Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 68

Thread: Omagh Goods Yard

  1. #41
    Building the track is not a problem, I have in the past built both points and track in a number of gauges, what I was thinking about was more of a time saver if you could find someone else to do it for you.

    Most layouts I see at exhibitions have a very simple design and consist of a run round loop with a number of sidings off of it, it is getting harder to find layouts that for want of a better reason are a bit more of challenge to operate or to view. To me, it would appear that some of the more complicated but interesting track layouts fail to get modelled.

    I also realise that over time track plans where modified to make them more simple and easier to maintain, one thing I have noticed with a few Irish track plans, is the use of a siding coming off the middle of a loop on one side and crossing the other track of the loop via a diamond crossing and then going on to serve a good shed behind the loop.

    Its these little quirks and curiosities which for some reason get missed out when a layout get modelled and would make a whole lot of difference to the character of the layout.

    Either that or I just happen to want to make my life difficult when it comes to modelling.
    Last edited by Colin R; 1 Week Ago at 10:34 AM. Reason: grammer mistake

  2. #42
    Building the track is not a problem, I have in the past built both points and track in a number of gauges, what I was thinking about was more of a time saver if you could find someone else to do it for you.
    Great, getting handmade track built cheaply isnt a reasonable assumption, its time consuming work, and hence relatively expensive, suck it up as the americans say

    Most layouts I see at exhibitions have a very simple design and consist of a run round loop with a number of sidings off of it, it is getting harder to find layouts that for want of a better reason are a bit more of challenge to operate or to view. To me, it would appear that some of the more complicated but interesting track layouts fail to get modelled.
    This is a perennial issue for exhibition layouts ( and one my club finds difficult to resolve ) . challenging layouts by definition are " challenging " and at exhibitions , punters want to see trains running ( if you have ever manned an exhibition layout, its interesting to see how fast people drift off, when no stock is moving ) . Hence layout that require shunting, cross track movements etc are likely (a) to need multiple operators ( b) more likely to stall or derail and (b) often dont hold the publics interest

    My club is currently deciding to build far more complex ( in comparison ) exhibition layouts , one that will inevitably require multiple operators and will work to signals etc. But its a big undertaking

    Home layouts , where there is nothing to prove , is where you find much more complexity

    o me, it would appear that some of the more complicated but interesting track layouts fail to get modelled.
    SO im in the early stages of modelling claremorris in the 70s , 50 points , 5 single line junctions, massively signalled to support " knock " specials ( 10 passengers trains in the station at one time !) and also the attached ballinrobe branch ( which I have committed to exhibit next easter, --- gulp , just the branch mind you )

    but without huge amounts of automation, running this whole layout at exhibitions will require 3-6 operators , a very big commitment

    In my case I actively sought out a complex track plan, and its the reason I'm doing it in 00 , because in anything else , there is not a hope Id complete it inside 10 years . Most layouts in ireland that are complex, are simply too big to model , and applying huge compression, results in an untenable layout. Then again most track work in ireland , even in steam days , was relatively simple, with few uses of complex ladders and slips etc , unlike what was common in the UK ( where traffic densities where orders of magnitude higher )

    Railway modelling is full of " biting off more then you can chew ", people massively underrate the time it takes to build a good quality layout, especially where there is any complexity
    Last edited by Junctionmad; 1 Week Ago at 01:26 PM.

  3. #43
    I also realise that over time track plans where modified to make them more simple and easier to maintain, one thing I have noticed with a few Irish track plans, is the use of a siding coming off the middle of a loop on one side and crossing the other track of the loop via a diamond crossing and then going on to serve a good shed behind the loop.
    its not a track formation , I can say was common in ireland, most single line stations were very simply " tracked " with the goods siding typically in advance or in the rear of the station and primarily designed to be accessed in the direction of the majority of traffic , typically " from " Dublin etc . Land was comparatively cheap in ireland and many stations were quite sprawling, presenting challenges in model form

    The formation you mention is more common on double lines, where the B of T rules frowned on facing points , so one line had to cross the other to access the yard. IN recent years the use of facing points is less frowned upon and such complexities are largely gone
    Last edited by Junctionmad; 1 Week Ago at 01:28 PM.

  4. #44
    When setting out the Goods Yard at Omagh my plan is to take the original engineers drawings that I have and overlay it with an imaginary grid which will give me references for the exact point positions and from this run centre lines through the pointwork and track that I can transfer to the actual baseboards. Sounds complicated but I think it will work.

  5. #45
    I totally agree with you regarding exhibition layouts, a friend of mind built a station called Chelfham on the 2ft gauge Lynton and Barnstaple Railway in North Devon, you could not get a simpler layout, a passing loop and one siding and it is a fantastic model, boring as hell to operate at an exhibition, yet when it was working, there was always three or four deep just to watch the trains pass by.

    For me, my idea layout would be based on one of the American shunting puzzle designs, but it would incorporate a continuous run as well.

    I know when I was little there was nothing better that watching trains go pass at speed, either in real life or on a model railway. Why is it we always wanted it to crash?

    Good luck with Claremorris, if I had the room that would be one layout I would build as part of a team effort.

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin R View Post
    I totally agree with you regarding exhibition layouts, a friend of mind built a station called Chelfham on the 2ft gauge Lynton and Barnstaple Railway in North Devon, you could not get a simpler layout, a passing loop and one siding and it is a fantastic model, boring as hell to operate at an exhibition, yet when it was working, there was always three or four deep just to watch the trains pass by.

    For me, my idea layout would be based on one of the American shunting puzzle designs, but it would incorporate a continuous run as well.

    I know when I was little there was nothing better that watching trains go pass at speed, either in real life or on a model railway. Why is it we always wanted it to crash?

    Good luck with Claremorris, if I had the room that would be one layout I would build as part of a team effort.
    thanks re Claremorris, its a big undertaking , but I'm a builder as much as an operator and its a interesting challenge , using 00-SF I can at least run off the shelf plain track etc

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by TonyMcGartland View Post
    When setting out the Goods Yard at Omagh my plan is to take the original engineers drawings that I have and overlay it with an imaginary grid which will give me references for the exact point positions and from this run centre lines through the pointwork and track that I can transfer to the actual baseboards. Sounds complicated but I think it will work.

    The only issue with that is you are likely to need compression in a model layout, personally Id take one of the many layout design software apps and build by layout in that first , to see what the ultimate dimensions are

  8. #48
    Senior Member jhb171achill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    I inhabit the parallel world, wherein lie gryphons, dwarves, changelings and railway enthusiasts.
    Posts
    5,608
    This is exceptionally low-brow and low-tech, but what I did on several occasions while trying to work out what quart I could fit into a pint pot, was to mark track sections and points out full size on old newspaper with a marker pen, but the bits out and lay them in place. This will show what fits very early!

    I know it sounds utterly ridiculous, but it's effective, and try as I might, no layout software is remotely intelligible to me!
    “An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it. Truth stands, even if there be no public support”

    Never argue with an idiot. He will bring you down to his level, then beat you with experience.

  9. #49
    Senior Member Mayner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Hamilton, New Zealand
    Posts
    1,704
    Blog Entries
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Junctionmad View Post
    its not a track formation , I can say was common in ireland, most single line stations were very simply " tracked " with the goods siding typically in advance or in the rear of the station and primarily designed to be accessed in the direction of the majority of traffic , typically " from " Dublin etc . Land was comparatively cheap in ireland and many stations were quite sprawling, presenting challenges in model form

    The formation you mention is more common on double lines, where the B of T rules frowned on facing points , so one line had to cross the other to access the yard. IN recent years the use of facing points is less frowned upon and such complexities are largely gone
    Going off topic both Ferbane and Belmont & Cloghran on the Banagher branch had track layouts with the goods yard served by a crossover off the goods loop and a diamond crossing across the running line up to closure in 1963.


    Presumably this saved a facing point lock and made shunting quite interesting. Smaller stations on the North Kerry & Limerick-Sligo line tended to have a similar track layout without the complication of the diamond crossing, this would have simplified attaching and detaching tail traffic to passenger and mixed trains.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    John


    If I was going there I would'nt be starting here.

  10. #50
    Some rough calculations taken today show that to model the actual footprint of the Omagh Goods Yard building along would required 785mm x 295mm. A huge building for any 4mm layout.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Welcome to Irish Railway Modeller. The home of Railway Modelling and collecting in Ireland. We are a friendly, open community where you will find lots of support, advice and encouragement, as well as inspiration! Join us today!
Join us