Nearly a Insch

Post pictures and information about your own personal model railway layout that is under construction. Keep members up-to-date with what you are doing and discuss problems that you are having.
barney121e
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:13 pm
Location: Dumfries

Nearly a Insch

Postby barney121e » Thu Jun 15, 2017 12:31 pm

Have been having difficulty getting set on a layout plan. I thought I had found it with my Loch Terry plan but have put that to one side for now. I finally realised the two top things for me were watching trains and building buildings. Looking at Ian Futers Modelling Scotland's Railway book I found a plan for Insch. a town in the North East of Scotland. On looking on google maps I noticed the plan has double lines to the station but then goes down to a single line. So have decided to model this. There is a level crossing which I hope to be able to power so it works like a real life one. I appreciate the trackplan is rather dull for most, but think it gives me ample space for buildings and watching trains go by.

I will scratchbuild some of the buildings, the pub looks interesting as it has a railway carriage in the garden. So that along with the station, signal box and waiting room will be scratchbuilt whilst other buildings will come from card building sites.

inschr2.png
inschr2.png (47.87 KiB) Viewed 1073 times

User avatar
End2end
Posts: 4436
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: At the end....... and sometimes at the other end

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby End2end » Thu Jun 15, 2017 12:43 pm

One thing I notice off the bat. Why not save some money by just continuing the double track round from the storage sidings exit on the lower right to what becomes a double line again on the right hand side before entering the station.
Saving money by not having to buy 2 more points just plain track instead.
Or if you need to change tracks there, why not use 2 points on the double line.
This way you could have, on the right hand side at least, 2 trains moving. 1 out of the station going clockwise and the other entering the station anti-clockwise.
Thanks
End2end

EDIT:
I've just noticed something else. If you could widen the track plan ever so slightly to fit tighter to the left and right sides you could fit longer trains in the lower storage sidings and thus, the same length of the station platforms.
"St Blazey's" - The progress and predicaments.
Welcome‎
Planning
Building
St. Blazey's Works & Depot thread

User avatar
Emettman
Posts: 2287
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2014 4:43 pm
Location: Cornwall UK
Contact:

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby Emettman » Thu Jun 15, 2017 1:29 pm

End2end wrote:EDIT:
I've just noticed something else. If you could widen the track plan ever so slightly to fit tighter to the left and right sides you could fit longer trains in the lower storage sidings and thus, the same length of the station platforms.



On the outside the storage loop can be extended by over a foot simply by swapping the handedness of the points ans allowing them to form the last part of the curve. This also produces a smoother track path.

To get the same effect on the inside, the loop should include one of the 90 degree curves (probably on the right.)

Chris.
"It's his madness that keeps him sane."

barney121e
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:13 pm
Location: Dumfries

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby barney121e » Thu Jun 15, 2017 1:50 pm

Emettman wrote:
End2end wrote:EDIT:
I've just noticed something else. If you could widen the track plan ever so slightly to fit tighter to the left and right sides you could fit longer trains in the lower storage sidings and thus, the same length of the station platforms.



On the outside the storage loop can be extended by over a foot simply by swapping the handedness of the points ans allowing them to form the last part of the curve. This also produces a smoother track path.

To get the same effect on the inside, the loop should include one of the 90 degree curves (probably on the right.)

Chris.


Thanks End2End and Chris

Bit confused about swapping the handiness and curves you are on about Chris? Any chance of a quick drawing. End 2End, I was trying to make sure that trains from the bottom left could have choice of track at bottom right, but maybe I am trying to be too clever.
Last edited by barney121e on Thu Jun 15, 2017 2:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
End2end
Posts: 4436
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: At the end....... and sometimes at the other end

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby End2end » Thu Jun 15, 2017 2:13 pm

barney121e wrote:End 2End, I was trying to make sure that trains from the bottom left could have choice of track at bottom right, but maybe I am trying to be too clever.


This would give you that option..... Plus I'd be sorely tempted to add some visable sidings too as I've added on the left.
inschr2E2E.JPG
inschr2E2E.JPG (39.14 KiB) Viewed 1055 times


Also...and I may get hung, drawn and quartered for this but..... Try designing the layout using setrack peices, even if only at first. Those flexible peices will drive you mad. :lol:
And perhaps use SCARM free software then once you've settled on your idea utilise one or both peices of software to tweak it to your exact requirements.
Thanks
End2end
Last edited by End2end on Thu Jun 15, 2017 2:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"St Blazey's" - The progress and predicaments.
Welcome‎
Planning
Building
St. Blazey's Works & Depot thread

barney121e
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:13 pm
Location: Dumfries

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby barney121e » Thu Jun 15, 2017 2:18 pm

End2end wrote:
barney121e wrote:End 2End, I was trying to make sure that trains from the bottom left could have choice of track at bottom right, but maybe I am trying to be too clever.


This would give you that option..... Plus I'd be sorely tempted to add some visable sidings too as I've added on the left.
inschr2E2E.JPG
Thanks
End2end


But would that mean that trains on outside line going clockwise couldn't get onto inner line to go anti clockwise, if you know what I mean? The lack of sidings is just down to how the line looks, the line where you have put the sidings is a permanent way, if that makes any difference.

User avatar
End2end
Posts: 4436
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: At the end....... and sometimes at the other end

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby End2end » Thu Jun 15, 2017 2:22 pm

Yes they could as I've added a double set of points on the right.
And trains from any direction can change to the other track using those points..or just stay on the same track they are on.
Thanks
End2end
"St Blazey's" - The progress and predicaments.
Welcome‎
Planning
Building
St. Blazey's Works & Depot thread

User avatar
End2end
Posts: 4436
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: At the end....... and sometimes at the other end

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby End2end » Thu Jun 15, 2017 2:31 pm

Your design is like my final design except I will have 2 hidden fiddle yards. One in the centre and one at the top of the picture which is actually the rear of the layout
Image
Notice the double points at the bottom (front) to change tracks. The station will be on the main twin running lines to the bottom left, to the left of the slight S bend into the middle fiddle yard.
Thanks
End2end
"St Blazey's" - The progress and predicaments.
Welcome‎
Planning
Building
St. Blazey's Works & Depot thread

User avatar
End2end
Posts: 4436
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: At the end....... and sometimes at the other end

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby End2end » Thu Jun 15, 2017 2:43 pm

Actually.......Now I come to think about it.... Why not seperate the points even further apart.
This will not only allow you to run trains onto either line but could ALSO be used as a passing loop on one line!! :mrgreen:
You'd have to work out which line you'd want the passing loop on as it will only work in one direction.
So for example....
LongerE2E.JPG
LongerE2E.JPG (14.55 KiB) Viewed 1045 times

You can see the potential to use it to change tracks immediatly but now with them further apart you can also see that you can use it as a passing loop in a anti-clockwise direction on the inner track.
And.....that's magic!
Image
:lol:
Thanks
End2end
"St Blazey's" - The progress and predicaments.
Welcome‎
Planning
Building
St. Blazey's Works & Depot thread

barney121e
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:13 pm
Location: Dumfries

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby barney121e » Thu Jun 15, 2017 3:25 pm

Had a little play with what Chris suggested (I think). Seem to have added a little more room.

inchmoreroom.png
inchmoreroom.png (50.86 KiB) Viewed 1040 times

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 11525
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby Bufferstop » Thu Jun 15, 2017 3:37 pm

I would replace the inner point of the left hand cross-over with a double slip. With one or more curved sidings branching off to the space in front of the station. The routes through the slip would then be;-
- inner platform to single main line
- inner platform to shunting neck
- shunting neck to sidings
I would also move the trailing cross-over probably to the left of the level crossing or at least closer to it. There would then be some visible "main line" between the crossing and the tunnel. This would give two types of movement.
1 - Clockwise goods train arrives to the inner platform. Loco uses crossover to run round before pulling train into the shunting neck.
2 - Anti-clockwise passenger service terminates at inner platform, loco pulls forward onto single track then runs round via the cross-over, before departing with train, using the crossover to regain the left hand (outer) track.
I would tidy up the pointwork in the hidden sidings so that there are two crossovers one trailing one facing between the visible main line and the start of the two loops, allowing the maximum of arrival departure routes to the loops. I'd take the advice of making the loops as long as possible, with a view to being able to get two short trains in the longest loops, but this would probably negate the advice re setrack curves as it might require larger radius curved points to achieve it and that means flexi track.
But hey! it's your layout, and as someone has just said in another thread it has to be compatible with you :)
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

barney121e
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:13 pm
Location: Dumfries

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby barney121e » Thu Jun 15, 2017 4:12 pm

Bufferstop wrote:I would replace the inner point of the left hand cross-over with a double slip. With one or more curved sidings branching off to the space in front of the station. The routes through the slip would then be;-
- inner platform to single main line
- inner platform to shunting neck
- shunting neck to sidings
I would also move the trailing cross-over probably to the left of the level crossing or at least closer to it. There would then be some visible "main line" between the crossing and the tunnel. This would give two types of movement.
1 - Clockwise goods train arrives to the inner platform. Loco uses crossover to run round before pulling train into the shunting neck.
2 - Anti-clockwise passenger service terminates at inner platform, loco pulls forward onto single track then runs round via the cross-over, before departing with train, using the crossover to regain the left hand (outer) track.
I would tidy up the pointwork in the hidden sidings so that there are two crossovers one trailing one facing between the visible main line and the start of the two loops, allowing the maximum of arrival departure routes to the loops. I'd take the advice of making the loops as long as possible, with a view to being able to get two short trains in the longest loops, but this would probably negate the advice re setrack curves as it might require larger radius curved points to achieve it and that means flexi track.
But hey! it's your layout, and as someone has just said in another thread it has to be compatible with you :)


Thanks Bufferstop

All good ideas but am trying to keep as close to actual track plan as I can. Even the Ian Futers book gets it slightly wrong as his plan has it single line both sides of the station but in reality one side is double line. I did look at Carrbridge station which is single line either side of station. The FY I am sure could be improved. Making both sides of station a single line would make it easier, maybe that is a compromise to make.

barney121e
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:13 pm
Location: Dumfries

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby barney121e » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:54 pm

Here's the plan from Ian Futers' book in anyrail. Does anyone think it flows better being a single line either side of the station?

ifinsch.png
ifinsch.png (74.49 KiB) Viewed 1014 times

User avatar
luckymucklebackit
Posts: 3316
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 7:05 am
Location: Troon - where the Duchesses went to die
Contact:

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby luckymucklebackit » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:04 am

It is what you think that is important - if that is what you want - go with it!!! Personally I see nothing wrong with it.

Jim
This Signature Left Intentionally Blank, but since I have written this and I intended to do it, this Signature is intentionally not blank. Paradox or What?
My layout - Gateside and Northbridge
Image

User avatar
Emettman
Posts: 2287
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2014 4:43 pm
Location: Cornwall UK
Contact:

Re: Nearly a Insch

Postby Emettman » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:00 pm

barney121e wrote: Does anyone think it flows better being a single line either side of the station?


I'd suggest the main issue is that it's taken out 25% of your storage capacity to run different trains.

Chris
"It's his madness that keeps him sane."


Return to “Personal Layouts - Under Construction”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests