Toying with an Industrial layout shelf

[ManofKent]

51 minutes ago, Chris116 said:

Finally got the track diagram to download. I remembered that from AnyRail you have to save it as a file to export and it then works!

 

You will see that I have used four Y points as in your original idea but have used them to form a loop which I always find I like in any layout. The blue and yellow boxes are for industries that have deliveries and send out their products. Given that there would be no way to hide loading and unloading I would suggest that box vans are probably the best way to serve the two customers. The head shunt at the right hand end of the layout should be just long enough for your largest loco and I would suggest keeping all locos that are used as small as possible. With the loop it means you can do all the shunting with just one engine which also makes the electrics much easier to do.

Thanks  - Interesting, but I think it confirms my suspicions that I'm trying to cram too much in a tiny space.

[SteveyDee68]

With the benefits of an overnight think (aka having slept on it) I realised that the rear of the scene of my attempt at a plan might be better served by a series of relatively low industrial buildings. The rear right siding could then serve a loading dock to one of those, but perhaps the illusion that the left headshunt leads off to the works proper and the sidings are simply for sorting (which is the essence of an Inglenook!) might be easier to achieve?

 

I've slightly rejigged my Blackford Wharf track plan again ... I now just happen to have three small Y points spare (they were originally for a four track train ferry!) ... and the correct sized foam board... and 2'9" is a challenge with only 8.5" width* ... hmmm?!

 

HOURS OF FUN!

 

* And being so small means a chance of actually making progress!

[33C]

22 hours ago, ManofKent said:

Thanks  - Interesting, but I think it confirms my suspicions that I'm trying to cram too much in a tiny space.

Why not have the layout with inset rails, and then go high level above! Hornby iron ore bridge to unload into below or liverpool overhead style tramway on a shuttle.... Two micro layouts in one. That's cramming it in!! 

[ManofKent]

1 hour ago, 33C said:

Why not have the layout with inset rails, and then go high level above! Hornby iron ore bridge to unload into below or liverpool overhead style tramway on a shuttle.... Two micro layouts in one. That's cramming it in!! 

Hmmm.... several of the quarries had narrow gauge tipping wagons and a standard gauge line....

[SteveyDee68]

Well, a large glass of cider, a piece of foam board cut to size and a great deal of track shuffling later and I can confidently say that you cannot get a full 5-3-3 Inglenook onto ManofKent's baseboard dimensions!

 

And boy, have I tried! 

 

The design I butchered posted earlier does just about work though, as a 3-2-2 Inglenook, although it feels cramped especially at the right hand side, mainly due to the kickback siding.

 

If the idea of a kickback siding is abandoned though, then the plan opens out as it only uses two points. Keeping to the proposed 3-2-2 formula, I've been able to length the headshunt slightly by about 30mm so that an 0-6-0 can be used to shunt, rather than limit the layout only to 0-4-0 locos. I've had everything up to a class 08 on there - though a Janus or USA 0-6-0 tank loco might be squeezing it a bit! The two rear sidings easily hold two wagons each, and the 'sorting" siding can actually hold four wagons; in my scenario I used a gate across the tracks to indicate the end of the private sidings.

 

As there isn't room for a shed, I would suggest using a small water tower (such as the Scalescenes Industrial Water Tower) to act as a view block at the end of the headshunt, perhaps with some loco facilities alongside.

 

I am very tempted to build this as a micro-Inglenook, as it would actually fit on top of the chest of drawers in my bedroom! However, I think I might cheat just a little and add 30mm to the depth (making it 250mm deep front to back) to allow a little more scenery front and back!

 

I'll post up photos tomorrow when my iPad has charge!

 

Steve S

[ManofKent]

2 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

Well, a large glass of cider, a piece of foam board cut to size and a great deal of track shuffling later and I can confidently say that you cannot get a full 5-3-3 Inglenook onto ManofKent's baseboard dimensions!

 

And boy, have I tried! 

 

The design I butchered posted earlier does just about work though, as a 3-2-2 Inglenook, although it feels cramped especially at the right hand side, mainly due to the kickback siding.

 

If the idea of a kickback siding is abandoned though, then the plan opens out as it only uses two points. Keeping to the proposed 3-2-2 formula, I've been able to length the headshunt slightly by about 30mm so that an 0-6-0 can be used to shunt, rather than limit the layout only to 0-4-0 locos. I've had everything up to a class 08 on there - though a Janus or USA 0-6-0 tank loco might be squeezing it a bit! The two rear sidings easily hold two wagons each, and the 'sorting" siding can actually hold four wagons; in my scenario I used a gate across the tracks to indicate the end of the private sidings.

 

As there isn't room for a shed, I would suggest using a small water tower (such as the Scalescenes Industrial Water Tower) to act as a view block at the end of the headshunt, perhaps with some loco facilities alongside.

 

I am very tempted to build this as a micro-Inglenook, as it would actually fit on top of the chest of drawers in my bedroom! However, I think I might cheat just a little and add 30mm to the depth (making it 250mm deep front to back) to allow a little more scenery front and back!

 

I'll post up photos tomorrow when my iPad has charge!

 

Steve S

 

Thanks - I couldn't get more than 3, 2, 2. I think regardless of whether it's a true puzzle or not , three sidings are needed for any meaningful shunting. Two just doesn't allow any re-ordering.

 

In such a tiny space there are going to be compromises with 00 (009 would be a better fit but I'm not buying a new loco - as this is very much somewhere to use the Peckett and 44DS). I don't mind limiting myself to small 0-4-0s if that's a compromise that has to be made.  I worked out the depth could be 230mm and still fit in the alcove - not your generous extra 30mm but 10mm is 10mm! Scenery and buildings are going to have to be pretty minimalist in scale but I don't mind very low-relief. Once the board arrives I can have a play with track and see what room I've got.  If it ends up being more of a diorama where trains can move but not do much that might be a better compromise than something that allows proper shunting.

 

I'm still undecided on setting. A few books have arrived on industrial operations in Kent - the two big ones are cement works or paper mills, both as ugly as sin and in the ugliest part of Kent!  Dorset and the Midlands seem to have had the almost picturesque industrial railways. Not that there's anything forcing me to model Kent. The Kent collieries weren't as ugly (I'm old enough to remember them in operation, although Chislet closed about a year before I was born), but you couldn't really model them without the Avonside or Austerities.

 

 

 

Richard

[SteveyDee68]

Just for the record here, find below a photograph of the 3-2-2 Inglenook I managed on your tiny baseboard! It happens to be turned around here, with the headshunt at the right hand side.

 

Track cut to size and tested (only needs one power feed!). In this version, the headshunt is a little longer to allow a class 08* to shunt but if shortened slightly that would give a fraction more length on the back sidings to allow for proper bufferstops.

 

 

First scenic treatment - water tank as view blocker and embankment / greenery / trees etc to define area, and a small yard office at back.

 

 

Second treatment - a half relief road overbridge with slope down along front and rear. A second siding from under the bridge serves as a loco facility - water tower and coaling stage. Mirror under bridge to reflect layout and create illusion of more beyond the overbridge.

 

Edited April 16, 2021 by SteveyDee68
* Glitch - unable to access numbers on my iPad! Added photos of scenic treatment ideas

[ManofKent]

4 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

Just for the record here, find below a photograph of the 3-2-2 Inglenook I managed on your tiny baseboard! It happens to be turned around here, with the headshunt at the right hand side.

 

Track cut to size and tested (only needs one power feed!). In this version, the headshunt is a little longer to allow a class 08* to shunt but if shortened slightly that would give a fraction more length on the back sidings to allow for proper bufferstops.

 

Thank you. 

 

What length are you assuming for coupled wagons? I was assuming 85mm per wagon including couplings (I might be being optomistic). Are those the 148mm Wyes?

 

I think I need to look at my AnyRail settings.

 

 

[ManofKent]

A couple of possibilities - thinking private quay/wharf for timber :

 

 

This has the advantage of simplicity and I think fits the space well ^ Only one feed required - could be run self contained, but I could add a fiddleyard to left in the future.

 

^ operationally the kick back would add extra interest. I'm assuming I'd just need a second feed to the fuel/water area - I don't think there would be need for a switch though. 

 

Any thoughts appreciated.

 

 

Edited April 17, 2021 by ManofKent

[ManofKent]

Well I now have a baseboard so we have progress and a degree of commitment to producing something!

 

10mm Foamex, with two foamex strips glued to the sides and three across. It's plenty rigid enough for the size of the board and very lightweight - I can't twist it at all on the diagonal and it takes  significant force to get and flex on the length. Mitrebond glued it together in minutes.

 

It's very small...

 

Width will prove "interesting". I need to pick up a couple of Ys to play with to finalise the track plan. I'm probably mainly going with inset track (might have a small amount 'exposed' for interest), which will visually help it looking too congested. Probably paper floor plans or rough mock ups will be needed to get the visual balance with the buildings. I need to be careful not to have too many building materials - mainly brick and corrugated iron - to keep it looking coherent and straddle the line between 'busy' and 'messy'.

Edited April 20, 2021 by ManofKent
image added

[Sun VI]

Hello Man of Kent,

Some further books that you may find of interest:

Lost Railways of Kent, by Leslie Oppitz, published Countryside Books of Newbury, Berkshire, 2003 and six reprints to 2019.  ISBN 1 85306 803 9

The Cement Railways of Kent, by B.D. Stoyel and R.W. Kidner, published The Oakwood Press of Headington, Oxford, 1973 with a second enlarged edition in 1990.  ISBN 0 85361 370 2

Military Railways in Kent, by R.M. Lyne, published by North Kent Books, 1983.  ISBN 0 9505733 9 6

 

No doubt there are more.  I haven’t heard of Gordon Edgar’s books before, so thanks to all for the recommendation.

 

Regarding the following:

‘EDIT: I meant to add that 2 wagon length sidings do tend to look short - but again, depending on the setting and overall design, they can be made to look perfectly plausible.

Edited April 8 by marc smith’

It should be possible to achieve this by running the siding(s) to the side panel of the layout.  Then, instead of a buffer stop, cut an old wagon crossways in two and position one piece at the end of the siding to suggest the siding continues off scene.  Cut off the coupling from this dummy end so there’s no chance for a shunted wagon to hook up, then you have a siding that appears feasible (I hope) while still only having a two wagon capacity.  Low relief buildings are used all the time – so why not low relief wagons?  I haven’t tried this but would be very interested to see the result.

 

Good luck!

[ManofKent]

6 hours ago, Sun VI said:

Hello Man of Kent,

Some further books that you may find of interest:

Lost Railways of Kent, by Leslie Oppitz, published Countryside Books of Newbury, Berkshire, 2003 and six reprints to 2019.  ISBN 1 85306 803 9

The Cement Railways of Kent, by B.D. Stoyel and R.W. Kidner, published The Oakwood Press of Headington, Oxford, 1973 with a second enlarged edition in 1990. 

 

Military Railways in Kent, by R.M. Lyne, published by North Kent Books, 1983.  ISBN 0 9505733 9 6

 

No doubt there are more.  I haven’t heard of Gordon Edgar’s books before, so thanks to all for the recommendation.

 

Regarding the following:

‘EDIT: I meant to add that 2 wagon length sidings do tend to look short - but again, depending on the setting and overall design, they can be made to look perfectly plausible.

Edited April 8 by marc smith’

It should be possible to achieve this by running the siding(s) to the side panel of the layout.  Then, instead of a buffer stop, cut an old wagon crossways in two and position one piece at the end of the siding to suggest the siding continues off scene.  Cut off the coupling from this dummy end so there’s no chance for a shunted wagon to hook up, then you have a siding that appears feasible (I hope) while still only having a two wagon capacity.  Low relief buildings are used all the time – so why not low relief wagons?  I haven’t tried this but would be very interested to see the result.

 

Good luck!

 

Thanks - I've got a copy of the first book, but not the other two. Industrial Railways of Southern England in Colour  by Jeffrey Grayer is an excellent book and  Industrial Railways in Colour (South) by Michael Poulter has some good content. The IRS guide ' Industrial Railways and Locomotives of Kent' ' by Robin Waywell is an excellent and comprehensive reference work, but not great for inspirational images.

 

Low relief wagons are an interesting idea - I've seen it done reasonably effectively with road vehicles but hadn't considered wagons... 

[SteveyDee68]

On 16/04/2021 at 19:40, ManofKent said:

 

Thank you. 

 

What length are you assuming for coupled wagons? I was assuming 85mm per wagon including couplings (I might be being optomistic). Are those the 148mm Wyes?

 

I think I need to look at my AnyRail settings.

 

 

 

Erm, I didn't assume a length - I simply put a couple of 10' wheelbase wagons on the track and slid the whole thing hither and yon until they fit! Sorry to prove myself to be so unscientific in my planning. I usually sketch a plan with a good dose of "optimistic pencil" and then try to mock it up full size to see how far away from reality my alternative universe has ended!

 

I think the Y points are short radius but are - I think - Streamline rather than Set-track as a relatively gentle curve from each exit at the toe brings the centre line of each track back parallel with that entering at the heel. (Hope that makes sense?) The only other Y point I have needs to use very sharp curves to bring the exit tracks back parallel.

 

Nothing beats a handful of standard set track parts and some old points for mocking things up at full size, as long as we are talking micro layouts - doing so for a larger model would be expensive!! 

 

HOURS OF PLAYING TRAINS FUN!

[ManofKent]

10 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

 

 

Nothing beats a handful of standard set track parts and some old points for mocking things up at full size, as long as we are talking micro layouts - doing so for a larger model would be expensive!! 

 

HOURS OF PLAYING TRAINS FUN!

 

Thanks - I've put in a click and collect order with the local model shop for track - all my plans use roughly the same components.

[ManofKent]

Well the good news is the track is ready to collect.

The bad news is I forgot they closed early on a Thursday and got there an hour late. 

 

The 'don't tell my wife news' is I couldn't resist a reduced 'Sherwood' Peckett when I placed the order. Well you can't only have a blue one can you...

Edited April 22, 2021 by ManofKent
missing 't'

[ManofKent]

Track and second Peckett collected, will have a play with track over the weekend.

 

I kept toying with a mini-Swanscombe cement pits layout - Pecketts would have served instead of the real life Hawthorn-Leslie's  - I could have used a tunnel entrance based on prototype, maybe 'the bothy' and the coal stage, but the chalk cliffs put me off. They'd need to be hand inscribed as all the commercial moulds are for rocks with a completely different strata, and I'm not sure I find it that scenically appealing. 

 

In the end I've decide to go with a fudge. I live a few minutes walk from Faversham Creek which was once an important quay for timber imports (particularly pit-props) and rail served until the mid 1960's, having been decline since the 50's. It was SECR / SR /BR served rather than a private quay like Strood and Rochester up the coast, but in my world... Effectively it's going to be a quayside timber merchants. Old photos are few and far between, but enough structures remain to give me ideas.   It's not a big warehouse type place - Gordon Gravett's superb Arun Quay is much closer (yes I'm incredibly envious of his talent, expertise, artistry etc. and if I could reduce his plan to 4mm and squeeze it in I'd be tempted). I think I shall shamelessly steal his idea of the quay at the rear of the model (the opposite side of the creek is low-lying farm/marsh).

 

I want to retain a sense of spaciousness even in my tiny area, so buildings will be sparse, but Steve /Sb67's superb https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/135217-pecketts-wharf shows how inset track can work wonders. Rob's various Sheep layouts (although a little larger) are also giving me lots of ideas.  It's a tiny area, but about the same length as the wonderful https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/155256-garnswllt from Locksley.

[ManofKent]

I've mainly spent the last few days looking at other peoples layout plans. It was useful in that I realised my plans looked too square on - I needed some curves and flow to the track to make it more visually pleasing.  I also realised that I just hadn't left enough room for structures - I don't want a heavily built up feel - no tall warehouses, but the track needs to appear to serve some purpose.  I've got to imply some outside connection with the world - it's too small a space to make sense for a site to have their own loco if that is all there is - at the minimum it would need a connection to exchange sidings.

 

Any way ponderings done I finally got the track out, building floor plans and had a play.

[DCB]

Too square man, you need to chill dude.    A few humps and dips would add some atmosphere as the trains crash and bang over the poorly maintaned trackwork.    I have the opposite probem, straightening out bent rails recovered from old layouts enough to re use them...

[ManofKent]

1 hour ago, DavidCBroad said:

Too square man, you need to chill dude.    A few humps and dips would add some atmosphere as the trains crash and bang over the poorly maintaned trackwork.    I have the opposite probem, straightening out bent rails recovered from old layouts enough to re use them...

Go with Swanscombe as a prototype - if you attempted to accurately model the trackwork there you would never get anything to run 

[ManofKent]

Track plan finalised!

 

Enough room for structures, not an inglenook but playing around with wagons there's enough shunting interest to keep me happy, albeit pretty much one wagon at a time.

 

I might substitute the odd bit of set-track with flexi and even up siding lengths (buffers are going to be beams fixed to walls to save track length and be more prototypical for this sort of location).

 

 

[ManofKent]

Still one dilemma though - Arun Quay stye with Quay at back or Quay at front?

 

The Quay will be very very narrow - will that still work with the Arun Quay style or is the gap (1.5- 3cm) just too narrow? The timber store is semi-transparent by the way.

 

Quay at front will need an extra building or two - too crowded...?

 

Thoughts appreciated!

 

 

 

 

Edited April 28, 2021 by ManofKent
Typo

[ManofKent]

I decided as the quay and track are going to be in the same position regardless of the chosen front the answer was to lay the foam, lay the track and cut out the quay void. I can try a bit of card as a backdrop to give me a better idea before I decide on building placement, but I'm leaning towards quay at front.

 

First layer of foam glued down and drying ('bluefoam' and Gorilla Glue). Weights to improve the bond will be consumed as project progresses.

 

 

[ManofKent]

Waiting for the cork layer to dry, so took a walk across the creek to take some reference photos. Structures are going to be loosely based on local preserved warehouses/workshops from when the quay was railway fed. The track was raised in 1966 and no traces remain, although there are some repurposed sleepers  from the branch still in evidence.

 

 

[ManofKent]

Cork has dried so ready to cut holes for point rodding and power feeds before laying track. 

 

Probably a daft question, but it's been 35 years since I last built a layout, and first time I've used electrofrogs - can someone check my wiring plan? DC only, electrofrogs throughout. Orange blobs represent switches, green arrow shows insulators between two sections - idea is I can run either all live or just one half. Thanks!

 

 

[sb67]

I'm pretty sure with Electrofrog points all feeds must be at the toe end of the points. I stand to be corrected but I think for your plan to work you'd have to have insulating rail joiners where the green arrow is and the feed for the top section would have to be in between the two points. The feed for the bottom section looks ok.