North London Layout Planning

[garethashenden]

So I'm back, trying to design a North London Railway layout that captures the bustle and business of Edwardian London in not quite enough space. I have a room which can be dedicated to trains. It needs to accommodate my workbench, rolling stock storage, et cetera, but there is space to build something around the walls if its high enough. I would want the layout to be a continuous run, which might just be possible. The room I have is 10' x 11'. Luckily the door is in the corner. I have drawn up a plan, that I'm mostly happy with, but I want some feedback. My vision is that as we move clockwise from the fiddle yard the railway passes through rising ground. Starting on a viaduct and ending in a cutting. Two stations, one on the viaduct and one in the cutting. Halfway through will be an industrial area, a mixture of warehouses and factories. I have one exchange siding and a run around loop so that a dedicated industrial shunter can do its thing there. There's a loop off the mainline so that this can be worked without interfering with the movements of passenger trains. Other than that, acres of terraced houses and a few pubs. Maybe a tram somewhere if I get adventurous. What do you think?

[bobwallison]

Looks like an intersting and fun layout, but what is the minimumm radius? It looks like 2ft 6in or so, assuming a six inch grid (to match the overall dimensions you give). That is really tight - it is P4, right?

You might be able to lengthen the sidings in the fiddle yard if the bottom right corner mirrored the bottom left.

Bob

[garethashenden]

You have found the problem! The tightest radius that I’m aware of is in the top right corner and it’s 32”. I should be able to ease it somewhat, but I think it will still be under 40”. I’ve made substantial improvements from this morning when there was a 19” S-curve, but it’s not perfect yet. I think the bottom right needs to stay about how it is, that’s where the door is. I would like to get in the room before having to deal with getting in the layout, so no baseboards directly across the doorway. There will need to be a lift out/drop down/swing bridge something to get in and out, but that’s not the end of the world. Even will all my short wheelbase stock, I need to improve the curves.

[Terry Bendall]

I think the sharp curves will be a problem. Someone I know scrapped a layout when he realised that pre-Grouping six wheel coaches would not cope with less than 48 inch radius curves. No doubt someone will be along shortly to give further advice on this.

Terry Bendall

[davebradwell]

I'm going to be more blunt - not only do you have impractically tight curves but you have put pointwork on them bringing the min radius even lower. You haven't mentioned what type of stock you are running but bogie coaches certainly need track centres widening at 3ft radius in order to miss when passing.

It's more usual to have a place in mind when creating a layout rather than starting by designing some track and working from there. Perhaps try an L in this space, or a U or go industrial.

DaveB

[hughesp87]

Gareth,

Whilst I'm not writing off your aim of a continuous run in such a small space, it would be helpful to set some parameters before you start, as others have suggested. Certainly you need to think about train lengths, because they govern loop and fiddle yard lengths. You also need to consider the type of stock you will run. 6-wheel and bogie coaches have rather specific requirements, which demand a degree of experimentation before you commit yourself to a final plan.

I certainly believe that trying to fit two stations into this configuration is well nigh impossible, unless you follow Iain Rice's idea of modelling 'part stations' on either side of the fiddle yard, with suitable overbridges to conceal the exits from the scene. The fiddle yard would also need to take the form of cassettes rather than loops. With the recent advances in laser cutting, curved cassettes are technically feasible, especially as you won't need to reverse them on a circular double track layout.

Coming back to the idea of a continuous run, probably the only way of avoiding the pitfalls that Dave has so eloquently described would be to maximise the radius and form a complete circle, rather than the rather squashed example you have drawn. The outer circle would then be used mostly for passenger and through goods trains and the shunting yard would be located inside the circle. Although you still have the same issue of curved pointwork, at least you have maximised the outer radius that way, and shunting 4-wheel stock with something like a Park 0-6-0T should still be feasible. At the points where the outer track comes close to the walls, typical brick retaining walls would frame the scene nicely.

Above all, don't make it too complicated! You can still create a convincing layout with a basic track plan, especially if you put the effort into shaping the scene around the railway, as you have mentioned. At least you will have a place to run trains whenever you want to - something I'm only just contemplating after 40+ years in P4! However I can't understate the value of doing experiments first to determine those design parameters.

Good luck, and by all means PM me if you want to discuss further.

Geraint

[Ian@Exton]

Gareth,

I agree with others - a key starting point is knowing the minimum radius that your stock can negotiate. This is particularly important for shunting and for reversing bogie vehicles.

Once you have this figure you can set it as the minimum radius within the design parameters in Templot. Then the programme will highlight any sections of track or pointwork which are below that minimum.

Good luck!
Ian

[bobwallison]

Gotham Curve on the Cromford and High Peak Railway turned through 80 degrees on a radius of 50yards, about 26ins in 4mm scale. From 1931 to the late 1950s it was operated by NLR 0-6-0 tanks, then by Austerity 0-6-0s.
Also, way, way back, Exactoscale's trade stand featured a four-wheeled P4 tank loco running round a circle of track that can't have been more than 12ins radius.
So there are both prototype and model precedents for running round sharp curves, but the constraints are considerable. Forget about any locos with medium to long fixed wheelbase. Or locos with bogies or pony trucks - the side swing would be impossible. You might just manage bogie wagons and coaches if you don't mind gouging out behind the solebars to provide clearance, but propelling them round sharp curves would be a nightmare. The list goes on.
I've Templotted a similar idea to yours with a minimum radius of 40ins (image to follow) but it doesn't work very well in your space. Can you re-hang the door to open outwards? Dave's idea of a U or L seems very sensible - end to end layouts can equal the operating potential of roundy-rounds. Did any enthusiasts' specials operate over the NLR? They provide a good excuse to operate carriages in the most unlikely places - I have seen photos of a 2-6-4T hauling 4Mk1s, banked by an 8F, into a limestone quarry.

Hope you have fun, whatever you decide.

Bob

[Noel]

A few other things to consider:
Will you be able to access all parts of the layout against the walls without having to lean too far over the layout, possibly risking damage elsewhere, especially since the baseboard is at a high level? Will you be unable to reach some parts at all? No reflection on your abilities is intended, but there will be derailments, or solder joints which fail, or automatic couplings which fail to engage, etc., usually in the most awkward places.
Does the door open inward or outward? If the former, which side are the hinges, and how far along the wall is it? how far do you need it to open it to get in and out comfortably?
What effect will this have on the location of any lifting section in the baseboard, bearing in mind that pointwork or multiple lines crossing from this lifting section to the fixed sections will increase the risk of problems with alignments?
Where are you going to put the workbench [and a chair presumably], rolling stock storage, etc., and what impact will this have on access to the layout and access to the storage?

Exchange sidings could be on railway company property or private property. Which applies here is not clear from your diagram, but this affects which locos can go where, and where any catch point will be; the railway company would always control access to its own property. Privately owned locos would be allowed to access company tracks if the exchange sidings were on the company side of the boundary, but normally with the access limited solely to that necessary to collect and deliver traffic from/to the exchange sidings.
The loop on the main is not essential - the access could be direct from the main, usually in the trailing direction. The rest of the train can be left on the main while the loco swaps inbound and outbound traffic, which should be quite quick, and would, where possible, be done at a time when passenger trains weren't running. The loop does provide the option of using it for passenger trains to pass freights.

[Julian Roberts]

Don't take this as a criticism - everyone has their own ideas and wishes. But I would be looking at the near 15ft you've got diagonally, and thinking a crescent shape pushed towards a corner could be significantly longer; and I'd find somewhere on your prototype to model exactly or near exactly. With all those locations - stations or otherwise - to choose from, surely something real could encapsulate everything you want to express. I expect you know about the NLS georeferenced map service and the OS 25" per mile maps you can see with every bit of track around 1900, that can then be planted straight into Templot.

This took my fancy at Model Rail Scotland recently - Rossiter Rise. Lots of different trains in a small space. I don't know if that's fictional., but I'd be looking for a curved real location. Just as, often, truth is stranger than fiction, real places 100 yrs ago can be seriously more interesting than our imagination!

[barhamd]

Prior to working on my model of Clare I was trying to fit a bit of Ex-Great Eastern London into a room ~10x9. I think I was about able to get a minimum of about 40" which could manage my stock of BR Mk1 coaches and locos like an N7 as well as lots of diesels.

plan.jpg

I didn't attempt to get a station in at all, though I was planning to model the ends of a platform near the door. The fiddle yard on this was vertical and had 5 shelves about 3' long each of which had a double track because there was no room for a more traditional approach.

31.jpg

j65.jpg

So I'd agree that you can get a double track continuous run into a small space and make it work if you can live with the limitation. It really is a case of not trying to fit too much in and then finding out that it doesn't quite work because you tried to squeeze in too much. I only abandon the project because I had the opportunity to extend the house and the railway room doubled in size.

Good luck with whatever you decide to do.
David

[garethashenden]

Thanks everyone for you input, this is exactly what I wanted. For a reference point as much as anything I superimposed 48" and 40" circles centered on the middle of the room. I have a hard time seeing 48" happening, but 40" is doable.



As for the room itself, here are a few pictures. The N scale layout will be going elsewhere in the house and the workbench will be replaced by a narrower one. This one seems to have a no man's land in the middle where stuff accumulates. Aiming for rail height of 52" to 54" off the floor. I have no hesitation building the layout across the windows.




While the industrial part is fictitious, the rest of it is based on the section of line between Dalston and Hackney, maybe continuing on to Homerton. The GER had a goods and coal yard in this area served by this line, and the GNR had one on the other side of Homerton. There are also some unidentified sidings near Hackney up on the viaduct. The locomotives are 0-6-0Ts and 4-4-0Ts. From previous experiments the 0-6-0 and some 9'wb wagons can handle a 24" curve, I need to see about the 4-4-0s. I have one of the inside cylinder 4-4-0s under construction and they're longer than the outside cylinder ones. As for coaches, the only prototypical ones for this time and section of line are the NLR's 4 wheel coaches, as offered by LRM. Any bogie stock would be large goods moving to/from the docks. The LNWR did run express services into Broad Street at one time, but that's the other side of Dalston Junction and I think they stopped in the 1890s, but I'm not certain.

The comments about reachability are noted. Its something I was aware of, but if I'm enlarging the curves, and therefore the baseboard, it becomes more of a problem. I think my current plan is to move the industrial area, or some portion of it, inside the curve. That will help with most of the problems. The radii can increase, there's still some straightish track between corners, and reachability will be improved.

[bobwallison]

David Barham's plan looks similar to the one I had sketched up, but much better - you could do a lot worse than scanning it into Templot and using it as a basis for development. The sidings on the inside of the curve could be at the same level as the main line, with a trailing connection off the inner loop.

If you're testing stock on tight curves, don't forget to test a whole train - buffers may close up tight and twist vehicles off the track, or they may lock when propelling trains. It's the entry from straight to curve that does the damage - a transition curve is very beneficial here.

Bob

[grovenor-2685]

For buffer locking see http://www.norgrove.me.uk/GWRtracknotes/R1774A.pdf

[TonyMont]

Hi, This is very interesting and I will follow the thread with interest. Talking of laser cut curved cassettes made me think, why not use these as the lifting section between two seperate baseboards? Remove the cassette and walk through.
Regards Tony.

[Noel]

Lots of different trains in a small space. I don't know if that's fictional.,

The green multiple unit appears to be an ex-LNWR Oerlikon set in BR livery, used on the Broad Street/Euston to Watford service, the red LT set and the grey motor coach are "Standard" stock built to the restricted loading gauge of the deep level tubes [Piccadilly, Northern, Central and Bakerloo], the 0-4-4T is a Metropolitan 'E' class, of which one is preserved [not necessarily restricted to that line under LT, I think], and the battery locos could go anywhere on the system. The time period would be some time in the 1950s.

[Noel]

The GER had a goods and coal yard in this area served by this line, and the GNR had one on the other side of Homerton. There are also some unidentified sidings near Hackney up on the viaduct.

According to the 1920 6in OS map the sidings below the GER viaduct, between Dalston Junction and Hackney, are a GER Goods and Coal Depot https://maps.nls.uk/view/102345864. Access to them is from the NLR.

[John Palmer]

For a rough and ready exercise to see what could be accomplished using transition curves, I knocked up a primitive double track continuous run in Templot designed to fit the confines of a 10' x 11' space as shown in the attached image.

TenByEleven.png

When drawing in Templot I tend to take scale chains as a basic unit of measure, and in this case the design was based upon four substantially identical curves for the inner circuit that transition from a small radius of 1056mm (4 scale chains/41.5”) to a large radius of 2127mm (between 8 and 8.5 scale chains/83.7”).

The outer track was spaced at the normal 6' dimension on the large radius, increased to 6' 6” on the small radius. This seems to provide clearance for 58' x 9' bogie vehicles having bogie centres spaced at 40'' 6', but there appears to be ample room to increase this clearance on the small radius if required.

Having established the double track circuit I grouped and twisted it within the 10' x 11' space with a view to (1) avoiding the swing of the door and (2) optimising space for track plan development outside the circuit.

Very boring basic circuit shape, but perhaps has some value showing the potential of transition curves in such a space.

[Stephan.wintner]

John, I think distilling the design down to it's basic topology, as you have just done, is likely the right thing to do at this point. (I'm speaking as an engineer who is doing exactly that professionally now.) As a next step, I'd suggest looking hard at David Barham's arrangement, and seeing how your latest sketch could fit if it was a bit more of a triangle (like his main loop) with suitable radii.

Once you have a handle on the basic loop, then see how other things fit around it, and tweak that loop to suit them. (Apologies, you've probably already done a lot of that, I'm mostly just trying to say I agree with this latest sketch & approach.)

Stephan

[garethashenden]

Thanks John! That looks great. I'll use that as the basic concept. I'm still figuring out transition curves in Templot after several years of bodging things. Its a bit of a learning curve, but I'm sure I'll get there, especially with everyone's help.

[John Palmer]

Hopefully the boxfile will upload OK as an attachment to this post, in case it may be of some assistance. The .bgs file with the graphic for the 10' x 11' containing rectangle isn't an acceptable file extension for upload, but it's very easily created in Templot by the quick and dirty method of going through the menu items Background -> add a quick baseboard outline -> other sizes and options -> (choose the unit of measure/options required).

Edited to add another quick caveat: in case I got the clearances wrong, I recommend you check them by means of multiple dummy vehicles using the Utils -> dummy vehicle and spacing ring menu items. That way you can set up dummy vehicles having the same dimensions as those you plan to use in order to check for conflicts.

[Martin Wynne]

When drawing in Templot I tend to take scale chains as a basic unit of measure

Hi John,

Just a reminder that you can enter data in prototype chains directly in Templot. Just prefix the dimension with a letter r or R when Templot is asking for model mm:

rad_chains.png

Which would set the model radius to the scale equivalent of 5 chains = 1320mm in P4. Just be sure to have set your model scale first.

When Templot is asking for the dimension in prototype inches you can use the prefix letter u or U to enter it in chains, although it's not very often you would want to that. For rail lengths or timber spacings for example.

There are lots of other conversion prefix letters, click the ? help button for more info.

cheers,

Martin.

[John Palmer]

Thank you, Martin, that is a really helpful reminder for me. I use Templot quite a lot for creating prototype track layout overlays on maps and aerial photographs, and it's often helpful to use chains for setting out curve radii when trying to get a fix on what the original designer intended. But I also use chains when plotting curves on freelance designs on the basis that this is how the prototype designer would probably have approached such a task.

TheTemplot information page 'About conversion factors' is well worth study for all the different ways of saving time you would otherwise spend calculating conversions like these. As always, the problem with rich software such as Templot is remembering how to uncover and use its functionality 'to the max'.

[garethashenden]

Here's the current state of the mainline. I've kept the 4 chain minimum radius, but rearranged some of the templates to open up the space in the middle. I'm now thinking of using a vertical fiddle/storage yard shown in this plan in the crosshatched area at the bottom. Its 4' long, or will be when I build it. I laid out some stock on the dining room table and that gives a respectable train length. Thinking of putting a junction in the bottom left corner, nonworking probably, but it could give some nice atmosphere.
The extra piece of track is a sample of 4 chain radius that I was playing around with.

[davebradwell]

After heading towards a logical solution you seem to have suddenly dumped that and started again. I would have expected the final shape to be remarkably like the plan by Barhand - you were nearly there. The only useful part of the circuit is the large radius bit between the corners as pointwork can be placed there and even on the inside. You've chopped it into little bits and spread it around so none of the bits is likely to be useful and you'll always be shunting round a tight bend. There's also an ominous little cross to the left of the others which suggests there's a bit at 2ft 9in radius somewhere.

Your traverser looks a challenge. With the strange track shape, can you really make a stack of them all identical so they all line up perfectly every time and despite seasonal movement of your timber baseboards. Anyway, I would question the rationale of curved cassettes/whatever - if a train departs west, isn't the function of the off-stage arrangements to turn it round so that it can arrive from the west later in the day? Putting track closer to the left and right walls would seem essential and give a longer straight bit but I doubt you could go from curved approach to straight traverser successfully.

I think your idea for a dummy junction would just emphasise how sharp the curves are. It certainly wouldn't use any normal mainline s & c arrangements. The 11ft room length is proving a real challenge for a continuous run with your traverser.

DaveB