Still trying to decide what to do with my travel/micro layout. I intend to have a station and goods depot with a small village in the middle. I know it will be a bit unrealistic due to size but going with rule 1 on this one. Which of the designs do you think will be most useful and I will have the most fun with. I could either have the station and goods depot side by side or have them at opposite Ends/ sides of the layout.
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/97/6482-220720120148.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=97230)
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/97/6482-220720120324.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=97231)
Sorry for the terrible pictures. Best I could draw on my phone. Many thanks.
I'm a bit of a fan of small layouts.
Can I ask what size you are working to please?
Martin
Quote from: port perran on July 22, 2020, 12:19:44 PM
I'm a bit of a fan of small layouts.
Can I ask what size you are working to please?
Martin
77x55cm. Restricted to that size as it's being made to fit inside a case I have for travelling. Making a little train set in a case to take with me when I travel. It will be rule one but basically my own little village in a box.
IKBrunel, as I see it the problem with the first plan is that a train (with locomotive nearest the point) leaving the upper siding and going round the oval could not enter the lower siding without reversing. That may suit your requirements of course, and is not intended as a criticism (I think that's what the LSWR originally had to do at Dorchester). Have you considered an alternative approach to the first plan which has both upper and lower sidings pointing in the same direction? That could allow a train with locomotive at the point end of the siding to leave the station, travel round the oval and then go into the other siding (or station) without reversing. If you had a shunting neck on each siding you could have a loco storage track at each station, thus allowing you to set up a commuter service whereby a train leaves Upper station and travels to Lower station; uncouples from its train; loco in engine servicing/storage siding at Lower station backs on to the train and takes the train out onto the main line for the journey from Lower to Upper; whereupon the process is repeated for the journey back from Upper to Lower. Another way of looking at it would be to think of Upper and Lower as two platforms of a single terminus station (Marylebone for example) and the main line oval representing a journey to say Nottingham and return back to Marylebone - rather a 1930s clockwork 0 gauge scheme I admit but with possibilities of exercising the imagination, which after all is what perhaps all of us are trying to do. Such a scheme also provides scope for urban development with buildings providing visual breaks to disguise the oval. You could also have parallel goods sidings off the passenger siding (as in your second drawing) at each of Upper and Lower, allowing you to transfer goods from Upper to Lower and vice versa. I believe that such a scheme is shown in one of the plans in the Peco N gauge Setrack planbook.
Just my two penn'orth!
Quote from: Tfc49 on July 22, 2020, 12:51:13 PM
IKBrunel, as I see it the problem with the first plan is that a train (with locomotive nearest the point) leaving the upper siding and going round the oval could not enter the lower siding without reversing. That may suit your requirements of course, and is not intended as a criticism (I think that's what the LSWR originally had to do at Dorchester). Have you considered an alternative approach to the first plan which has both upper and lower sidings pointing in the same direction? That could allow a train with locomotive at the point end of the siding to leave the station, travel round the oval and then go into the other siding (or station) without reversing. If you had a shunting neck on each siding you could have a loco storage track at each station, thus allowing you to set up a commuter service whereby a train leaves Upper station and travels to Lower station; uncouples from its train; loco in engine servicing/storage siding at Lower station backs on to the train and takes the train out onto the main line for the journey from Lower to Upper; whereupon the process is repeated for the journey back from Upper to Lower. Another way of looking at it would be to think of Upper and Lower as two platforms of a single terminus station (Marylebone for example) and the main line oval representing a journey to say Nottingham and return back to Marylebone - rather a 1930s clockwork 0 gauge scheme I admit but with possibilities of exercising the imagination, which after all is what perhaps all of us are trying to do. Such a scheme also provides scope for urban development with buildings providing visual breaks to disguise the oval. You could also have parallel goods sidings off the passenger siding (as in your second drawing) at each of Upper and Lower, allowing you to transfer goods from Upper to Lower and vice versa. I believe that such a scheme is shown in one of the plans in the Peco N gauge Setrack planbook.
Just my two penn'orth!
One slight restriction I have is I've bought all the track already and have two left hand point as opposed to a left and a right handed point. Never thought about the point you made. I had in my head that with a small loco that I will be running on the layout the train could pull in loco first and then reverse out. I originally intend to have just one siding but altered my plans as a thought two might add a bit more enjoyment. The top plan was what I was going with first with siding at opposite side and I'm still leaning more towards that. Just had a thought that it might be useful to have one siding but with more lines coming of it but that would block the view of the station and might make it cluttered.
If only you had a few centimetres more width, you could use one of your left hand points as a right hand point by using the curved portion as last part of the main curve at each end, and the straight portion would diverge to the right and could provide a run-round loop with the left hand point at the other end.
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/97/1599-220720143738.jpeg)
Quote from: woodbury22uk on July 22, 2020, 02:39:00 PM
If only you had a few centimetres more width, you could use one of your left hand points as a right hand point by using the curved portion as last part of the main curve at each end, and the straight portion would diverge to the right and could provide a run-round loop with the left hand point at the other end.
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/97/1599-220720143738.jpeg)
I know it's a shame but I'm stuck with the internal dimensions of the case.
For the size you have available, I think the lower diagram is the better choice.
Scenically, I feel that it will give you a more realistic small station and goods yard.
Good luck with your build.
Martin
:NGaugersRule: hi
Quote from: port perran on July 22, 2020, 03:12:58 PM
For the size you have available, I think the lower diagram is the better choice.
Scenically, I feel that it will give you a more realistic small station and goods yard.
Good luck with your build.
Martin
I think that sounds the most functional. I just worry I may block off the view of the station with the goods shed.
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/97/6482-220720154141.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=97246)
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/97/6482-220720154238.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=97247)
Quote from: port perran on July 22, 2020, 03:12:58 PM
For the size you have available, I think the lower diagram is the better choice.
Scenically, I feel that it will give you a more realistic small station and goods yard.
Good luck with your build.
Martin
I'm intending the station layout to be similar to the picture of another layout I found below and either the goods shed opposite or next to it.
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/97/6482-220720154638.jpeg) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=97248)
Quote from: woodbury22uk on July 22, 2020, 02:39:00 PM
If only you had a few centimetres more width, you could use one of your left hand points as a right hand point by using the curved portion as last part of the main curve at each end, and the straight portion would diverge to the right and could provide a run-round loop with the left hand point at the other end.
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/97/1599-220720143738.jpeg)
Not sure if I am missing something, but could the two straight lengths between the points in the above be shortened a few centimetres, maybe use lengths of flexible track cut to the right length? ???
What a great idea.
Your second plan is like something I'm working on.
The single platform station is on the plain line at one side of the oval and the two-track yard is at the other.
The yard functions as a sort of visible fiddle yard.
Best wishes.
John
Quote from: Train Waiting on July 22, 2020, 04:24:38 PM
What a great idea.
Your second plan is like something I'm working on.
The single platform station is on the plain line at one side of the oval and the two-track yard is at the other.
The yard functions as a sort of visible fiddle yard.
Best wishes.
John
Thank you for your reply. Do you have any photos or links to your layout?
The problem of the first plan (reversing to enter) is something normal on american railways. With a single entry into the customers yard, it depends on from where the train is coming. One time the loco enters forward into the yard and has to push back in reverse to continue its voyage. Another day (on the way back) the loco pushes in reverse into yard and can then travel forward to return to its voyage. And on such a tiny layout you will have short switchers and trains... so the reversing of the train to enter will not look awkward
So plan 1 is more adapt for village sculpting with two industries.
Plan 2 puts more focus on the station/industries leaving less place for the village
That is one SMALL roundy roundy!
If the layout in the photo impressed you, why not just copy that? It obviously works!
Quote from: AlexanderJesse on July 24, 2020, 08:51:05 AM
The problem of the first plan (reversing to enter) is something normal on american railways. With a single entry into the customers yard, it depends on from where the train is coming. One time the loco enters forward into the yard and has to push back in reverse to continue its voyage. Another day (on the way back) the loco pushes in reverse into yard and can then travel forward to return to its voyage. And on such a tiny layout you will have short switchers and trains... so the reversing of the train to enter will not look awkward
So plan 1 is more adapt for village sculpting with two industries.
Plan 2 puts more focus on the station/industries leaving less place for the village
For this to work there needs to be a way for the locomotive to run round and escape when it enters forwards, or it would have to wait until the cars are unloaded. So a much more complex track layout in the yard. It has been known in the UK but it would be a very expensive operation tying up a locomotive and crew.