Kingsbridge

[Paddy Mac Namara]

New Layout Description:

Celbridge started April 2016 is no more, I’ve lifted the track and started afresh.

My shed is 3.4 m x 2.2 m and the layout is to run around the circumference. Depth of layout is 500mm all the way round. I have it set at a height of around 760mm so that I can sit comfortably in the chair and work away at it.

Unlike Celbridge this layout is going to be end to end. Experimenting with track plans at the moment.

I have added an extension to baseboard for return loop (non scenic) at one end and terminus station at the other end.

Here is track plan.

[jhb171achill]

Interesting layout style! Irish or anything else?

 

[JasonB]

I like the name! 

[Paddy Mac Namara]

1 hour ago, jhb171achill said:

Interesting layout style! Irish or anything else?

 

Irish

[Paddy Mac Namara]

I do no whattocallit. “Kingsbridge”.

I wanted a terminus station like Heuston, with the return loop hidden by a scenic break, probably road overbridge. I run trains to Cork and then they return.

What we think will fit in our heads and what actually fits are two different storys.

Now I have a fairly big room for my layout, however the first plan doesn’t work, not enough room for platforms with a least 3 carriages.

I have revised it as shown. Because the return loop is done with diamond crossing there was no issue with electrical short circuit. However, the introduction of the Y junction creates a continous loop.

I like the symmetry of the Y junction and it allows for two decent sized platforms, with 3 lines.

Currently, and I’m still just playing around, the single power controller is located at the green track in the middle line.

To prevent short circuits, I have used isolated tracks shown in red as per Hornby Track Plans 8^th Ed (£4.99) P. 30.

Lots of switching on/off isolated sections depending on which arm of Y junction is chosen.

 

 

 

 

[jhb171achill]

1 hour ago, Paddy Mac Namara said:

I do no whattocallit. “Kingsbridge”.

I wanted a terminus station like Heuston, with the return loop hidden by a scenic break, probably road overbridge. I run trains to Cork and then they return.

What we think will fit in our heads and what actually fits are two different storys.

Now I have a fairly big room for my layout, however the first plan doesn’t work, not enough room for platforms with a least 3 carriages.

I have revised it as shown. Because the return loop is done with diamond crossing there was no issue with electrical short circuit. However, the introduction of the Y junction creates a continous loop.

I like the symmetry of the Y junction and it allows for two decent sized platforms, with 3 lines.

Currently, and I’m still just playing around, the single power controller is located at the green track in the middle line.

To prevent short circuits, I have used isolated tracks shown in red as per Hornby Track Plans 8^th Ed (£4.99) P. 30.

Lots of switching on/off isolated sections depending on which arm of Y junction is chosen.

 

 

 

 

I’d say that will work a whole lot better. Presumably multiple unit operation primarily, or push-pull?

[Paddy Mac Namara]

18 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

I’d say that will work a whole lot better. Presumably multiple unit operation primarily, or push-pull?

Not push-pull if my understanding is correct. Anytime i push carriages or wagons they always seem to get snarled up and uncouple or derail.

Locos will enter platforms at station "head" first. Then uncouple carriages.

Another loco will come from storage sidings (Inchicore) and couple to carriages in station and off it goes again. Lone loco will then goto Inchicore.

Work in Progress

[DJ Dangerous]

Sorry to see Celbridge bulldozed for redevelopment, but Kingsbridge looks like it's going to be a worthy succesor.

[Paddy Mac Namara]

I'm not straying far from home with my layouts, hey stick with what you know. I've been using the Dub-Cork route since a child.

So that Y junction causing way too many comlplications with shorts and just way too many isolated sections to keep track off. So this is next track plan.

[Paddy Mac Namara]

[Paddy Mac Namara]

This gives me 4 platforms at station. However when i did a few test runs with locos and carriages, i realised that at best i'll only get about three carriages to fit.

So ive gone with 3 platforms in this new iteration.

[leslie10646]

Interesting. I like the loop with the crossover which feeds trains back from whence they came, but on the correct line.

However, how does an arriving train (an "UP" train), get across to the departure platform to form a "Down" train - don't you need a crossover somewhere? You've hit the age-old issue that points take up a lot of linear layout, which I sort of got round by buying a big house and mortgaging myself to the hilt (paid off when I was 75!).

Good luck though, just a bit more innovation?

[Paddy Mac Namara]

Thanks, very useful. I'll have to investigate some options. 

[Paddy Mac Namara]

I have included a cross-over from up to down as suggested (thanks).

The return loop has isolation gaps on both rails, shown in red.

Power is fed to down from red curved track. I can isolate the up part of the return shown yellow. Switch the points at the cross-over and bring loco onto downline without any shorts via the green tracks.

[Mayner]

I like the reversing loop quite popular for city terminals in layout plan books of the 60s-70s era. One of the biggest advantages of setrack is that you can test a track layout to check that it meets your needs before you finalise the design.

Usually reverse loops were wired through a DPDT switch to the adjacent section or a separate controller with isolation gaps (Isolation track or insulated railjoiners at both ends of the loop or isolated section) Gaugemaster recommend a min of a train length for DCC.

One of the advantages with DCC is a reversing loop can be controlled by a 'reversing module" which allows a train to run round the reverse loop and on to the rest of the layout without stopping.  Gaugemaster have published some useful info on wiring reverse loops both for DC & DCC.https://www.gaugemasterretail.com/rightlines-article/reverse_loops_part1.html

I would recommend installing more track feeds if you are powering the layout with one analogue DC controller and additional section breaks either with Insulation Tracks or Insulated railjoiners if you are thinking of adding a second controller.  https://www.gaugemasterretail.com/rightlines-article/layout-control-and-common-return.ht

The sketches are for the track feeds and isolation breaks for the main elements of your layout and buillt on experience having built both analog and DCC layouts. 

 

 

Edited December 25, 2024 by Mayner

[Paddy Mac Namara]

thanks for advice very helpful, i am going to have a separate power supply to the up line, fed from track nearest the wall.

With down line power supply isolated ,as noted earlier, i can perform shunting operations on these tracks as a down loco leaves the station.

[Paddy Mac Namara]

Turning 60 has some advantages. 

[jhb171achill]

One observation - it seems that within the terminal there are no run round facilities, and the only means of crossing from one platform to another is via the green crossover at the top. This would mean that a train entering the terminus would have to leave the same platform (whichever it is) running "wrong line"; thus reversing.

Would it not be better to have a connectiuon between one platform road and the other within the station for operational purposes?

 

[Paddy Mac Namara]

On 12/1/2025 at 8:16 PM, jhb171achill said:

One observation - it seems that within the terminal there are no run round facilities, and the only means of crossing from one platform to another is via the green crossover at the top. This wld mean that a train entering the terminus would have to leave the same platform (whichever it is) running "wrong line"; thus reversing.

Would it not be better to have a connectiuon between one platform road and the other within the station for operational purposes?

 

Thanks for comment, it could be an option, i'm playing around with movements of locos and carriages to get a feel for things, nothing set in stone yet

[jhb171achill]

33 minutes ago, Paddy Mac Namara said:

Thanks for comment, it could be an option, i'm playing around with movements of locos and carriages to get a feel for things, nothing set in stone yet

That's by far the best way to approach the planning stage! If your terminus eventually resembles something like, say, Docklands, you'll have an island platform with two faces. You'd expect trains to leave on one line and arrive on the other, with access to both platforms fropm either.... often, in cases like this, there's an "arrivals" and "departures" side. the arrivals side would need a loop unless there's a shunting loco to release stock on incoming trains.

[Paddy Mac Namara]

Thanks to all for comments, advice and suggestions. It has really helped me develope a much better layout than I had originally planned, so here is the current plan. well not quite finished, but you get the idea

Work in progress.

Edited Thursday at 22:34 by Paddy Mac Namara

[DJ Dangerous]

I'm enjoying the updates on the evolution of the track plans here, and the graphics, apart from being well done, really help a lot!