Galgorm Hall - Reborn

[VerdevaleRailway]

Just throwing out food for thought.

Looking at it operationally, you have your roundy roundy train operating and have operational interest by maneuvering wagons between your station sidings and the branchline. But I think that having that second passing loop allows you to have a second train going in the opposite direction, or allows a train from the sidings/brancline have a run on the roundy. I think you get a fair amount of bang for your buck with the second passing loop. That's what I have in my layout, though it is all in a tunnel so I can't see what is there, but of course you have the option to turn your back on sections

But think carefully before you abandon a 2 mainline layout, there is something pleasant in having 2 trains passing each other, set and forget with them operating at differant speeds whilst operating your sidings.

Happy ruminating Paul!

[Emettman]

If that's ideas settling down, excellent.

On the single line main I'd definitely suggest an extra loop, 2 points for an extra train, either scenically, near the branch stations (originally different companies), or "out of sight" at the right hand end.
(Tucking the end of the branch line a couple of feet out sight also increases the capacity by a 2-car DMU.)

Ha! Two stations, different altitudes: remnants of a wagon lift, connecting the ends of a high and low siding?

Chris

[TimberSurf]

OK, I won't get into the minute detail and prototypical configurations (as I know now't about that) but I am with the double track brigade!
Might I also suggest a new principle. As you obviously want an upper level, here is a trick to get twice as much for your buck.
I call it split level. Its not seen often but its a really clever trick. Basically, it allows a gradient to the upper level to be half as steep as a normal design. So in your case ensuring inclines are not to steep and more straight line to be level. Simply install the South 2ft wide board, 2 inches higher than the North (Station) 2ft wide board. That way, instead of having to rise 4 inches along the 6 foot of the side (one foot wide) boards, both sides each incline and decline just 2 inches. if it's hard to get into your head and your interested, I can post some diagrams for you.

[carnehan]

Thanks again chaps.

V.R. I worked and worked at getting a double mainline loop as it was in my initial brief. The complicated pointwork at the station, extra space needed at both ends to get it round the corner and thus compressing the scenics in between and the minimal additional 'play value' I gained from having it all left me with the conclusion to remove it altogether.

Emmetman, a wagon lift? Now do I really need to add something else complicated to the build process? I like the notion of it though so will file it away in the thought process box. An additional loop will definitely be added at the non scenic end of the layout though.

Timbersurf, I have reached a level of calm following a period of frustration with this planning process. I get what you are saying regarding a split level layout but rather than jig and re-jig things once again, I am quite satisfied with the path I am going to take. Some diagrams of your proposal would be inciteful though, if not for me, then someone else who has maybe still got notions off a two level layout.

Paul

[TimberSurf]

Just for Dave and others then

split level gradient diagram.jpg (47.33 KiB) Viewed 2536 times

High level is red and low level is blue

Gradient plan.jpg (31.22 KiB) Viewed 2536 times

Gradient not split.jpg (9.32 KiB) Viewed 2536 times

Gradient split.jpg (9.27 KiB) Viewed 2536 times

[TimberSurf]

and for the hard of hearing

Gradient Non split 3d.jpg (16.47 KiB) Viewed 2536 times

Gradient split 3d.jpg (17.32 KiB) Viewed 2536 times

[VerdevaleRailway]

I am quite satisfied with the path I am going to take.

Paul

Well done, considering all your options and their feasibility at this stage prohibits the "what ifs" later on. There are always going to be trade offs, now you know what they are and the reasons you chose them. Kind of like dating,


Tony

[Bufferstop]

Re Gradients
The diagrams used by Timbersurf to demonstrate gradients are correct in the mathematical sense, however railway gradients are measured as the rise in the going, ie. along the slope not the base of the triangle. Most railway gradients are so shallow that it makes not much difference any way. Apart from when a gradient is created on an embankment alongside level ground (such as the slope up to the top of a coaling stage) it's pretty difficult to measure the horizontal distance, rather than the distance up (or down) the slope. A friend who worked in the borough surveyors department said that they quoted roads footpaths and outside steps as rise along slope. but indoor ramps and stairways are quoted as rise in floor length. I've never checked that but I can see why it might be so.

[TimberSurf]

Dave, your missing the point, it is a principle only, not a track plan.
Once the seed is set, can be utilised for:- a folded figure of eight, have cross overs at the middle level, double track, single track at mid level with points each end, etc.

[FairwayJunction]

Hi, great location, was wondering what your YouTube channel is called, thanks.

[carnehan]

Hi FJ, my channel is Galgorm Hall OO Layout. Not a lot to see on their at the mo but hopefully things will change when I get the new layout going.

Paul

[harris]

Hi Paul
What did you use for the retaining walls?
thanks

[carnehan]

Hi Harris

Sorry, I'm a bit lost. What are the retaining walls you are referring to?

Paul

[harris]

sorry wrong thread