"Hawkesbury" - the engine shed area is no more.....

[halsey]

2 hours ago, Chimer said:

OK, I said I could fill the boards - hopefully I've got the arrangement right now?  This is very much a first stab which could be improved, but little fiddles take a long time to implement using XTrackCad and I wanted to show you something soonish.

 

So what have we got here?  Basically a double track mainline turning 135 degrees between two tunnel mouths.  This is at Streamline's 2" track centre spacing, with a minimum radius of 36", mostly 48".  Off scene I have used 2nd and 3rd radius settrack to get round the other 225 degrees to complete the circuits, resulting in having the wider settrack spacing across the bridge.  The points forming the crossovers on the main are large radius, those accessing the yards and sidings curved or medium radius, and those within the yards small radius.  The layouts of all the siding areas are just indicative, and the one for the loco stabling sidings in particular is very train-setty.

 

Freight ops are confined to the inner anti-clockwise circuit (I'll call it the "up" line for future reference).  It's quite common for yards only to be served by trains in one direction, with stuff originating from the other end passing through and coming back.  The passing-through "down" freights will have to be imagined, unless I can fiddle the layout to give somewhere for one to sit between turns ……  So an up trip freight will first drop off to and pick up from "Canal Sidings", probably leaving the body of the train sitting on the main between the tunnel mouth and the access point, then repeat for "Home Goods", leaving the body of the train in the up platform.  Then having departed from the scene it stops on the bridge and reverses into the hidden siding under the hill behind the stabling point until next required.  The fun here is using some form of random card system to determine which wagons have to be dropped off and picked up, noting coal wagons have to be left by the coal staithes, covered vans in the goods shed and so on - the resulting shunting puzzles can be quite head-scratching.  The shunting will normally be carried out by the train engine.

 

Passenger ops can be quite varied too.  A down train can continue or terminate - if it terminates, the coaching stock can be worked into the carriage sidings, or the train can immediately depart in the up direction over the trailing crossover, with either the same loco having run-round the train or a new loco from the stabling roads.  Same options for an up train, plus the possibility of the stock from a terminating train being worked into the bay platform to await a later down departure.  Work here for a station pilot loco ……  Note the curving road inside the up platform is part of the goods yard, not another bay platform.

 

To wire this for DC operation would be quite challenging, as there would need to be lots of sectioning to allow, e.g., the station pilot to attach to the rear of a train and remove the coaching stock while the train loco doesn't move.  Absolutely do-able, but much easier using DCC and just saying which loco you want to move (says he, never having operated a DCC layout).  

 

Any good/ food for thought?  Phil @Harlequincould draw it much more beautifully ……...

 

 

 

 

 

WOW thanks and thanks for the work involved it is really appreciated.

 

Looking a little further down the line does your design system have the ability to plot peco track parts?? (not that that would be beyond me I think/hope as I have a lot of bits from the last layout).

 

It looks great and is in principle exactly what I had in mind - just digesting it …………..

 

Early thoughts

• I'd rather not have hidden sidings/hills (esp as that is the window) - in favour of a coal yard??
• It looks as though there might be quite a few curved points on here - I have 2 BUT have had bad experiences with them
• As prompted by my other thread I have decided to model/wire totally from above (due to old age) on a total covering of 10mm XPS board with a 2mm cork overlay for undertrack areas which to start with will also be laid as a complete covering
• I had decided not to use DCC but could still be persuaded if it really helped but I remain to be convinced (as does SWMBO £'s) so if DC is agreed early understanding of isolation zones and joiners would be good David C Broad was v good at this last time

 

THANKS again lets see what others have to say ………………………….

 

.......................................….I will start laying XPS and cork and probably the under worktop/bridge area to keep me going

 

Also I will dig out my still packed away earlier layout points/curves and see what bits I've got to assemble and get an idea of space take up

 

Edited November 14, 2019 by halsey

[halsey]

 would it be better where/if possible to work within the 2nd-4th radius Peco Set-track range as my new track laying format will be gluing rather than pins so this will be less stressed when laying it out ??

[Zomboid]

Glueing flexible track is the approach most people here use, I believe.

Though set track would be a viable option to achieve something along those lines.

[Harlequin]

3 hours ago, Chimer said:

OK, I said I could fill the boards - hopefully I've got the arrangement right now?  This is very much a first stab which could be improved, but little fiddles take a long time to implement using XTrackCad and I wanted to show you something soonish.

 

So what have we got here?  Basically a double track mainline turning 135 degrees between two tunnel mouths.  This is at Streamline's 2" track centre spacing, with a minimum radius of 36", mostly 48".  Off scene I have used 2nd and 3rd radius settrack to get round the other 225 degrees to complete the circuits, resulting in having the wider settrack spacing across the bridge.  The points forming the crossovers on the main are large radius, those accessing the yards and sidings curved or medium radius, and those within the yards small radius.  The layouts of all the siding areas are just indicative, and the one for the loco stabling sidings in particular is very train-setty.

 

Freight ops are confined to the inner anti-clockwise circuit (I'll call it the "up" line for future reference).  It's quite common for yards only to be served by trains in one direction, with stuff originating from the other end passing through and coming back.  The passing-through "down" freights will have to be imagined, unless I can fiddle the layout to give somewhere for one to sit between turns ……  So an up trip freight will first drop off to and pick up from "Canal Sidings", probably leaving the body of the train sitting on the main between the tunnel mouth and the access point, then repeat for "Home Goods", leaving the body of the train in the up platform.  Then having departed from the scene it stops on the bridge and reverses into the hidden siding under the hill behind the stabling point until next required.  The fun here is using some form of random card system to determine which wagons have to be dropped off and picked up, noting coal wagons have to be left by the coal staithes, covered vans in the goods shed and so on - the resulting shunting puzzles can be quite head-scratching.  The shunting will normally be carried out by the train engine.

 

Passenger ops can be quite varied too.  A down train can continue or terminate - if it terminates, the coaching stock can be worked into the carriage sidings, or the train can immediately depart in the up direction over the trailing crossover, with either the same loco having run-round the train or a new loco from the stabling roads.  Same options for an up train, plus the possibility of the stock from a terminating train being worked into the bay platform to await a later down departure.  Work here for a station pilot loco ……  Note the curving road inside the up platform is part of the goods yard, not another bay platform.

 

To wire this for DC operation would be quite challenging, as there would need to be lots of sectioning to allow, e.g., the station pilot to attach to the rear of a train and remove the coaching stock while the train loco doesn't move.  Absolutely do-able, but much easier using DCC and just saying which loco you want to move (says he, never having operated a DCC layout).  

 

Any good/ food for thought?  Phil @Harlequincould draw it much more beautifully ……...

 

 

 

 

Is there some way to give the goods yard it’s own headshunt? That would allow trains to circulate on the inner circuit without interruption while shunting the yard.

And maybe there could be a loop in the yard so that it’s easier to make up or accept goods trains in either direction? (The mainlines could be used to run round a goods train but that would snarl things up while it’s going on.

 

2 hours ago, Tallpaul69 said:

If you could live with a small triangular infill in the top right of the operating well to allow the loco approach road to be longer, the loco sidings and turntable might fit in the space top centre, releasing the space currently occupied by the loco sidings for more holding sidings for freight rather than the single siding at present beside the mainline at the left of the layout?

 

Hopefully someone with better drawing skills than I can draw this up for you?

 

Another thought is that a "down" freight could be backed into the bay platform or one of the carriage sidings between duties.

Or it could be a parcels train rather than a freight?

 

Cheers

Paul

A triangular infill would make a big difference to the track plan but the reach into the top two corners is already a worry and an infill would make it worse. The cupboards and the baseboards that have already built make this difficult to do now.

Edited November 14, 2019 by Harlequin

[Chimer]

39 minutes ago, halsey said:

 would it be better where/if possible to work within the 2nd-4th radius Peco Set-track range as my new track laying format will be gluing rather than pins so this will be less stressed when laying it out ??

 

Hum.  Any "realism" in the concept is completely reliant on the comparatively gentle (4' radius) curve through the station area.  Using Settrack would give you a 20" radius 90 degree curve smack in the middle of the scenic section, and using Settrack points for the crossovers in particular would destroy any remaining flow to the trackwork.  Avoiding sharp visible curves was one reason for hiding the main line tracks down the left hand side (the other being to try to fool the eye into not realising the trains are tailchasing, by taking a chunk of the circuit out of direct obvious sight).  

 

With regard to your earlier reactions/queries:

 

Yes, XtrackCAD does have a Peco Settrack library available as well as the Streamline one.

The hill doesn't need to be a hill - it could just be the wall keeping trainspotters out of the loco shed - anything that cuts (or seems to cut) the main line there out of the viewed area.

If you're going to (for instance) shunt coaches across both lines in the station area, you need somewhere to hold other trains out on the circuit.  Better (in my opinion) out of plain sight. 

Similarly, if you ever want to run a passenger train on the up line, you've got to get the freight train out of the way - hence that hidden kickback siding.

The curved points used are Streamline not Settrack - much gentler and I've used them without problems.

 

Cheers

 

Chris

 

 

[Chimer]

24 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

Is there some way to give the goods yard it’s own headshunt? That would allow trains to circulate on the inner circuit without interruption while shunting the yard.

And maybe there could be a loop in the yard so that it’s easier to make up or accept goods trains in either direction? (The mainlines could be used to run round a goods train but that would snarl things up while it’s going on.

 

 

Yes to both, if the "home goods" and "canal sidings" were amalgamated into a single bigger yard.  But the OP seemed to want two distinct areas, and one-direction goods yards are very common.

[Tallpaul69]

23 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

Is there some way to give the goods yard it’s own headshunt? That would allow trains to circulate on the inner circuit without interruption while shunting the yard.

And maybe there could be a loop in the yard so that it’s easier to make up or accept goods trains in either direction? (The mainlines could be used to run round a goods train but that would snarl things up while it’s going on.

 

A triangular infill would make a big difference to the track plan but the reach into the top two corners is already a worry and an infill would make it worse. The cupboards and the baseboards already built make this difficult to do now.

Agree with you Phil re the benefits of a head shunt or a loop!

Another possibility might be a long refuge siding on the visible side of the divide at the bottom of the layout?

 

I thought we might get away with the infill I mentioned because there is such a large area in the top right corner of the layout that does not need to be accessed except for scenic treatment as there are no tracks!

 

Cheers

Paul

[halsey]

1 hour ago, Harlequin said:

Is there some way to give the goods yard it’s own headshunt? That would allow trains to circulate on the inner circuit without interruption while shunting the yard.

And maybe there could be a loop in the yard so that it’s easier to make up or accept goods trains in either direction? (The mainlines could be used to run round a goods train but that would snarl things up while it’s going on.

 

A triangular infill would make a big difference to the track plan but the reach into the top two corners is already a worry and an infill would make it worse. The cupboards and the baseboards that have already built make this difficult to do now.

 

I added a couple of areas of "infill" last time and it wasn't a good idea as reach was a problem - this is why to some degree I have built boards that I don't want to alter as reach is very important - less so for scenery agreed - but I would still rather keep to the parameters chosen.

 

[halsey]

1 hour ago, Chimer said:

 

Yes to both, if the "home goods" and "canal sidings" were amalgamated into a single bigger yard.  But the OP seemed to want two distinct areas, and one-direction goods yards are very common.

 

I do prefer separate areas BUT I am very happy to consider this esp if the main line was left cleaner? and the canal wharf/water ended up running against the bottom workshop edge board possibly if space is an issue with just a single track serving the wharf

[halsey]

1 hour ago, Chimer said:

 

Hum.  Any "realism" in the concept is completely reliant on the comparatively gentle (4' radius) curve through the station area.  Using Settrack would give you a 20" radius 90 degree curve smack in the middle of the scenic section, and using Settrack points for the crossovers in particular would destroy any remaining flow to the trackwork.  Avoiding sharp visible curves was one reason for hiding the main line tracks down the left hand side (the other being to try to fool the eye into not realising the trains are tailchasing, by taking a chunk of the circuit out of direct obvious sight).  

 

With regard to your earlier reactions/queries:

 

Yes, XtrackCAD does have a Peco Settrack library available as well as the Streamline one.

The hill doesn't need to be a hill - it could just be the wall keeping trainspotters out of the loco shed - anything that cuts (or seems to cut) the main line there out of the viewed area.

If you're going to (for instance) shunt coaches across both lines in the station area, you need somewhere to hold other trains out on the circuit.  Better (in my opinion) out of plain sight. 

Similarly, if you ever want to run a passenger train on the up line, you've got to get the freight train out of the way - hence that hidden kickback siding.

The curved points used are Streamline not Settrack - much gentler and I've used them without problems.

 

Cheers

 

Chris

 

 

 

The curves concern was purely one related to holding stuff in place before glue sets if that's doable then totally agree with your flextrack thoughts - as said earlier realism isn't my prime concern over and above operations BUT if we can achieve it so much the better - the last layout was a bit of a "train set" and it would be better to move away from that where possible and (if as you suggest) it will keep others more engaged so much the better again.

I'm very conscious that this layout will need to last and challenge for a longer period than the last one and to be clear that's a good thing

[halsey]

All XPS now cut to size a reasonably easy job and a good product but it does need an edging on the baseboard edge to stop bruising - a trip to my local DIY tomorrow.

I'm going to glue with a spray contact adhesive only applied to one surface so its not there for ever!

[Chimer]

1 hour ago, halsey said:

 

I do prefer separate areas BUT I am very happy to consider this esp if the main line was left cleaner? and the canal wharf/water ended up running against the bottom workshop edge board possibly if space is an issue with just a single track serving the wharf

 

I'll have a play with this tomorrow, but it's not easy to warp track round into the area I think you're thinking of for the wharfside.  But that is one place where the horribly small radius settrack points just might come in handy.

[Chimer]

On the general subject of goods yards, not particularly related to Halsey's issues ….

 

For myself, I would always want to be able to puzzle shunt a goods yard while a train or two circulate unattended on the main line(s), which does indeed need a headshunt.  But it's a planning nightmare especially once you decide to abide by the rule that yards have to be accessed by reversing over a trailing point.  That means you need an empty siding longer than the longest train, probably parallel to the main, to act as a reception road, from which the trucks to be shunted can then be drawn forward into the headshunt (which probably needs to be half a train length itself) clearing the point that leads into the main fan of sidings.  You also don't really want the train loco to have to enter the tunnel (which most of us will have acting as a scenic break) to get the guard's van clear of the trailing point before starting the reverse in …. it's getting big …. (I'm thinking 00 here)

 

Now if you also want trailing access from the far running line across a single slip into the reception road, that's at least another couple of feet added to that throat and of course the train loco will be at the wrong end for shunting the fan and needs to run round somehow - if you want that to happen clear of the main line you need a loop off the reception road, so that's another two feet allowing for the clearances - and the whole damn thing is probably on a curve , 'cos for some reason the yard always ends up on the inside of the roundy-roundy, so fitting in the points at all is a nightmare .  And let's not forget tension-lock uncoupling ramps don't work on curves ….

 

I reckon that's a minimum of 3 train lengths between scenic breaks, so about 12' to be able to run a semi-decent trip freight …..

 

Not sure why I felt the need to say all that, but I feel better now!  

[halsey]

14 hours ago, Chimer said:

 

I'll have a play with this tomorrow, but it's not easy to warp track round into the area I think you're thinking of for the wharfside.  But that is one place where the horribly small radius settrack points just might come in handy.

 

I have got a lot of small "Y" points from the old layout they seemed to be very good in tight goods areas (see old layout drawings?)

[Harlequin]

17 hours ago, Chimer said:

 

Yes to both, if the "home goods" and "canal sidings" were amalgamated into a single bigger yard.  But the OP seemed to want two distinct areas, and one-direction goods yards are very common.

The line to the shed could maybe do double-duty as the goods headshunt if the points were tweaked a bit?

 

[halsey]

FYI - current points stock from old layout 

8 small radius left hand

7 small radius right hand

6 small radius "Y"

3 large radius "Y"

1 double slip

1 medium radius 3 way

3 large radius curved right hand

All PECO streamline

It would be good to use as much of this stock a possible - but not paramount

 

 

[halsey]

Final decision made - I'm sticking with DC it provides all I need/want.

[halsey]

On 15/11/2019 at 09:13, halsey said:

FYI - current points stock from old layout 

8 small radius left hand

7 small radius right hand

6 small radius "Y"

3 large radius "Y"

1 double slip

1 medium radius 3 way

3 large radius curved right hand

All PECO streamline

It would be good to use as much of this stock a possible - but not paramount

 

 

 

ON reflection...…………….

IF overly using old track/stock compromises the layout (particularly thinking of those of you into realism) then I would rather not as this stuff usually finds a ready market on E Bay and I do want to get away from train set as much as possible - which I think i'm right in saying is evidenced by over use of small rather than large radius items

 

Hope that helps and keeps more people on board.

 

Have a good weekend all...………………………………...

[DCB]

On 15/11/2019 at 08:11, Harlequin said:

The line to the shed could maybe do double-duty as the goods headshunt if the points were tweaked a bit?

 

I agree, see top of my sketch.  Also linking the canal siding to the yard, effectively having a goods loop rater than a bay with sidings off it might allow two trains to run while you shunt the yard.  Otherwise looks good and capable of proper railway like operation.

[halsey]

2 hours ago, DavidCBroad said:

I agree, see top of my sketch.  Also linking the canal siding to the yard, effectively having a goods loop rater than a bay with sidings off it might allow two trains to run while you shunt the yard.  Otherwise looks good and capable of proper railway like operation.

 

I'm always very conscious that I don't understand the tweaking as much as you guys but I'm getting there - and I like where we have got to - loads of interest most points within easy reach good track coverage etc so my boxes are ticked

It would be good to perhaps settle on this (now if not very soon) and if its OK move the topic on to more accurate plotting, a shopping list, a wiring/isolation diagram so I can perhaps get on and lay the loops and run some trains - clearly bridge and hidden section can be done now so that will keep me going for a while. 

Dog (shrimp) is still doing well for those who showed an interest - but all of us are feeling a bit imprisoned as he cant be left at all and cant get out of his cage for another 3 weeks

 

THANKS ALL

Edited November 16, 2019 by halsey

[halsey]

I am assuming I can lay part of the loop even now from the 4ft mark on the r/h side over and including the bridge to the 7ft mark on the LH side incl the spur on the LH side - that will keep me going for a while whilst the tweaking etc develops.

 

- Julian

 

Time to lose the "Halsey" 

[Harlequin]

OK to lay track temporarily but I think it would be better to wait for @Chimer to plot the changes and make sure they fit. [Edit: If he agrees with them, that is!]

 

P.S. I suggest moving the crossover at 8,5 down to 8,3 so that goods trains on the outer circuit can get in and out of the yard.

Edited November 16, 2019 by Harlequin

[Zomboid]

1 hour ago, Harlequin said:

P.S. I suggest moving the crossover at 8,5 down to 8,3 so that goods trains on the outer circuit can get in and out of the yard.

Wouldn't that usually be achieved by putting there crossover at 8,4 and using a single slip?

 

Not sure I would though, all the sidings are configured for shunting by trains on the inner circuit, it would be a big palaver to shunt them with a train running clockwise, and a real railway probably wouldn't have bothered.

Edited November 16, 2019 by Zomboid

[Harlequin]

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

Wouldn't that usually be achieved by putting there crossover at 8,4 and using a single slip?

 

Not sure I would though, all the sidings are configured for shunting by trains on the inner circuit, it would be a big palaver to shunt them with a train running clockwise, and a real railway probably wouldn't have bothered.

Yes you're right, a single slip wouild combine the crossover with the goods entry in the proper way.

 

I was just thinking that Julian might feel there was something missing if goods trains never circulated clockwise. Since this is the only goods yard on the route, if he want goods traffic to run on either circuit (easily) this yard should allow for both.

 

I don't see it as being too difficult to shunt from the outer circuit: Having set back in, just need to run round using David's goods loop and stash the guard's van somewhere before shunting as normal...? No?

 

Edited November 16, 2019 by Harlequin

[crackedmember]

Please see a couple of suggestions for improvements to your design.  The Single slip could be replaced by a simple diamond crossing if you decide you do not need a crossover between the running lines at this end of the station.  Either arrangement could be found.  Goods trains travelling in the clockwise direction would probably just drop and pick up wagons.  Shunting would be carried out by the engine of the train travelling in the opposite direction.  Alternatively a small shunting engine might be employed,  the carriage sidings would certainly suggest enough traffic to justify this, especially with the loco stabling present.  If neccessary the crossovers would be used to run round the train.

 

For the entrance to the loco stabling / goods yard from the  anticlockwise circuit,  having a separate headshunt for the goods yard makes entrance to the loco stabling independent of the yard.

There needs to be at least one loco length between the headshunt and turnout to the loco stabling.

 

 

Hope this is of help