high number of white levers. 

With regards to shunt discs (or lack thereof), I believe it was a requirement on the “big railways” that any exit from a non-passenger line onto the running line had to be signalled. I don’t know if that extended to light railways though, probably not. In that regard Green Soudley is fine, assuming that trains leaving the tinplate siding do so via 13 crossover and 14 signal. 

19 hours ago, Ramblin Rich said:

my 'inspiration station' Eggesford on the North Devon line had sidings trailing off at one end of the up platform and a level crossing the other end, with quite a short platform between.

There was a similar situation at Stanford Le Hope station. When the platforms first needed extending, the up-platform extension was built on the opposite (south) side of the level crossing, with a rolling section to fill the gap across the road! After the original station burnt down, the original up platform site was abandoned and relocated on the south side of the crossing. 

Greetings All,

Despite already having a layout under construction ( ), I keep daydreaming about building an inglenook. The track plan is obviously not an issue, but scenic vision isn’t my strong suit. I know that industrial or quayside sidings are a common theme (with good reason), but I’m rather taken with the idea of a setting surrounded by trees. Something like the American logging / sawmill layouts. The trouble is, as mentioned in one of my other threads, I want to limit myself to using my late father’s stock. That means British, grouping-era locos and stock. 

The idea I’m kicking about at the moment is depicting the engineer’s yard of an otherwise larger industrial concern, say a sawmill or quarry (I’ve seen old photos of a local chalk quarry where plant life has reclaimed the spent areas, while work continues elsewhere). The engineer’s yard would justify short sidings and varied wagon loads - there’s no point rearranging eight identical mineral wagons. I’ve got a mental image of a forest backdrop, with a few sheds or corrugated shacks in the foreground. Maybe there’s a fitter tinkering with some broken machinery in the yard, seemingly oblivious to the shunting going on behind....... NHY 581’s sheep chronicles are a big inspiration in that respect. 

I know that Rule 1 applies at all times, but does this idea sound plausible? The footprint would be the typical 4’ x 1’ or thereabouts (I have a little flexibility there). As always, any advice is greatly appreciated!

Thank you in advance!