RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted November 19, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 19, 2009 As readers of my blog will have seen, I'm going through a bit of an indecisive period with my modelling at the moment. Despite this the idea of building something for another competition really does appeal. At the moment I have three main options which I am considering going down for the competition, matching the two main periods I want to concentrate my fleet on (and one extra one to try something a bit different.) In each case they would be built in P4 The first would be for 1987-88, this would be a freight focused layout based in China Clay country, reusing some of the buildings from Blackcombe (all be it with a bit of rebuilding and extra detailing), the trackplan would be fictional but based upon the prototype. This would be a full layout built on two 4ft by 2ft baseboards ((with the backsceen mounted slightly forward of the back of the board in order to thin things down to match the size limit.) This idea is fully dependent on successful adaptation of Jim SW's DCC controlled dingham coupling to some of my China Clay wagons in order to eliminate my problems with shunting. The second idea would be set in 1998-99 (possibly stretching to 2002-3 depending on how much I decide to reduce my loco fleet.) The idea would be based around a terminus station. Inspiration has come from Charlotte Road in that I would like to design it so that in future the buffers can be removed and the layout converted to a through station, similar to this is an idea coming from Nigel Burkin's 4a &4b where the platform at the end (plus the station building) is on a separate baseboard (which would again aid the extension idea) Track plan wise there are a couple of stations I have been looking at for inspiration, the first being a continuation of my Bodmin idea (with the throat adapted so that the S&C is designed with a through line in mind. I like the idea of keeping the branch line in place. Something based upon Tavistock or Bere Alston also appeals, again playing rather loosly with the prototype to match my requirements. The final source of inspiration (all be it not much use for the stock I have) was Botley. The big advantage of this idea is that while it does fit my current space requirements its also pretty future proof with the expansion opportunities, its also a lot easier to deal with operation. I think a revision of the bodmin plan might just do the job, with some of the points off scene (on a possible 3rd baseboard.). The platforms would be built 4ft long (rather than the bodmin plan's 5ft) and fitting the runaround loop in prototpically will be interesting.... The final idea is to model a small halt with one or two sidings in Broad gauge. in all honestly theres probably going to be too much to do here for this to end up being viable, but it would be an accurate model of a prototype. This would be much smaller in size than the modern plans, and would use a new build baseboard. probably 5ft by 1ft + fiddleyard. The idea would be to start building a loco and a couple of coaches in early 2010 whilst still going ahead with one or the other of the above two ideas, that way I cover everything. I suspect that if I do go with this option there is the highest chance of it not being finished on time.... going to start looking at some trackplans tomorrow and over the weekend, and post some diagrams here. Already onto google looking for useful diagrams for tavistock &beer alston and will take it from there..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted November 19, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 19, 2009 Well, I've come up with the first full track plan, and ideas on another. First up the bodmin lite idea: its certainly workable, but I think getting it down to the size of the competition (or that which I can manage to set up at home to work on) would lose a fair bit of operational interest. Going to go back to templot again later and have a play with some point locations and see if I can improve on it. The biggest problem I see with this is that it just dosnt seem to have the expandability that I really need from this project. Having decided that my 1998 project must be my mainline layout (at some point) I cant really justify building this unless I can expand upon it to make the mainline, (the afore mentioned dislike of 80s passenger workings kind of kills off the idea of using this plan for an 80s project. __________________________________________________________ The next plan I've looked at in detail was something based upon Botley, given the space restrictions I've chopped off the Foster Yeoman works which origonally attracted me to the location, but it would be a feasible extension idea to build it at a later date (along with laying third rail). The track plan is basicly accurate, although I have applied a bit of selective compression to the point entering the branch/3rd platform, and more compression between that point and the switch between lines. If I did decide to go with this, there is still a fair bit of tweeking that can be done to the curves etc to better match the prototype (again kind of future proofing the design should I ever decide to switch to an accurate model. At this stage my thinking is to move the location somewhere in the southwest, possibly on the southern mainline serving a fictional town between Tavistock and Oakhampton or between Tavy & Plymouth. The idea being that it would have the branchline going off to serve industry (clay of course, with the added possibility of aggragrates and passenger services). It could be ran as a terminus as well (although is lacking the run around loop in the station), and has a huge amount of expansion possibility. Operations wise would initially see a mixture of South West Trains 159s and Wales and West 150/153/158, with the potential of adding GWT services on diversion with HSTs and the sleeper along with Virgin loco hauled if it was extended to the continuous run. Freight would be more limited (due to the fiddle yard size) but would include short formations of PTAs (and other Yeoman wagons when I get round to building some...), along with a bunch of different options for clay (including a set of CDA, Tigers, Vans etc). The attached plan is 1728sq inches less fiddle yard, however given I already have 2 4ft by 2ft boards, I would plan on using these boards, but leaving a band of blank wood along one half of the board that will be hidden by a temporary back scene. The fiddle yard will be casset based at the left hand end, although this is only intended to be temporary. if space is left after adding the cassets, consideration would be made to adding a 2nd fiddle yard at the bridge end. Finally expansion, the most obvious task would be adding secinics to the rest of the baseboard left out of use, along with adding another baseboard or two (the prototype is about 16ft in 4mm scale between the two bridges). At the same time the addition of curves to each end to make a continuous run would be sensible. As mentioned a possible future development would be to rebuild the scenics to incorporate the unloading building and the rest of the yeoman facility, and to lay the 3rd rail. This would potentially be done at the same time as the continous run extension (by which point I suspect I will be wanting a change again) I do like the idea of building a high quality large fiddleyard that will be useable with a couple of different front sections (to get both a 3rd rail and a GWML layout......) The plan: edit: I should have mentioned that on the above trackplan the grid is set at 300mm, points used are a B8, B9.25 between the mainline and branch and a B10 for the crossover (the latter probably aught to be bigger and a C given its on the main, but I think thats about as far as I can go length wise. _______________________________________________ Of my other initial ideas, I think that Bere Alston would make a great modern layout if you kept the mainline open, and another concept was something based around Yelverton (again as a alternative secondary mainline ignoring the southern) but in both cases I think the size required to do justice is just too large as I havent managed to work out a good place to break it down into a section to model that both fits the challenge size and the current limited area at home..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted November 20, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 20, 2009 A little more progress on the plan, Lots of messing around trying to get the locations of pointwork to match the existing baseboards, still havent got to a satisfactory end as I still have one point crossing a baseboard joint. I have also drawn on the main structures for the layout (platforms, shelters, foot bridge, and road bridge) along with a relocated signal box. This is shown in the crude coloured diagram below. The baseboards shown are the full 8ft by 2ft size, not the area which would be in use for the challenge. edit: Have now found out where the error with the overlapping point had come from, a slight mistake when drawing the baseboards on (in working from the wrong datum.) A revised drawing is attached below. There is also a potential 2nd bridge (farm track) that is another 8ft (in 4mm scale) down the line which would make a good secinic brake on the left hand side. Starting to rather like this idea now, so much so this afternoon I plan on printing out some track templates and seeing how it looks on the baseboard. As for the challenge, I'm still undecided between this and the broad gauge idea, Planning to go and talk to the Broad gauge society at Warley, and attempt a loco kit build at some point once I have some spare funds. Welcome any thoughts etc... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenser Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 Looking at the plan , two locations immediately come to mind - Bere Alston and Bourne End - both junctions where a through route has been truncated . If it is a town like Tavistock ,this gives a fair amount of local traffic , and can be expanded to a SW main line layout later. The branch could be worked conveniently as a shuttle with a 153 - you said you wanted one. The Marlow branch was worked as a shuttle from Bourne End for part of the day, with the branch unit being detached from a London train which split at Bourne End. The one practical difficulty here is that Hornby153s and Bachmann 158s have radically different mechanisms and consisting may be a little awkward Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted November 20, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 20, 2009 Looking at the plan , two locations immediately come to mind - Bere Alston and Bourne End - both junctions where a through route has been truncated . If it is a town like Tavistock ,this gives a fair amount of local traffic , and can be expanded to a SW main line layout later. The branch could be worked conveniently as a shuttle with a 153 - you said you wanted one. The Marlow branch was worked as a shuttle from Bourne End for part of the day, with the branch unit being detached from a London train which split at Bourne End. Thats promising to hear, sounds like the plan I have come up with does seem plausible at least, which is important! Like the sound of the Bourne End operation with the detachment of the 153 from the mainline working. The one practical difficulty here is that Hornby153s and Bachmann 158s have radically different mechanisms and consisting may be a little awkward That is a good point, I do keep thinking about repowering the 158s with something underfloor, likewise the 150s. will have to see how badly they run together as to how urgently I get on and do the work though..... Stock wise at the moment (for 1998) I have: 1 Wales & West Regional 153, 1 W&W 150, a W&W Alphaline 158 thats a touch too late for the period and a SWT branded NSE 159 to that I would add a W&W regional railways 158, and probably some sort of top & tail Fraggonset mk2 rake formed from other stock I already have in the todo pile. pushing forward to 2003/4 I'd have 3 wessex 158s (2 2cars and a 3 car), 2 Wessex 150, 1 153 (would need to add central trains logos to the RR one I have), SWT 158, and a Voyager, to which a Wessex top & tail set and the Devon & Cornwall 153 can be added. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave777 Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 Just a quick comment: angled tracks look good, although I think I preferred the earlier, thinner plan as it - oddly - gave more feeling of length and space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ramblin Rich Posted November 20, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 20, 2009 Interesting scheme, Rich - I like the idea of a "reversing terminus" & in that respect it's similar to Bodmin. I suppose you could imagine the rest of the loop is off-stage & have any loco-hauled traffic reverse back out of the platform to run-round. I've been musing on the possiblity of a minimised version of Bodmin (Bodminion?) to enter the challenge but I didn't want to tread on your toes - if you're tending away form doing Bodmin now maybe I'll have a go.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Hilton Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 This is coming together quickly Rich - thanks for the P4 advice too! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenser Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 In terms of prototype scenario, this is suggesting Bere Alston would really be at Tavistock (if you follow me) , with freight on the Gunnislake branch. My experiment in consisting 153 + 158 may have been influenced by the fact that I need about speed step 8 to get the 158 moving whereas the 153 is away at step 1 or 2 (I also didn't have the 158 fitted with Kadees. Given that the layout is 8'6" long you can imagine the result) . If you have response at speed steps 1 or 2 with the 158s this may be less of an issue , but the design approach - small motor bogie versus massive centre motor all wheel drive - is likely to make match very tough. A 150 may be easier to match - certainly anything with a Beeetle (are your 150s Brachill or Bachmann?) One query - how does the front platform work in terminus mode? Going on the Bere Alston analogy , this should be a "derelict" track? One practical approach would be a cassette at the RH end, beyond the bridge, representing the far end of a loop + headshunt . This cassette could be long enough to take a 2 car 158 - though in practice I suspect the front platform would be derelict and the line used only as a freight runround Final thought - 3rd rail electrification to Salisbury and even on to Exeter has been floated occasionally as a remote possibility. If there were still a mainline via Tavistock (and necessarily assuming there was no problem with Meldon Viaduct) would it be possible to justify 3rd rail to Plymouth???? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 One query - how does the front platform work in terminus mode? Going on the Bere Alston analogy , this should be a "derelict" track? It's closer to the Bourne End scenario, there they have a plain terminus platform (like the lower one on Rich's plan) and a second platform which has the point to go to Marlow, at peak times they could "lock in" a unit between Marlow and Bourne End to increase capacity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenser Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 It's closer to the Bourne End scenario, there they have a plain terminus platform (like the lower one on Rich's plan) and a second platform which has the point to go to Marlow, at peak times they could "lock in" a unit between Marlow and Bourne End to increase capacity. You can depart from the plain terminus road, however I can't see how you get into it , given that you have a double track approach, and it only leads into the departing Plymouth, road. Either there is a second crossover off stage to the left, or access to the front road is by continuing through the middle road and shunting back into the departure road - much as was done at Lincoln Central until recent remodelling (down to Durham Ox , and shunt back across the through roads into the island platforms) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 Ah see what you mean. The "middle" track on the left could always be a siding in this scenario, all trains arrive/depart on the lower track in that direction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted November 20, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 20, 2009 Thanks for the feedback. Liking the idea of an off scene sector plate on the RHS, though I suspect it may well be pushing the limits of the comp a bit much (certainly if I decide my competition entry will be the Broad gauge layout then this one will get the sector plate!) Will have the trackplan with me at Warley tomorrow (Stand 33) if anyone wants to discuss it further. will also be doing a little bit of template laying on the baseboard tonight to see how it looks..... I assume that for a mainline this aught to have the track slightly raised up? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted November 20, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 20, 2009 Well thats the track plan glued onto the baseboard. Going to have to check later to make sure the angle the track is at is not going to make me go over the limit..... If it does I do have a couple of clever space saving designs for the cassets...... The actual plan seems to fit the board quite nicely, with all of the points appearing to have cleared the cross braces (which is nice as I really didnt want to have to start moving them!) I need to run a ruler over the bay platform, as it may be a little narrow (in fact I'm pretty certain that it is), which annoyingly may require the whole lot moving forward... The below image shows the state of play earlier tonight, mostly as a test bed to help calculate what I need to buy from Exactoscale tomorrow (Steel FB rail, lots of it!) thankfully I have enought sleeper bases for the mainline, the branch will again be CWR this time using a different base plates(probably wood sleepers with BR1 or BR2 base plates.) where as the top platform road for the branch will be jointed track, either bullhead or more likely FB using PAN11 base plates. The premis for this miss match of sleeper types is that different parts of the line were relayed at different times. Taking Botley for example there are a few photos Ive seen (for example one of Chris Nevards showing it prior to the addition of the 3rd rail, where the Up is FB with what looks like the Exactoscale type padrol clip, whereas the down is still in bullhead. This does tempt me to model the up line on my layout in FB with exactoscale parts, and the down in FB with PAN11 clips, the branch with BR1s and the branch platform in BH. The mix of track types not only adds to the interest for me when building it, but I hope may also be of interest to some people when looking at the layout. Once these revisions are finished the next step will be gluing down a layer of .4mm wood to bring the mainline up higher than the surroundings (which I need to double check with some track types first to make sure that this is definitely needed) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted November 20, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 20, 2009 In terms of prototype scenario, this is suggesting Bere Alston would really be at Tavistock (if you follow me) , with freight on the Gunnislake branch. My experiment in consisting 153 + 158 may have been influenced by the fact that I need about speed step 8 to get the 158 moving whereas the 153 is away at step 1 or 2 (I also didn't have the 158 fitted with Kadees. Given that the layout is 8'6" long you can imagine the result) . If you have response at speed steps 1 or 2 with the 158s this may be less of an issue , but the design approach - small motor bogie versus massive centre motor all wheel drive - is likely to make match very tough. A 150 may be easier to match - certainly anything with a Beeetle (are your 150s Brachill or Bachmann?) At the moment its a case of one Bachmann and one Bratchel (that I really must get on and finish!) both will probably end up Beetle powered (or some alternative.) Given that I really dont like the way they did the 150s drive. I suppose the other option is to only multi the 153 with a 150 (I believe that this is the most common multiple working Wessex utilize) Eventually everything will get repowered (Im having thoughts on redoing the 158 windows as well as the 150 ones to correct the level of tint as well...) One practical approach would be a cassette at the RH end, beyond the bridge, representing the far end of a loop + headshunt . This cassette could be long enough to take a 2 car 158 - though in practice I suspect the front platform would be derelict and the line used only as a freight runround That does make a lot of sense, One option I am thinking of looking at further is to build the platform and then add some details to get a derelict look, but make sure that everything is easily removable so that should the expansion happen its easy to get it back to service. Alternatively, the sector plate would work pretty well.... Final thought - 3rd rail electrification to Salisbury and even on to Exeter has been floated occasionally as a remote possibility. If there were still a mainline via Tavistock (and necessarily assuming there was no problem with Meldon Viaduct) would it be possible to justify 3rd rail to Plymouth???? Now thats an interesting prospect, again as a future development idea, Wessex units for the Waterloo - Plymouth, maybe use the 456s on the local stuff along with some slammers, then add to that the GW diversions...... Very Interesting! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted November 21, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 21, 2009 I've been pondering what I am going to do for the Inclusion or execution of reference to the number 5, to signify RMweb's 5th birthday in 2010 rule, and think I have come up with my solution (hopefully no ones going to go and copy it now, but if that does happen I said it first ) My five things is going to be the inclusion of five different types of track on the layout, so there is FB16 (the up mainline), PAN11 (the down mainline), BR1 (the branchline), BR2 (short section between pointwork to access branch), and traditional bullhead for the branch platform.... Also planning to add a few extra fives in the details, such as hopefully having a BMW 5 series and a Renault 5 in the station carpark, and some other small mentions. As for the layout its self, I now have all the rail thats needed, so its just a case now of waiting on Colin to have the point kits ready and I can get to work..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff mcghie Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 My five things is going to be the inclusion of five different types of track on the layout, so there is FB16 (the up mainline), PAN11 (the down mainline), BR1 (the branchline), BR2 (short section between pointwork to access branch), and traditional bullhead for the branch platform.... The short section that you're planning on being BR2 and in all probability the short bit between the S&C on the mains would be PAN V to avoid twisting from vertical to 1:20 and back.You should be able to do that with bits out of Colin's kits I'd imagine. What's FB16 by the way? Jeff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted November 21, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 21, 2009 The short section that you're planning on being BR2 and in all probability the short bit between the S&C on the mains would be PAN V to avoid twisting from vertical to 1:20 and back.You should be able to do that with bits out of Colin's kits I'd imagine. What's FB16 by the way? Jeff. Think its actually a sleeper designation come to think of it, I think its what Colin's article described the exactoscale stuff as. At least using the PAN V stuff instead of br2 still means I fit in my 5 track types! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff mcghie Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 A bit of googling turns up that the exactoscale concrete FB stuff is F27, one of the most common types installed, certainly until the advent of fastclip and the now ubiquitous G44/W560H's. cheers Jeff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted May 3, 2010 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted May 3, 2010 Time to admit defeat I think I dont think there is any chance of getting the layout built and finished this year, given that so far other than a couple of structures awaiting paint no progress has been made. The change of job, move to Bristol and the start of the 'proper' Cima exams is going to decimate my free time come September, and given the lack of progress so far I really dont want to get into the position where I am having to rush things to get the layout finished in time. If there is some form of category for incomplete projects or plans I will enter it in that instead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.