Templot Club Archive 2007-2020
|
|||
| author | remove search highlighting | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
posted: 2 Jan 2014 22:02 from: Mythocentric
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin Re my topic over on YMR this is my layout plan based on the Lancashire & Yorkshire’s Rishworth with the problem area outlined in red. Who said small branch line termini were simple? I’ve tried to follow the video and repeatedly got stuck, no doubt through trying to run before I can do the Templot walk! The photo (which has been ‘flipped’ horizontally to match the track plan) shows the 3-way as being symmetrical but an asymmetric 3-way with the left-hand leading gives me more room to fit in the coal road (not to mention being easier to build!). I’m working on B7 crossings on both turnouts which give’s me a good compromise in the space I have available. Thank you in advance for your generous assistance both here and on YMR! 2849_021659_570000000.jpg  2849_021700_430000000.jpg  Edit: Sorry! I committed the usual sin and forgot to mention the track gauge which is 00-SF! Regards Bill |
||
|
posted: 3 Jan 2014 00:21 from: Alan Turner
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Mythocentric wrote: The photo (which has been ‘flipped’ horizontally to match the track plan) shows the 3-way as being symmetricalSorry but the photo clearly shows a tandem turnout as the centre crossing is off-set. If it were a three throw turnout it would be central to the centre running lines. Alan |
||
|
posted: 3 Jan 2014 00:36 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Bill, Welcome to Templot Club.  Please can you attach your AnyRail file (.any) here? Your screenshot is a bit too small to work from accurately. regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 3 Jan 2014 00:42 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Alan Turner wrote:Sorry but the photo clearly shows a tandem turnout as the centre crossing is off-set. If it were a three throw turnout it would be central to the centre running lines.Not necessarily Alan. A three-throw is only symmetrical if the centre road is straight and both turnouts are the same crossing angle. If the crossing angles differ, the middle crossing will be offset. In any event, Bill is looking for a tandem turnout, not a three-throw. regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 3 Jan 2014 02:53 from: Mythocentric
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin Sorry about that! The file should be here if I've got it right! Honestly, take me away from 3D and I'm like a lost sheep sometimes! Incidentally, I used Anyrail to 'prove' the track plan while leaving plenty of room for hand-building so there's no problem in using, say B8 vee's on the single slip if that makes it any easier on the running lines. In the yard the single turnout (following the 3-way) will be a B6 so hopefully B7's on the 3-way will give me room to manoeuvre. The prototype itself was constricted between the run round loop and the River Ryburn on the other side! Regards Bill |
||
| Attachment: attach_1705_2370_Slitheroe.any 294 | |||
|
posted: 3 Jan 2014 10:45 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Bill, Thanks for uploading your AnyRail file. As you are using 00-SF without any sharp curves, you will get a neater result if you use the prototypical 44.67mm track spacing (6ft way) rather than the Peco spacing of 51mm which you have there. This also much improves the visual effect of 00 gauge and gains a bit of extra length in loops. (Unless you have set a wider spacing to match the known prototype?) As promised I will do your slip and tandem for you shortly. If anyone else would like to try it: 1. export from AnyRail as .png file. 2. load it into a picture shape in Templot. Use the other picture option and set the width to 4267mm: 2_030533_100000000.png  2_030533_100000001.png  regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 3 Jan 2014 11:06 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
p.s. Bill, Flipping a track plan can create odd results as trailing crossovers become facing crossovers and need facing-point locks. Your track plan looks a bit odd as it stands, and makes more sense in the original: 2_030603_570000000.jpg  The bay platform road was presumably used for departures only? Martin. |
||
|
posted: 3 Jan 2014 19:13 from: Simon Dunkley
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin Wynne wrote:p.s. Bill, Hi Martin and Bill, Many L&Y branch termini were built with double track, yet a single platform on the down (arrival) line. Arriving trains have no facing turnouts, and departing trains have only the one turnout, on the crossover from down to up line. This is a fantastically economical arrangement, and whilst it is true that some lines were worked as single lines with the (usually up) road out of regular use and deployed for storing old coaching stock, used only on summer excursions, I am not aware of any arranged with facing point access to the platform for incoming trains, but welcome being proved wrong. That's not a bay as such: it's a goods road with access from the platform, for the loading of such things as the products of the mills. Hope that helps: it is not impossible to resolve, with the platform on the arrival side and the main goods yard behind that, it would be plausible. Simon |
||
|
posted: 3 Jan 2014 20:25 from: Mythocentric
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin Simon's already provided an answer so I've included a brief history which should explain my reasoning further. 44.67mm track spacing is first choice. As I mentioned I only used Anyrail with the intention of ‘proving’ the track plan which, unfortunately meant using Peco’s finest (?)! It also helps in that like the original (built on a shelf between Oldham Road and the River Ryburn) I’m tight for space so every bit counts! The reason for ‘flipping’ the track plan is one of space. I live in an apartment and the only room I have for the layout has an emergency fire exit at one end which would have been at the station (fixed) end in the original configuration. This way round the fiddle yard will fold down when not in use to provide the required exit with the stock being on cassettes stored on shelves. It was either that or a basic shunting plank, and I hate shunting planks! A Brief History: The line was originally built to double-track mainline standards by the Lanky with the intention of tunnelling through Blackstone Edge to provide an alternative route into Lancashire. However, it proved to be “a dangerous and expensive enterprise” (including a viaduct which had to be rebuilt because the first one collapsed just before completion!) so it terminated at Rishworth opposite the schools (named as Slitheroe on the original contractors drawings hence the layout name). Apart from the first few months it was always run as single line. Ripponden and Triangle having two platforms both losing one platform by 1906 with Rishworth only ever having the one. Trains ran in both directions on the former up line (The Platform Road on the layout) after crossing over at Ripponden with the other line being used as a long siding between Triangle and Watson’s Crossing Halt to store excursion stock and as a head shunt for the goods yard at Rishworth. The line marked as the Bay Road wasn’t in fact a bay as such after 1919 being separated from the platform by a wooden fence and only accessible from the former down line via the single slip which also provided access for locos running round their trains. It formed a second smaller coal yard having two sidings, so on the layout I’ll use it for domestic coal which enables me to ‘disappear’ the wagons to empty them with coal from the ‘coal road (No 3) being ‘tripped to the mills offstage! Traffic was handled by railmotors, various 0-6-0ST, 0-6-2T and 0-6-0’s with LMS 2-6-2T, Fowler 0-6-0 4F and Stanier 2-8-0 8F’s later on goods. Goods traffic was heavy given the number of mills (both wool and paper) in the area with all trains running on ticket and staff. That gives me another justification for the layout. As I said I don’t like shunting ‘planks’ but I do love shunting when there’s a valid operational reason for it! It’s that quirkiness which attracted me to it in the first place though as you can see from the original contractor’s drawing below it could have been more ‘interesting’ with the trackwork at the head-end of the yard including another single slip and various siding links, all of which was removed by the LMS, who also (re)installed the single slip in place of the original configuration shown below on the layout plan, with the run round being provided with a simple cross over. I hope I haven’t bored you to tears with all this but it should give the reasons for its current form. 2849_031522_100000000.jpg  All the above information courtesy of the LYRS! Regards Bill |
||
| Last edited on 3 Jan 2014 20:35 by Mythocentric |
|||
|
posted: 13 Jan 2014 00:27 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Bill, Well that was tricky. Your photo appears to show an S-curve transition through the middle road of the tandem, so I have tried to replicate that. I also modified your track centres to better match the photo and the prototype regulations. .box file attached below. Feel free to modify it any way you want. I have done some of the timber shoving, but left some for you. full plan: 2_121906_350000000.png  overlaid on your original: 2_121906_350000001.png  station throat: 2_121906_360000002.png  tandem: 2_121906_360000003.png  regards, Martin. |
||
| Attachment: attach_1711_2370_slitheroe_in_templot.box 286 | |||
|
posted: 14 Jan 2014 21:27 from: Mythocentric
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin That is absolutely brilliant! I asked for help with a couple of (albeit complex) turnouts and get a whole layout! I freely admit I'm now officially gobsmacked! Thank you so much for your generosity and assistance! I've just printed it out full-size and laid it out on the base boards and it's surprising how much better and natural it looks. That S-curve transition which I hadn't paid much attention to because I'd usually have built it straight as per the C&L kit template does make a big visual impact on the layout especially with it being right in the centre of the track plan. I can't wait to see one of my 8F's negotiating its way through during shunting ops, so especial thanks for your hard work and insight there too! So! Finish off those timbers, print out a calibrated copy on card and apply a healthy dent to my bank balance in favour of C&L next I think! I only with I'd applied myself to Templot a lot sooner! Regards Bill |
||
|
posted: 26 Jan 2014 09:00 from: roythebus
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Using Templot to make your layout DOES make a big visual difference. I had a chap visit me a while ago to buy some stuff off eBay. He commented how realistic scalefour looked on my layout, which is built using Templot to OO-fine scale! | ||
| Please read this important note about copyright: Unless stated otherwise, all the files submitted to this web site are copyright and the property of the respective contributor. You are welcome to use them for your own personal non-commercial purposes, and in your messages on this web site. If you want to publish any of this material elsewhere or use it commercially, you must first obtain the owner's permission to do so. |