10ft x 1.5ft n-gauge layout plan help

[Benatkinsonuk]

Hi, long time reader of the forum, first time poster!

 

Excuse the very (!) rough and untidy plan attached. Anyrail took some getting used to! I'm after some suggestions / thoughts on this layout I have space for in my spare room. It runs along the wall with space for the 'L' to the left to act as a fiddle yard, with a terminus station at the other end. The main (long) board will be approx 10ft x 1.5ft (305cm x 45cm) and the fiddle yard board will hopefully be nearer 1ft in depth.

 

I will be modelling the mid-90's with a class 156/158's, class 37/47's and maybe a mid length HST and hope to have some further operational interest with the two lines splitting off to a TMD or freight depot. With the right hand side of the board hosting the station and town scene that gradually turns into the countryside towards the left side of the scene break before the fiddle yard. 

 

I have only ever built continuous loop layouts with set track before. I am modelling with streamline (undecided on code 55 or 80, so please do advise!) so I want some sweeping curves, but it feels like it's lacking something?! A lack of interesting stuff going on perhaps. Please let me know if you spot any glaring issues (I know the two curves on the left are a little sharp for flex track so will probably use set track after the scenic break).

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Ben

[Dungrange]

Welcome to the forum.

 

Your fiddle yard roads look quite short.  If I'm reading your plan correctly, the maximum length train that you can accommodate would be just short of 2'.  Whilst that's adequate for your proposed DMU services, it seems a bit cramped for loco hauled services.  The maximum length you could probably accommodate would be a Class 37 and three Mk1 or Mk 2 coaches.  Definitely not big enough for a convincing HST (unless you think two coaches would be convincing).  I'd also think a three platform station needs more than four fiddle yard roads to feed it.  You probably need to try and incorporate curved points to lengthen the fiddle yard.

 

You also need a couple of crossovers on your curve to allow all fiddle yard roads to deliver trains to the station throat and to allow all trains departing from your station to access any fiddle yard road.  At the moment, you seem to have a lot of wrong line running required.  The alternative is of course to ask whether the line you are modelling needs to be double track, or could you perhaps model just a single track entry/exit from your fiddle yard?  Maybe it was once double track but was rationalised to a single track line in the 1970s?

 

As for interest, I agree that a multiple unit shuttling back and forward between the fiddle yard and a station platform isn't that interesting.  Similarly, I don't find TMD facilities that interesting either, so my own preference would be for some form of freight facility.  What would interest you?

 

I also note that there is no run round loop.  This means that any loco hauled passenger service arriving in the station will need to be released by another locomotive (or a station pilot) and the same will be true for any inbound freight train.

 

Try to think through each operating step.  Locomotive hauled train in Fiddle Yard Road 1.  How does it get to Platform 1 (easy).  Then what?  The locomotive is at the wrong end for the departing service, so where is the locomotive that will release it going to come from?  How does it get there?  Will that locomotive take the train back to the fiddle yard, or just shunt the coaches to another platform for a later departure?  What about the freight train in Fiddle Yard Road 2?

 

Not sure if that's any help.  I can't advise on Code 55 / Code 80 as I don't model in N gauge.

[Benatkinsonuk]

Thanks for the comments David. Very useful. 
 

Agreed, I think if the fiddle yard starts much closer to the corner, where to two boards will meet, I’ll be able to get nearer to 3ft fiddle yard length and add a 5th and 6th road to that fiddle yard incorporating curved points, it should be more like it. Great stuff. I do like the idea of 3 platforms, a bit more activity so increasing the capacity of the fiddle yard is a good starting point!

 

Another good point re length of platform, I could lengthen the platforms out towards the middle of the layout, while i won’t have much running length before the fiddle yard, most of my enjoyment comes in the start and end of journeys and the traversing of points and junctions. Which would play well into your idea of a freight depot of sorts. I need to do some further research into what the track layouts might look like for that near side freight branch line.

 

r.e wrong running, I am guessing a little here, do I need to add further point works to enable trains to cross to any of the platforms both in and out? A single track in and out of the fiddle yard is also an option which would simplify things, one to ponder, I suppose that could open a little more space for the freight shunting area.

 

Finally, the run around loop - I knew I’d missed this - another point well made thank you. It would add some operational interest, too. Again I’ll do some research on how these plans look.

 

Cheers

Ben

Edited November 1, 2023 by Benatkinsonuk

[The Johnster]

The long straight out of the terminus makes the curve at the end look even sharper than it is; straight tracks are very strong visually and I think the general 'feel' of the layout would be more natural and better aesthetially balanced if this straight was either broken up or replaced by long sweeping curves instead.  Curves will increase the impression of length.  For your station throat you might benefit from reverse-adapting the well-known Minories setup, which allows access to/from all platforms without having to negotiate reverse curves.  Real railways tend to have long and thin footprints, and I'm not happy with your TMD of freight facility (freight facility would definitely be my preference, TMDs are where locos sit around and don't do anything for their living or your operational enjoyment all day) in terms of the way it spreads away from the running lines; I think it would look more natural a little closer in and with the headshunt curved to follow the running lines.

 

There's room top left for a carriage/dmu storage siding, possibly two, curved to follow the main lines, which would increase operating potential.  You need a station pilot or spare loco to clear trains from the bay platform, and once that loco is provided there is no need for runaround loops and loco release crossovers (rare by the 90s anyway); that might enable you to shorten the platforms and have more space between their ends and the scenic break into the fy.  That said, it is good practice to have the platforms longer than the trains, imbues the scene with a feeling of space and doesn't look cramped.

 

The usual double track up and down lines of UK practice, driving on the left and assuming the terminus to be 'down' as it's not big enough for the London terminus that would be 'up', there is no means of access to the TMD/freight terminal from the down line.  This would be solved almost automatically if you brought it in closer to the running lines, as the entry turnout is now next to the facing crossover giving acccess from the down to all the platforms; this now only needs to be moved a foot or so to the left to serve as access for the TMD/facility as well.  If you are having a semaphore signal box it will be situated in this area; of course MAS colour light signalling is at least as likely in the 90s and the box for that could be anywhere!

 

 

[DCB]

For regular loco hauled trains with class 37/ 47 etc a run round facility, a pair of crossovers is required.

I think a traverser or Cassette table is the only solution for a FY in this space.    Pushing the tracks to the back of the baseboard approaching the curve to the FY would maximise FY length.
Platforms don't have to match train length,  lots are a lot longer than the trains which use them and generally loom a lot better if a bit too long..  See doodle.  Tracks to front right are loco stabling front right carriage  DMU / EMU storage.

Edited November 1, 2023 by DCB

[DavidB-AU]

3 hours ago, Dungrange said:

As for interest, I agree that a multiple unit shuttling back and forward between the fiddle yard and a station platform isn't that interesting. 

 

On that point I disagree. Look at layouts like Ian Futers' Newcastle Haymarket or Victoria Street. You can invent traffic to make it interesting.

 

I also disagree that it's too small to be a London terminus. Have a look for photos of DEMU Thames Valley's Ripper Street which was could be described as "Minories meets Broad Street". Or MMDMRC's Whitecross Street which (although 4 platforms) is based on the City Widened Lines bit of Moorgate and is just 13' x 1' in OO.

 

Something like Chester Northgate might work if you pretend it wasn't closed but had some of the tracks removed. Or a shortened version of Bradford Forster Square with some nearby parcels platforms which are the last remains of a 19th century rival company's station.

 

Another possibility is something in the style of Stanstead Airport, although serving a some fictional airport in the Midlands (which would explain the 156s and 158s). Stanstead is interesting in that the approach is single track through a tunnel under the runway. Rather than a TMD you could imagine the airport receives aviation fuel by rail (as Heathrow does at Colnbrook) and maybe a Royal Mail terminal.

[DavidB-AU]

Another thought, some modernised version of Uxbridge Vine Street might also work with mostly short multiple units. 

 

 

As for goods traffic, the mid/late 90s is a very useful but narrow window when EWS/Wisconsin Central was actively chasing wagonload traffic. You could imagine the station is next to an industrial estate. It would not be impossible to receive short trainloads, e.g. 2-4 VGAs or Cargowaggons.

[cypherman]

Hi, You could possibly try a version of Minehead station. As your layout is set for modern traction you could remove the turntable.

http://www.wsr.org.uk/map1003.htm

 

Edited November 1, 2023 by cypherman

[scottystitch]

Further to DCBs post, I've translated some of his suggestion into Anyrail.

Code 55 throughout. Turnouts are mediums. Each traverser track is drawn 1.5inches apart.

The radius of the inner off scene curve is 12"

Squares are 140mm, the nominal length of a Farish Mk1 coach.

 

Best

 

Scott.

 

 

Edited November 4, 2023 by scottystitch

[Chimer]

Taking a slightly different approach, this version attacks the short FY issue by bringing the up and down lines together as soon as they're out of sight with just has a single fan of points for the fiddle yard sidings.  These are behind a low back scene which allows the space in front on the left to be utilised for an MPD, industrial site or maybe a docks area.  The other line could lead to a goods yard or MPD front and centre.  3 platform roads with the fourth (bottom) road for freight arrivals/departures.  Second crossover added to the throat to allow all platforms to be used for arrivals and departures.  Run round loops added, not essential but offer options, especially to allow freight loco to run round for departure after shunting from buffers end.

 

Drawn (in XTrackCad) for 00 as that's what I've got loaded, so for the OP in N squares are 6 inches.  Streamline points apart from Set-track for the fiddle yard fan, which could be small radius Streamline at the expense of losing a bit off the platform lengths.

 

 

[Flying Pig]

This is what a considerably rationalised Kings Lynn looked like circa 1990 (from the Quail map).

 

[DCB]

1 hour ago, Chimer said:

Taking a slightly different approach, this version attacks the short FY issue by bringing the up and down lines together as soon as they're out of sight with just has a single fan of points for the fiddle yard sidings.  These are behind a low back scene which allows the space in front on the left to be utilised for an MPD, industrial site or maybe a docks area.  The other line could lead to a goods yard or MPD front and centre.  3 platform roads with the fourth (bottom) road for freight arrivals/departures.  Second crossover added to the throat to allow all platforms to be used for arrivals and departures.  Run round loops added, not essential but offer options, especially to allow freight loco to run round for departure after shunting from buffers end.

 

Drawn (in XTrackCad) for 00 as that's what I've got loaded, so for the OP in N squares are 6 inches.  Streamline points apart from Set-track for the fiddle yard fan, which could be small radius Streamline at the expense of losing a bit off the platform lengths.

 

 

It solves the FY point work problem but stops the simultaneous arrivals and departures which I find very interesting to watch.  At my terminus  I often pull out ECS on the down line as an Up train departs or push back ECS as a down train arrives.   I can have two  trains arrive simultaneously at the junction and that looks really impressive..
There were very few loco hauled termini by the 1990s.  I was lucky enough to see Inverness in 1987 era with 47s on Aberdeen and Perth trains and 37s' to the north  but it was a short period.  Likewise I saw the 47s etc on Bristol Birmingham trains change direction and engines at Gloucester but there were few locations  where diesels operated steam style trains by the mid 80s.  Big difference between London termini and Country is train frequency, 10 an hour vs 6 or even 3 per day.    Then again Marylebone used to have two trains leave simultaneously only for the 4 tracks to run out after about a mile.     Then nothing for half an hour.   And Edinburgh Waverley had simultaneous Aberdeen and Glasgow departures, then nothing for ages 

[Benatkinsonuk]

Wow....thank you so much for all the replies. I'm looking forward to reading these in depth and taking all this info on board when I'm home from work later! Ben

[Chimer]

4 hours ago, DCB said:

It solves the FY point work problem but stops the simultaneous arrivals and departures which I find very interesting to watch.  

 

Agree, but keeping double track all the way to the FY requires either (a) a traverser, which knocks out the option of having something interesting in front, (b) another pair of crossovers in the fiddle yard, which eats up the space or (c) using cassettes (which come to think of it could be a better option for fiddling operations behind a backscene).

[DavidB-AU]

12 hours ago, DCB said:

There were very few loco hauled termini by the 1990s.  I was lucky enough to see Inverness in 1987 era with 47s on Aberdeen and Perth trains and 37s' to the north  but it was a short period.  Likewise I saw the 47s etc on Bristol Birmingham trains change direction and engines at Gloucester but there were few locations  where diesels operated steam style trains by the mid 80s.

 

Depends where you imagine the terminus to be and where trains are going to and from. Weymouth saw class 37s from Bristol up to 1999. Fort William saw 37s on the sleeper portion (which could be as short as 4 coaches) until 2001, then 67s until 2019 and still sees class 73s! Although they are big stations, 37s with 4 x Mk 2 ran Cardiff-Manchester/Liverpool up to 1999 with a very brief revival to Manchester for the 2002 Commonwealth Games. On much longer trains, Holyhead and Penzance saw Virgin XC class 47s up to 2002. There is also the option of mail and parcels which in the late 90s could have very short trains.

 

Then Holyhead got loco-hauled trains back in 2008. Not forgetting FGW ran a Saturday only Par-Exeter-Penzance with a 57 and the day coaches off the Night Riviera in 2014.

[Benatkinsonuk]

Thanks again all. I am a west country lad with the layout loosely set in the mid 90's, although a lovely class 57 in GWR colours works a sleep train from paddington still I believe? Anyway...I going to get back to any rail and take some time on working on a plan. I'll update it once it looks a bit more polished, which is much easier thanks to your help.

[scottystitch]

1 hour ago, Benatkinsonuk said:

Anyway...I going to get back to any rail and take some time on working on a plan. I'll update it once it looks a bit more polished, which is much easier thanks to your help.

If my Anyrail file would be of use to you, just yell and I can email it to you. Might be a good foundation to work from.

 

Best

Scott.

[DavidB-AU]

9 hours ago, Benatkinsonuk said:

Thanks again all. I am a west country lad with the layout loosely set in the mid 90's, although a lovely class 57 in GWR colours works a sleep train from paddington still I believe? 

 

FGW got the 57s from late 2003. Prior to that it was using 47s on the sleeper and on the last remaining Plymouth and Penzance loco-hauled day trains which ceased in 2002.

 

Penzance in 1996

 

For your sort of station in the 90s and in the space available, a 37 and some Mk 2s from Bristol (or even Cardiff) wouldn't be too far fetched. Plus the usual DMUs.

[RobinofLoxley]

There are some good proposals here but I would just like to add some comments and a doodle of my own.

 

Its especially important and its been referred to already, that the fiddle yard and station tracks are of comparable length, so that the station is designed for the longest train (HST based on rule 1) and the fiddle yard must then be able to absorb it. If that creates a conflict its resolved by changing, that means reducing, the longest train until a balance is obtained. Even so, there has to be enough open trackwork between the two to stage plausible movements.

 

What @Chimer did was to create longer fiddle yard sidings using St-5 and -6 turnouts; its possible to have 6 sidings as I'm sure he knew. Then there's the question of compressing down to single track, with varous benefits, but possibly compromising parallel movement. I dont suppose @DCB would find the outbound train held at a stop signal while the inbound passed it to be OK. I have drawn what happens with the extra turnouts needed to allow full parallel movement, its up to the OP to decide on that. Totally agree about that a traverser would impede any traffic yard operations at the front centre of the layout. On my drawing I have shown road (1) in the fiddle yard having a cassette option. Parallel movements here also create some requirement for wrong line running because the relevant turnouts cant be accommodated off-scene.

 

Then there's the question of the size of the terminus. I can't see a full four road station being compressed to single track but I bet someone knows a prototype for that. I think that 2 main tracks with the third doubling as a yard access looks reasonably in proportion to me. Sorry about the reverse curve.

 

I have put in access roads for carriage sidings and a goods yard without suggesting how these should be laid out. There an opportunity at the front to massage the view of the fiddle yard access turnouts with buildings in front of them, though.

[Revolution Ben]

 

Hi there,

 

Interesting concept.

 

You've had lots of great input so far, but I would just add a couple of thoughts:

 

1)  In your fiddle yard a traverser would allow longer trains as it would dispense with the length taken by a fan of turnouts.

 

2)  If you settle on two freight sidings toward the inner edge of the scenic area then I would suggest rather than making them a dead end put a single turnout in at the far end to create a loop with enough space for the longest locomotive you expect to run to be able to run around any wagons it has brought in.  This tends to be common in modern practice - for example at the loading point at Hillhead, where you can see a turnout at the far end so the same loco that brought the train in can take it out: 

 

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

 

[RobinofLoxley]

I dont think point (1) is true; however many sidings there are they need points.

 

(2) is absolutely your choice. Personally I dont like to fill in all the blanks in this forum when its clearly not needed.

[Dungrange]

28 minutes ago, Revolution Ben said:

1)  In your fiddle yard a traverser would allow longer trains as it would dispense with the length taken by a fan of turnouts.

 

12 minutes ago, RobinofLoxley said:

I don't think point (1) is true; however many sidings there are they need points.

 

Well, it's partly true.  With a traverser, you don't need any points between the modelled station throat and the traverser (but you do if not using a traverser).  It also reduces the cost of these points and their associated control system, whether that be motors, servos or whatever.  However, something that hasn't been asked is how comfortable is @Benatkinsonuk is with carpentry, as there is much greater skill involved in building a traverser than there is in just building a baseboard.

 

As to how much longer the fiddle yard sidings may be, it depends on where the fan of turnouts is located.  Taking the initial image in this thread as a starting point, which uses straight turnouts after the curve, yes, a traverser will always allow for longer trains.  However, if switching to curved turnouts, then the length difference between the two approaches becomes less clear as it could be possible to create some fiddle yard sidings using points that are longer than could be achieved with a traverser, and this could be critical if there is a need to have a very long train (whether that be an HST or a more significant length freight service).

[scottystitch]

29 minutes ago, RobinofLoxley said:

I dont think point (1) is true; however many sidings there are they need points.

As always I could be missing something, or misunderstanding your comment, but my sketch of a plan doesn't use any turnouts associated with the traverser...

 

 

Best

Scott.

Edited November 3, 2023 by scottystitch

[RobinofLoxley]

Yes, my mistake. Without looking at the traverser proposals I had it in my head that the traverser was on the end of the sidings, when in fact it replaces them.

 

I'd also add that the way its drawn, both Chimer and I put the turnouts where the long curve is on the traverser drawing so there wouldn't be that much extra track available

Edited November 3, 2023 by RobinofLoxley

[Stuart A]

For some inspiration, take a look at the excellent Chandwell.

 

 

 

Also how about a freight transfer facility, such as could be found at Gilbraith's in Blackburn - I can't find many photos, but there is mention of it on RMWeb.  I've seen a picture of a 66 with Cargowaggons there.

 

The shed is still visible on google maps https://maps.app.goo.gl/5Ng7wMca2yBtaitm6