7mm Sedbergh Town

Stuart D

Active Member
As referred to in my introductory postings, here's the plan of my layout. I'll try and sort out some meaningful photos to follow....
Not sure whether to explain the "back story" to the plan; I know some people find that sort of thing interesting, others not so - don't want to bore anyone!
Anyway, this is a start at least.
SedberghTown.png
 
Last edited:

OzzyO

Western Thunderer
I also like the back story of any layout, what gauge are going to build the layout in? 'O' normal, 'O' fine (31.5mm) or S7.?

I'm based in BiF so depending on how close we maybe able to meet up.
 

Stuart D

Active Member
I also like the back story of any layout, what gauge are going to build the layout in? 'O' normal, 'O' fine (31.5mm) or S7.?

I'm based in BiF so depending on how close we maybe able to meet up.

The layout is built to Fine standard, with a very slight modification to reduce V-crossing flangeway to reduce the 'dreaded drop'. I have one loco with back-to-back of 29.4mm (don't ask!) which rules out 0-MF that I would probably otherwise have opted for. But all the pointwork in the fiddleyard is either Peco or Marcway, there was no way I was going to start making hand-built pointwork for the FY. Some of the sidings use Peco points, otherwise the station pointwork is hand-built.
I haven't forgotten about the back story, just been a bit distracted.....
 

Stuart D

Active Member
The back story.....
Decades ago I got interested in railway history in the north of England, and in particular the various madcap schemes of the 1845/46 Railway Mania. As a result I came across the proposed Liverpool, Manchester & Newcastle-upon-Tyne Junction Railway which planned a line from Preston along the whole of the Ribble valley and tunnelling through the hills to get to Hawes and thence across to Darlington ; with connections at various points to existing or planned lines. The company merged with another scheme, adopted their slightly different route, and received Parliamentary approval, but of course nothing was actually built.
My assumptions start with a 'what-if' the Act had authorised the original route and that it had actually been built. Second 'what-if' is that local pressure, which did exist at various stages throughout the 19th century, saw a branch line built from Hawes down Garsdale to Sedbergh, and a little later a line continued to a southward-facing connection with the Ingleton line to the south of the real Sedbergh station. Later still a narrow gauge line was built up Dentdale to serve the various quarries; and of course also to serve my interest in all things narrow-gauge!
Hope that's enough to give a general flavour of where I'm coming from - ask away if anything doesn't make sense.
 

Stuart D

Active Member
It occurs to me that I should have added a bit more to the back story....
My assumptions are that the LMNJR remained independent until 1923, but that services had been operated variously by the MR, NER and L&YR. My layout is based in the late 1930s and assumes that all services south (mainline) and west (branchline) of Hawes are operated by the LMS. This in part due to the fact that I have acquired plenty of appropriate LMS stock, but no LNER. If I had been starting now with no stock then I might well have opted for a different assumption, based on joint operations.
And if I'd been modelling in a smaller scale I might well have been tempted to model Hawes (LMNJR!) as a station where LMS/LNER loco changes took place - for considerable operational interest...... But that would be a quite different "what-if".
 

Stuart D

Active Member
Had another go at the weekend to get some photos of the layout. Thought it best to start with general shots that will add to the track plan in post #1 above. Here's one showing the fiddle yard and the scenic mainline section on the extreme right. Obviously I haven't made any start at all on the scenery of this section - still trying to get the station area to look less like a modeller's workbench!
The reason for the extensive fiddle yard is that I wanted to be able get all of my stock out and on the layout, permanently! Most damage occurs to our stock from frequent handling, and this approach is intended to counter that.
I'm not sure about file size limits for uploads so I'll just attach the one photo for starters.....
FY+viaduct.jpg
 
Last edited:

Stuart D

Active Member
And another... This time of the station side of the layout. The track on the extreme left will in due course be hidden behind a backscene; as you can see on the track plan its sole purpose is to enable trains to get from the FY to the scenic mainline section without going through the station, which wouldn't "fit" with the geography of the location.
stationside.jpg
 
Last edited:

Stuart D

Active Member
Hi Stuart. Please could you post photos at full size rather than as thumbnails. Thumbnails are a PITA to view. You can edit your original posts rather than creating new posts.
Dave

I was always led to believe that it was better to post as thumbnails, given that you only have to left click on the photo for it to appear as full screen (more or less). But I'm happy to edit them if full size is preferred on WT.
 

Stuart D

Active Member
That's fine, Dave. Thank you. When I had a moment I'd have gone back to Templot and seen if I could output the sketchboard plan, probably as a jpg, but png is just as good.
 

simond

Western Thunderer
I do like the idea of keeping the stock on the track, to avoid handling. Will you put some kind of dust cover over the fiddle yard?

atb
Simon
 

Stuart D

Active Member
I do like the idea of keeping the stock on the track, to avoid handling. Will you put some kind of dust cover over the fiddle yard?

atb
Simon

I'm not planning to; there's just too much to cover and where would the covers go when not in use? If they were hinged down they would prevent me getting under the baseboard to the mainline section if I needed to, and if hinged up they would obscure a view of the mainline section and probably need a lot of carpentry to support them when open. I did put a cover over the engine store area of the FY to reduce dust on the locos at least, but in truth that is not really necessary as I subsequently decided that I was not going to carpet the floor, and the painted chipboard flooring produces very little dust. So it isn't really a problem.
 

simond

Western Thunderer
Thanks Stuart.

I’m years away from needing it, but had thought to use a sort of “tent”, which perhaps avoids the storage issue.

Atb
Simon
 

Stuart D

Active Member
If you did decide to provide covers for your stock when the layout is not in use, how about using roller blinds. They could cover stock and roll away when no longer required. Or am I just being daft?

All the best

John

Far from being daft, that sounds like a very interesting solution, John.
If I had a shunting plank with a 4ft fiddle yard then I'd be seriously considering that, but with a fiddle yard that is about 24ft x 3ft I'm not sure it could be achieved easily with roller blinds - it would need some form of dust-proofing between the several blinds (to be fully effective) and a structure to support them when in use which might get in the way when not in use and you're operating the layout.
At the moment dust is not a major problem for me, having decided not to put carpet on the floor; but if I decided to reverse that decision (it can be a bit hard on the knees at times!) then I think I would explore this idea in more detail and see if it might be achievable.
Thanks for suggesting it.
 
Top