Model Railway Forum banner

Little Salkeld

13344 Views 49 Replies 11 Participants Last post by  linka
This is my latest and probably my last layout. It is in a shed on the North side of our bungalow in an area that never gets the sun and is not much use for anything else. The shed is nominally 24' by 6' but part is sectioned off for gardening tools and things. Allowing for insulation and lining this gives me a space 18' 10" by 5' 7" or 5.74m by 1.7m for the model railway. That is a good length compared to what many people have but the width is restrictive. Like my previous layouts it will be L.M.R. of B.R. in the late 1950s/early 60s and will have a flavour of the Settle and Carlisle line.

I had nearly finished the previous layout in the shed, which was a plain roundy-roundy on one level, when I realised why I had not touched it for several weeks. It was because there were too many things about it which I did not like. They were :-
(a) Regular derailments at the lifting flap which I had obviously not made well enough.
Even more regular derailments at the point leading into the up line storage loops, even after I had replaced it with a new one.
© I didn't like the station main building being at the front of the layout.
(d) I wanted a longer scenic run.
(e) Peco had brought out their bullhead rail with very much improved points.

I decided that I would completely dismantle and rebuild it. This time it would be a double roundy-roundy with storage loops below the station. Also the whole thing would be built high enough that ducking under to get in and out would be easy, so that the lines across the doorway could be permanent fixtures. (The fact that I am only 5' 7" means that I can easily duck under 5' or a little less.) The main station building would be at the back of the layout. I spent hours on Anyrail checking that the proposed track plan would work while keeping to the 24" minimum radius that I had on the previous layout. I decided that I would have the minimum workable gap between levels so that gradients up to the station level could be as gentle as possible. In the end I chose 70mm between levels and this resulted in gradients of between 1 in 70 and 1 in 75.

I chose Little Salkeld from the stations on the S&C because I wanted one where the refuge siding went behind the second platform and where the goods yard was to the left of the station building looking from the main lines. I think that it's the only one with these characteristics. I shall make two changes though; for visual and operating interest, I will give it an extra siding, and I will put home and starter signals on both main lines, which the real station did not have.

If I can do it successfully, here are two pictures of the storage loops before the station baseboard was put on top.

I have got quite a bit further with the construction but this will do for a first instalment.


P.S. I haven't yet got the hang of transferring pictures from the gallery.


See less See more
1 - 5 of 50 Posts
Looks very neat, efficiently 'packing in' as much run as possible in the space.

I have a plan for my 'duck-under' as I get older. Got me an old wheelchair so I can ride under when bending becomes a challenge. Much
simpler than any lift out section. Old wheelchairs are chucked out quite regularly, the one I have 'had to go' because it had no locking
wheel brakes.
I like the track gently snaking through the platforms. You do know that these bullhead points can flex a little without any modification
'as they come out of the packet'? I haven't permanently laid any of mine yet, but having gently curved plenty of code 100 and 75
Streamline large radius points over the years and not a single problem, I will go on to do the same with the Bullhead. (I have a scale
half mile radius curve through my 'station that is to come' into which the points will fit seamlessly by this means.)

QUOTE (Robert Stokes @ 20 Dec 2019, 22:07) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...I believe that medium radius points are on the drawing board but when they will be available is anyone's guess...
I have to believe that Peco are working at whatever may be their full capacity to expand the range of points; because my local model
railway shop owner tells me the sales of the BH track have way exceeded expectations. Of course they may be getting hung up on the
slips: these will be a problem is my feeling because of their small radius. (In my ideal world Peco would have abandoned Streamline
geometry, and gone for prototype representation. I have a very neat double slip from Marcway based on five chains radius. Not
outrageously large, an item I need for Hatfield East side yard.)

QUOTE (Robert Stokes @ 20 Dec 2019, 22:07) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...A shed 7.2m by 2.4m it says in another thread! I'm envious. A pity that the width is not quite enough for O gauge...
Then again, even 3.1 x 10.2 metres isn't sufficient for dreams of world domination. O gauge would fit, but not therequirement for a
pacific pounding away with 12 or more on, sigh. Our fundamental problem, the real railway sprawls...
See less See more
QUOTE (Robert Stokes @ 23 Feb 2021, 15:54) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...I realised that a main line descending into a tunnel was unrealistic...
Not necessarily. The GNR main line descends steadily into the Thames valley on the last 20 miles approaching Kings Cross, but has several tunnels, as it encounters the remnants of escarpments at near right angles to its route. These weren't quite the landforms the Midland encountered in its Pennine adventure, admitted...
Like the lighting over the 'castle corner', very reminiscent of walking the Pennine Way in a long ago summer. Much cloud and heavy rain, but when the sun broke through there were powerful 'spot lighting' effects, sweeping across the uplands; and you have it right there!

To echo others, that's looking very fine indeed altogether.
View attachment 20202

This is not quite finished as the left-hand wall needs its capping stones. The position of the rear plate girder bridge is an attempt at a con trick. I want to give the impression that the lower track runs straight on whereas it really turns sharply to the right. This con trick may not come off very well...
I feel the effect will be improved if you have dense vegetation near completely obscuring the view under the girder bridge, then there is less information about the continuing direction of the double track line. The blend to the 'distant' back scene is good, and should add to the perception that the line runs off into the distance.
1 - 5 of 50 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.