JN

I know by 1990-94 cattle docks at stations weren't a thing. In all the years I've been alive, I cannot recall a single instance of something like this (some stations didn't even have this when they were originally built). Maybe I wasn't very clear and/or got my maths wrong, so the corners and centre-to-centre measurements are wrong. Possible if not probable for the former. Actually the case in the latter (I still don't have things right). However, I was thinking of a car park for one side of the station. You should see from the thread that I've never mentioned a cattle dock. The only mention of a historic layout possibility is that of a coal export port, similar to that of the original purpose of the Stockton and Darlington railway - this wasn't without precedent in the early 1990s: Bidston (I think this actually closed in the early 1980s) Ellesmere Port Harwich is the smallest rail connected port I can think of on the East coast of the UK Holyhead (okay, intermodal exports/imports and passengers) Hunterston (okay, coal and iron ore imports) Mostyn (okay, not coal) Seaforth (okay, coal imports) As I've mentioned, or at least implied, Felixstowe or Immingham (or marshalling yards like Acton, Alexandra Docks, Arpley, Dee Marsh, Healy Mills, Kingmoor, Margam, Mossend, Tees, Toton and Tyne) are just too big to model in the space I have (certainly in OO and probably even in N too). However, no-one said I have to model Felixstowe or Immingham etc.

I'm not sure if the following has been posted, but: http://www.penmorfa.com/Archive/four.htm (photo 10) http://www.penmorfa.com/Archive/eighteen.htm (photo six) http://www.penmorfa.com/Archive/nineteen.html (photo four and possibly photo 10 as well)

This layout siding gives a train length maximum of one locomotive with two BBAs or five HAAs or HEAs. A locomotive the size of a class 37/47/56/60 would be 1/3 of the train length. Even as a Mostyn, rather than a Felixstowe or Immingham, it would look kind of strange. This would also be the standard rather than the exception. Mostyn was barely ever used during the early 1990s (I think its only recorded use, for steel, was during the 1989 port strike in Scotland - as per photo one of http://www.penmorfa.com/Archive/twentynine.html). If I did this in N-Gauge, the track lengths would be the same, but the wagons would be about 1/2, so I would get four BBAs or 10 HAAs or HEAs in to the siding (on current plans). I can't really shrink the port entrance to as this would be the shunting area - I'm thinking Class 08 and one BBA wagon without using the main line as a shunting area (out, switch points, then back to the other siding). My Dad, on his 6x4 layout, has a 5:8 scaling up ratio. Even this would only give me a train length of three/four BBAs or eight HAAs/HEAs... My layout would also have a lower scaling up ratio - not 1:1, but less than 5:8. I might be able to 'get away' with a 37/47 with a four or five mk1s or mk2s and two-car DMUs, but I prefer the idea of a freight-based layout. That said, the typical traffic for Mostyn seems to be short TTA tank trains (http://www.penmorfa.com/Archive/twentyseven.html). The added bonus of a tank train, too, is that the load is unseen. Maybe this is a better way to go.

I know how it feels to repeat. Although you didn't quote from the same post... ("My process was to lay down 2x22.5d* third radius curves in Peco 100 setrack and create the same in flexitrack code 75 (I believe the only code using concrete sleepers which is good for my choice of era) creating 45d then have a short straight then another 45d curve to finish the required 90d. I tried making the outer curves longer, but the same angle, thinking this would be fourth radius equivalent."). Whether I succeeded is down to ability (knowing arc lengths for any given angle and radius etc) rather than intent - I genuinely thought I was making third and fourth radius curves. I couldn't use your measurements, but I was able to use the following: Curves (inside) - 582mm @ 22.5d Curves (outside) - 652mm @ 22.5d Straights - 889mm Even these caused a varied gap between the tracks - I did try for a gap of 70mm, but going clockwise from the first top-left straight the gap is (in mm): 70, 70, 70, 60, 59, 67, 65, 50, 50, 65, 69, 69, 33, 47, 27, 70, 70, 64, 64, 70. Yet all the track is the same angle, the same length and all connects. I'm sorry, but I don't know what I'm getting wrong and I'm (or the software or both) obviously getting something wrong... I also thought 50mm (50mm which equals 12ft 6in seems a bit much, though) was the correct track centre to centre measurement for OO gauge and it being prototypical for the wagons to conform to the track (rather than the other way around). I might actually be wrong on that). Anyway, I'm not too fussed about ferryvans - like I said, I'm happy with a Mostyn type port with rather than needing a Felixstowe.

The layout was pretty low down on a bed which got to about thigh height (when I visited my Dad at weekends I would sleep in the main bedroom and Dad slept on a sofa bed). With it being directly on the mattress it could be pushed down a little further for any correcting decoupling, derailing or stalling problems.

You can see my thoughts via https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/165285-layout-design-struggles/

Hi Tony, Thanks for that idea. I was very tempted by N-gauge for a variety of reasons (track plans and better train lengths being the most obvious). The main problem I had though, is that my inherited rolling stock (a Class Five, a Patriot, Mallard, a Class 40, a Deltic, a Class 117 DMU)* as well as my childhood locomotives and stock are all OO gauge. I just thought it would be nice to give the rolling stock mentioned a run even if its regarded as a railtour if not as a service train. Also, I'd like numbers/transfers can be more easily added to OO than N gauge (converting 'Bow Fell' to 'Ben MacDui' - I climbed Ben MacDui in 2005 and the locomotive has hauled steel trains as per photo seven on http://www.penmorfa.com/Wrexham/three.html). A good idea, though and one worth considering until I buy the track. The type of port I'm happy with is 'Mostyn' rather than wanting it to be somewhere like Felixstowe or having a scale size marshalling yard the size of Acton, Arpley, Dollands Moor, Margam, Tees or Tyne. Thanks again, Regards, Jonny *It should have been much more, but there's a complicated and personal story that I don't want to go in to the details of especially on a public forum like RM Web...

The individual boxes on my design = 10cm as the software is in metric. This is my fault, though, I should have mentioned that when I showed my initial design. Yeah, thanks, I think I've got the measurements of the curves wrong. My process was to lay down 2x22.5d* third radius curves in Peco 100 setrack and create the same in flexitrack code 75 (I believe the only code using concrete sleepers which is good for my choice of era) creating 45d then have a short straight then another 45d curve to finish the required 90d. I tried making the outer curves longer, but the same angle, thinking this would be fourth radius equivalent. I thought a mid-curve straight would help with running bogie coaches/DMUs and wagons, that this would allow me not to have every wheel set on a curve (a reason why I've put a short straight with two of the points on the main line - I'm not so fussed about he siding). I recognise that I'd mostly be running semi-fast and stopping passengers (with a sometime railtour rather than 'top line' expresses) or freights that normally run at a maximum of 60mph (I've found that empty coal and steel trains run with the 6XXX coding with coal trains running at no more than 45mph). Only modern container trains running at 60-75mph. The only trains that I plan on running at 90mph are 158s, but even then this would be on the trunk A-route main lines like the E/WCML rather than a B-route main line like Darlington to Middlesborough or Newcastle via Hartlepool. I imagine my layout to be more of a secondary, non-trunk, B-route main line (which is why I'm really not all that interested in OHLE catenary - that said, the GWML has only received partial catenary fairly recently - the Bristol to Exeter and Penzance section still hadn't in the summer of 2019). However, I found that the mid-straight curves were taking too much space, pushing the track close to the furtherest edge and not leaving enough for scenery like platforms and platform fencing. I basically decided the improved performance (precisely how much of a difference it would have made I've no idea) wasn't worth losing reach and scenic possibilities - I'm even skeptical as to how much scenery I could add on the track to 2ft side of the baseboard and I'm considering coming down to 1-2ft and designing the layout from that perspective... I'd like the town and station to be on the same level, being close to a 'port' (underneath town is possible if I decide on an industrial siding, 'somewhere' further in land), the town would be at sea level, so 'underneath the town' would mean the station platforms and rails would be at negative feet or if the platforms were at sea level, then the town would be at plus x feet with no obvious gradient. As I say, its not a problem for inland towns etc as there might well be sudden gradients with a town of post-Beeching railway station size (like Bolton) or arches/walls (like Manchester). As regards the points, yes, you're definitely right about that. I left them as is because I didn't know about the correct length of track to have between the two switch roads. I remember trigonometry from school, but I was struggling putting the points in the right place etc. Also, because I was geusstimating the lengths of the curves etc I wasn't able to get the centre to centre measurement of 5cm correct around the whole layout. Rich Papper (of Catford https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/118696-catford/&do=findComment&comment=4480695). I just thought 'get the design of the sidings right and you'll know how wide you need at least some of your baseboards. Besides, six four by two foot (three along one side and three along the second side with two two by two feet at each end) kind of made sense to me, made things simple from a baseboard perspective. If I need to sacrifice a depot, so be it, as a siding (industrial or port) would probably be more realistic (in the sense that the Stockton and Darlington railway moved coal from mines to port - I also like the idea of a port as the traffic can be bi-directional - imports as well as exports). I'm not rejecting the advice, but I can see that I've expressed the conclusions of my thinking rather than the process of my thinking as well which has probably made things harder to understand/give advice on. *d = degrees because I can't find the degrees symbol.

Actually, I've just realised... I still have a pretty good amount of space for scenery and everything is still 'get-atable'. I seem to remember, though, being able to reach over the far side of my Dad's 6x4 layout, though - it was a stretch, but just about doable (or I could be remembering with the proverbial rose-tinted glasses lol). However, I get that it's not just about 'stretch' length, but garage walls and (possible) back scenes and loading gauges and platforms etc all have to be considered... Better to be able to expand than have to cut down, too. I'm not too worried about full-length trains - my Dad scales up in the ratio of 5:8 (model:actual). Besides, DMUs are only two, three or four 'coaches'. Locomotive (37/4) hauled passengers like the Manchester - Holyhead trains were five coaches and Euston - Aberystwyth were six coaches (https://www.hattons.co.uk/newsdetail.aspx?id=454). I got to my 50 pieces fairly quickly and I wanted to keep those two pieces in the top right corner just in case I wanted another redesign (I know, another?!). I'm also going to have the depot with the siding whatever it turns out to be - just imagine there's a 51st between the two points and the other two points (so there's a little bit of separation between 'the sidings' and the 'depot'/stabling point). Anyway, I'm 'thinking out loud' whilst I get things ready, but thanks to the people who've helped.

I've been able to redesign the layout, a little, with the advice given. There is a bit of 'wrong line working' to enter the siding. I do like ladder junctions, but after the I realised 'Brocklesby Junction'. I don't know if my junction is the correct length or what the track plan was in the early 1990s (my Dad took us/me photographing steam trains mostly on the North Wales Coast line and the Settle and Carlisle line then), but the idea is there. I'll do the 'stretch over test' once I've got the baseboard up and I can then refine the design further from there.

Yeah, you're probably right about it being new build (sheet metal rather than brick, but its not a total 'style')... http://www.davesrailpics.bravehost.com/imm/immloco.htm https://picturestocktonarchive.com/2006/06/22/thornaby-rail-depot/ I can't seem to find sectorisation era photos of Cardiff or Motherwell. There won't be as many roads as either (space and all that). I've seen on a Holyhead depot photo that the refuelling point is on one of the roads that leads in to the shed (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rivercider/11495844606). To be honest, this seems more sensible than with most depots having to do long moves to the refuelling point (like I believe was the case at Toton) wasting some of the fuel just added (its different on model railways because it adds operational interest and spacial constraints).

Hi Andrue, I remember painting some rails with a paintbrush (a small 'detail' brush) and a tin of Humbrol. Anyway, I've been able to find a few videos you might find useful from YouTube channels I subscribe to... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGgT0zQg1s4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaRT3wDlCCc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Vpf0S7ioe0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6G7D5k0kpc I hope all is well with you. Regards, Jonny

Looks interesting. Seems to me they are invoking the spirit of the Orient Express/Trans Siberian Express etc by selling the journey as an experience rather than just connecting two destinations. People might travel for the experience as much as wanting to visit Edinburgh from Paris (or Paris from Edinburgh). Midnight Trains seem to be going for the higher end of the travel market, travel by train in comparative luxury to even first class air travel - as well as the added bonus of arriving in the city itself rather than flying to an airport and then going in to Edinburgh or Paris via non-luxury public transport.

This has a bit about EU law regarding the (UK) railways...

This is mentioned above.

Not my first layout, but my first layout I'll be doing on my own... I've got clinical anxiety and depression caused by my autism and I've found my mood is a little more stable since thinking about a model railway (and railways in more detail for my model railway).

Thanks for the poem information. The verse looked/sounded interesting to me. I can be a little morbid, so that the poem is morbid is not a problem for me. Anyway, I haven't settled on an idea, but I appreciate the kindness with which you gave suggestions - I'll obviously have to what works best for me, but its the time you gave (especially when you didn't have to do so) I'm thanking you for that as well as the suggestion.

Thanks very much for that, Chimer...

Thanks for that, John. I just thought the 'painting first' would allow me to not get (say) the white of the brake wheel on to the bogie. Impressive look, though and I'll keep your post in mind. Thanks again.

Thanks for that. The space is 12x6, so I’m planning on using 6 (three on one side and three on the other side) 4x2 baseboards along the sides and 2 2x2 baseboards at each end. I decided on the baseboard dimensions for a variety of reasons - space being the leading consideration (a bit like the 'buy the best you can afford' maxim 'build the biggest layout you can'). Regards, Jonny

Thanks for that, Steve. A helix is worth considering. I’ve seen plenty of layouts with them. I’ve subscribed to Chadwick on YouTube, so I can pull up his helix construction video when required. Yes, OO is the gauge I will use - its what I already have. The space is 12x6, so I’m planning on using 6 4x2 baseboards along the sides and 2 2x2 baseboards at each end. Anyway, what’s the Thomas Gray poem you’ve quoted in your signature? I like poetry too. Regards, Jonny

I know. Regards, Jonny

Above you'll see my original plan. However, having looked at Catford (https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/118696-catford/) I decided to put the junction at the side. That didn't seem to work for me, so this is why I've started this layout design thread...

Right, so here’s my problem - I’m struggling with my layout design. I’m happy with the idea of a tail chaser, but I’m struggling to fit in a junction for my industry/port siding(s). I’d like to keep the design as simple as possible then wiring can be as simple as possible. My problem too, with layout design, is that it’s difficult for me to visualise the layout on boards where there might be a little more give and that with my Autism (when using RailModdler Express I was struggling to even visualise the hole in the layout from which I’d operate the layout from) I like to generate symmetry. I also think there is a lack of confidence on my part because with a symmetrical layout, I just double and rotate everything. Whereas with junctions etc I then have to start thinking in terms of what else do I need? That got overwhelming for me with my wagon kit purchase (https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/165188-cambrian-steel-wagon-kits/), so I don’t know what its going to be like with the layout… One problem I’ve always had the problem where I take first initial steps and then my thoughts snowball and crash when the thoughts get too much. I sort of decided that posting on here might help me slow down a little and make it easier to take it ‘one step at a time’. I know it doesn’t really affect the design, per se, but I'm intending to set the layout in the latter end of the sectorisation era of c1990 to c1994. I like coal and steel trains too. Some features I’d like: Depot (my deceased uncle Tony was a fireman at Stockport Edgeley) Industry/port siding(s) Station (I have a few locomotives I inherited from my uncle that I’d like to run as railtours along side service freight and passenger trains) Things I’m not fussed about: Fidldle yard (its purely a home layout - although, I recognise it could be ‘included’ as a marshalling yard like Alexandra Docks, Tees or Tynsely) OHLE I won’t get everything, but finding something that works is preferable to an unachievable ideal. Regards, Jonny

My general layout design (hard to explain in much more detail than that as I don't want to turn your layout thread in to 'my layout problems' thread) is an oval too, but I'd like to fit in somehow an industry/port siding(s). I did try using your idea, but the redesign didn't work out...