Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 20 of 62 Posts

·
Paul Hamilton aka "Lancashire Fusilier"
Joined
·
844 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
HI all,

Following on from timely posts asking what had happened to my Perth based loft layout in EM I am posting here the Cyril J Freezer track plan for my new layout here in Melbourne Victoria.

I am most keen to develop this layout into a finescale 00 gauge layout to SF00 standards with the ability to run many of the latest RTR offerings as that is what the local community run here and I want to share the love so to speak!

The turn outs will be C&L Finescale timber sleeper units from their new laser cut range with plastic chairs cemented using MEK. (This is tried and true by the way).

All points will be operated using Tortoise motors and the layout will be DCC with various Digitrax LocoNet compatible aftermarket automation aspects included (I have all of these circuits already).

What is showed on the plan straight from the book as a sector plate will actually be a three track (cassette based) traverser of approximately the length shown enabling a running session to consist of three previously "loaded cassettes" of appropriate rolling stock.

By default, rolling stock will be of my favoured ex MR / early LMS Fowler style locos and coaches / wagons (eg Fowler 2P 4-4-0 , 3F Jinty 0-6-0T and 4F 0-6-0 varieties).

Additionally there will be a Thomas set of three trains and first off thanks to the addictive influence SRMan's impressive sound equipped locomotives, a series of appropriately early BR Blue diesels.

What I am looking for in terms of feedback from the crew here at MRF is a) can I get away with a B7 template for all point work and
regarding protypical signalling I am all up in the air with really nothing more than some platform starters at the top of the layout and a few ground disks at the lower platform cross oers with hand operated levers in the lower yards. Happy to take this aspect up in the apprpriate forum of course - John Webb!!!

For additional specification the layout will be operated using Dingham couplings for the MR/LMS period stock, undecided for Thomas (audience is not too discerning) and ?? for the BR Blues.

 

·
Just another modeller
Joined
·
9,983 Posts
*** You have Templot don't you Paul?

Redraw it in Templot... Interlacing the turnouts a little and allowing them to gently curve and flow properly will gain you loop and siding space. there is no need to use a single template or frog angle - I would imagine you will end up with most B7 or larger and still make gains compared to the freezer drawing.

Richard
 

·
Paul Hamilton aka "Lancashire Fusilier"
Joined
·
844 Posts
That is what I expected even from our previous discussions concerning interlacing of points. It was simply a matter of using the C&L templates that match their timber sleepered pointwork bases as opposed to the templot variety that are not 100% supported (albeit they can make the Templot version to spec if required). The gains will come for sure as I actually have 3.3 metres of total space available versus the 9' shown in the original diagram. I will post this image of the original on the Templot forum as I am still somewhat of a total pratt when it comes o planning the entire layout in Templot. Thanks Richard. Hope others benefit from the post.
 

·
Just another modeller
Joined
·
9,983 Posts
***Doop - I should have read your initial comments better - I forgot about the templates.

Yes, as per previous, you have the ability for big gains even with the point bases... you should be able to clip and nest them... and they are gently curvable. Ideally there would be the odd bit of moving of timbers but not so much. I think that if you wanted to use only a single template then the B7 would be a good choice... its a natural angle and will generally work with the plan and the nesting quite well. The benefit will come manily from the flow and nesting anyway.

You could actually still do the plan in templot for general flow and form and lay them on top.... It'd be a good "Practice" exercise.

regards

Richard
 

·
Paul Hamilton aka "Lancashire Fusilier"
Joined
·
844 Posts
Ok, Templot now moving ahead. One question though.

The head shunt shown at the end of lets call it platform two, what size locomotive would need to use this facility? I am assuming that suburban trains of a loco and two coaches would use this and run around and reverse out - something like a Fowler 2-6-4T. Would I be correct. Also maybe a Jinty too I would guess. What I wouldn't expect to see would be a 2P or other 4-4-0 Compounds and the like doing that as they wouldn't be running tender first would they?

If a tender loco brought a passenger train into this station then I would assume that a loco would come from the shed as shown and take the coaches back off to the traverser.

As such should I base my headshunt length on the longer tank locos like the Fowler 2-6-4Ts and if so what is that approximate length?

Now the exciting bit comes when I decide that down the track I want to run three casettes of lets say blue diesels and appropriate rolling stock. I know nothing about these beasts at all other than when they have sound fitted and some weathering they are tremendous. Any suggestions for an ex LMS layout? I was thinking of class 20 and Class 08 but apart from that I have no idea. Are the blue diesel passenger locos much larger than a Fowler 2-6-4T? What about DMUs?
 

·
Just another modeller
Joined
·
9,983 Posts
*** OK...

For setting the length of the escape track on platform 2:

A fowler 2-6-4 was roughtly 47'3" long / 14.4metres long. You'll need a couple of inches more at least for comfort. I'd think the most common passenegr tank loco for a station this small would be an 0-4-4 or similar, wih jintys or MR U class. Perhaps a 2-6-2 as well?

Diesels would be on the smaller side too - Bo-Bo types would predominate. not sure but I'd think not a 20 or an 08 on passenger duty... a 23 or 25 perhaps (calling all blue diesel era modellers in Midland areas - help)

A Derby lightweight or a 108 would be an appropriate DMU I think....

Richard
 

·
Paul Hamilton aka "Lancashire Fusilier"
Joined
·
844 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
QUOTE (Richard Johnson @ 20 Mar 2009, 09:33) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>For setting the length of the escape track on platform 2:

A fowler 2-6-4 was roughtly 47'3" long / 14.4metres long. You'll need a couple of inches more at least for comfort.

OK that would be 200mm conservatively then.

QUOTE (Richard Johnson @ 20 Mar 2009, 09:33) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I'd think the most common passenegr tank loco for a station this small would be an 0-4-4 or similar, wih jintys or MR U class. Perhaps a 2-6-2 as well?

Looks like Falcon Brass offer some suitable locos as does London Road from the look of it. Meanwhile from the RTR point of view I will be able to get by with a Jinty at least. Couldn't find anything on a "U" class. Only SR varieties popped up on the net

QUOTE (Richard Johnson @ 20 Mar 2009, 09:33) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Diesels would be on the smaller side too - Bo-Bo types would predominate. not sure but I'd think not a 20 or an 08 on passenger duty... a 23 or 25 perhaps (calling all blue diesel era modellers in Midland areas - help)
I meant for the 20 and 08 to be in the yards not the passengers sorry. No idea on the passengers at all.

QUOTE (Richard Johnson @ 20 Mar 2009, 09:33) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>A Derby lightweight or a 108 would be an appropriate DMU I think.... 108 looks good 2 car unit in BR blue would be lovely...
 

·
Just another modeller
Joined
·
9,983 Posts
*** I'd try for closer to 300 if U can... but 250 would do.

Gibson did the U class - its a johnson / deeley era loco / the predecessor to the Jinty. It appears on their "Express and interest and we might make it" list as "MR Class S and U/LMS Class 3 0-6-0 tank locomotive". It makes up easily and well into a really nice loco with tons of character - I wish I had boght another one before they were sold out!

Steer clear of Falcon in the main - they can be a bit approximate. London road make very nice kits

my diesel comments were a bit of a guess so hopefully a blue era modeller will chime in.... Anyway... Go Green pre yellow ends young man, when steam still pottered on alongside them....
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
9,845 Posts
Talk of 2-6-4Ts and Derby Lightweights is starting to sound very Yorkshire West Riding. I've got a few books on this region, mostly for 50s and 60s which I could research if that would help?

David
 

·
Paul Hamilton aka &quot;Lancashire Fusilier&quot;
Joined
·
844 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Thanks for the inputs. Would like to stay peak district if possible and would be happy to develop a suite of appropriate green locos too, many of which may well have survived into blue I imagine anyway. More work on that front to come.

Hit some small snag today with the news fro Brian at C&L that a Templlot file is not really suitable for laser cutting due to the way curves are represented in Templot. I am guessing, but still waiting on advice back from Brian, that my solution may well lay in individual sleepers again stuck onto the printouts. Nothing really wrong about this except I had fancied the slabs of laser cut timber pointwork timbers arriving in the mail ready to start laying chairs onto. Any way will see.

I am moving the track plan across in parallel to the signal forum to cement the signal layout in place for the design.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
9,845 Posts
QUOTE Would like to stay peak district if possible

That's fine. If you change your mind, just let me know.


David
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,202 Posts
QUOTE If a tender loco brought a passenger train into this station then I would assume that a loco would come from the shed as shown and take the coaches back off to the traverser.

As such should I base my headshunt length on the longer tank locos like the Fowler 2-6-4Ts and if so what is that approximate length?

mention of the 2-6-4T's...and station pilots, rather leads my train{?} of thought towards this station being at the outer end of a busy commuter line?

Which could well support an intensive commuter service?

Which would mean some pretty slick operation, getting trains to arrive and depart with minimal headway?

I am reminded of an Iain Rice [again, bless him]....track plan....found in his book ''Designs for Urban Layouts''...[ISBN 1 902877 08 2].....which I have quoted from in another thread....

This particular gem is based upon C J Freezer's ''Minories'' plan again.......but altered somewhat from the orginal settings...albeit still on a commuter line.

[I could scan and post, but again I am not sure of copyright issues, etc....maybe Doug could again advise??]

With Mr Rice's interpretation, he came away from the double platform idea, instead creating an island platform scheme.....ie one platform, two main faces.

Both platforms have access in entry and exit modes.....ie the plan can be created either as a double track, or single track mode.......thus each platform road has access to potentially both running lines [or convert one into a short, ''safety'' headshunt..]

Use is made of nicely complicated P&W work..ie double and single slips, etc...the sort which is commonly found on the prototype, where land space was restricted....

.[are modellers influenced AWAY from complex P&W work , believing it to be used only in special cases...based solely on the purchase price of Peco slips and 3-way turnouts, I wonder??]

Iain Rice's plan also has a coal siding [important in the days right up to the 1960's, when most households still ran coal fires, in urban areas]

plus and engine SERVICING road....ie, loco's arrive, quick stoke 'n poke, then sent back

One platform road also is part of a runround loop......enhancing operation, which was absent from the original Freezer Minories plan....

All the above within around 6 foot 6 inches, by about 1 foot to 18 inches..[board edges not parallel on frontage]

I would also suggest 2-4-2 tanks with two or three suburban coaches.....now..one for those with time to search...there IS/WAS a loco building company,located, I believe, somewhere near Exeter [UK]...who produced limited -run locos, ready-to-run.....charging around the £150 price range...not overly heavily detailed, I believe...yet not out-of-the-way,price-wise, compared to a kit?

For Lancashire Fusilier's plan...may I suggest an option....based on Mr Rice's idea....of moving the main station buildings from the rear of the platform, and placing them on a higher level, ACROSS the end of the platform track.. possibly on a bridge which COULD suggest the station may be a 'through' station rather than a terminus...?

Or....if modelled in 'low relief', the station could still be a terminus.....

what this change would allow, is, the extension of the rear platform road right up to the end of the platform proper...ie the same length as the 'main' plaform road?

With the addition of a facing crossover with single slip in the vicinity of the signal box, the plan could be double tracked?

[either way, I would add a short spur/headshunt/safety trap/whatever, again using a single slip....or not as money allows...see above....twixt the cattle siding point, and the point accessing the main line, near the signal box, creating a very short spur/dead end...or even, double track main line exit.......parallel to the running line , under the road bridge??]
 

·
Paul Hamilton aka &quot;Lancashire Fusilier&quot;
Joined
·
844 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Great comments and ideas there to take on board. I defintely like the extension of what I call platform 1 and the higher level station building which can hide the fact that the lines are terminating under the station. Not so sure about the double track which would be good but I struggle to see how it might all fit without looking too contrived in 450mm that I have as a limit due to where to model will be sited.

A slip is being proposed by my track designer to replace the two toe to toe points on the run around loop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
Hello,

I used this trackplan, in its entirety, for a layout 20 years ago; having just got married and not having much spare cash or space and found it ideal. Spent a great 2 years operating it; so good luck Paul, whether or not you make alterations, is entirely up to you. I remember reading a long time ago that Mr Freezer was delighted that people used his plans as a basis, and altered them to suit their individual needs.

As for diesels in the Peak District, I would go for a Class 25, 24, 20 and 08, along with any suitable DMU (108 probably).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,202 Posts


LF...there is plenty of room to place a double track exit...providing a slight re-arrangement of various bits is made......I have included a scan of Iain Rice's plan...and humbly apologise if he or anyone else is offended by this........

[A picture conveys my ideas much better than my limited vocabulary???? If the above is a problem, Doug...please delete, and I'll PM Lancashire Fusilier with the image...although many other contributors and watchers might also appreciate Iain Rice's ideas???]

I appreciate the hidden fiddle yard isn't fronted by anything in IR' plan........that is for individuals to adjust or work out.......Iain Rice also has, in the same book, a 6 foot shelf plan for a GOODS YARD ONLY......inverted it might fit to the right of the minories plan....access for the goods yard is via an over [road] bridge to a sector plate fiddle yard...but could equally be via the minories coal yard [as a shunting neck].....with the goods yard placed in front of your hidden fiddle yard????

If Mr IR or Doug is ok with the above, I can scan the goods yard too.....it's a little gem, with an outside single slip....and a tandem turnout to add simple sophistication..ie a focal point {?}
 

·
Paul Hamilton aka &quot;Lancashire Fusilier&quot;
Joined
·
844 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Thanks Alistair, please send me the image via PM as I can't see it anyway on a work computer and I will review and discuss with my track designer.

Cheers Clive for the input, nice to hear you enjoyed running the layout. I will explore the diesel classes you mention and corresponding stock.
 

·
Paul Hamilton aka &quot;Lancashire Fusilier&quot;
Joined
·
844 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Additionally, to aid track design in Templot, can anyone advise the correct spacing of sleepers for MR practice on 45' rail lengths please.

Many thanks,
 

·
Paul Hamilton aka &quot;Lancashire Fusilier&quot;
Joined
·
844 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
MR 45' sleeper spacing all resolved and included in the Templot process now.

Here are the first pass at the nearly finished track plans. Please understand that at 3.3m long this was never going to look very pretty but it gives an idea of where it is all at. For scale reference the loco shown is a Bachmann Jubilee (Australia - of course) indicating that the head shunt at the end of what is the main platform has sufficient space for even a Duchess and probably the largest f any loco likely to have ever been near a MR branch line in the Peak District like this! Tongue removed from cheek now!







These prints were done on a large plotter at my work and were taken from a true size pdf that Martin at Templot helped create. Once final timber shoving is finished this will be off to the laser cutters for the whole layout to be created in laser cut ply wood and then it is on to the track building stage.

I may well still look at the elevated station building as suggested by Alistair. Easy to play with given it is just plain track. Does give me the option to extend the layout when a new house allows.
 

·
Alan D
Joined
·
1,480 Posts
So this is based on a design by Cyril is it? I would just like to add - the man is/was a God. Reading his books (I think I have them all) gave me inspiration to no end. Hail Cyril!!!!

By the way I want to see how this one turns out, I'll be watching closely.

Cheers

Alan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,499 Posts
That plan is looking really impressive mate! can't wait to see this layout progress.

Kind regards

Paul
 
1 - 20 of 62 Posts
Top