Jump to content
 

Are view blocks effective in hiding train length?


PL8180RM
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm looking at putting together an LNER A3 in scale7 quite soon thanks to the generous advice gleaned here. When Carl Arendt's site was pumping out content monthly I even submitted some ideas for compact station plans.

 

All of them however, were reliant on not being able to see the whole train. One such simply showed the final island platform of a large station with a runaround and a pilot loco pocket. Train lengths need only be enough to show the loco and a coach and a half or so. To me. It seemed like a witty workaround to the quandary of building express, mainline steam and running tiny trains.

 

Operation on such a layout would be various consists arriving and leaving, with the pilot either releasing the loco, or clearing the (a?) runaround loop.

 

However, none of them ever got past the 3D model state! So, does this actually work in practice?

 

For what it's worth either way I'm looking trying to find a way to operate my large locos that is both urban, and not a train shed! If you have any other suggestions I would gladly gear them!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I didn't specify any there would be a view block. In the above case it would be simply the interior of the end of the station and the rest of the train notionally outside, a passenger foot bridge giving a break.

 

Other layouts which use this method in multiple places like the Amalgamated Terminal ( http://www.carendt.com/micro-layout-design-gallery/passenger-lines/ ) Use it a few times to break up a board into three micro layouts (platform, throat, and running line) which seems like it would only work when viewed at a side on angle.

 

This isn't really intended to be an exhibition layout but I don't want to rule it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the way into Birmingham New Street from the southwest, the line passes through a sequence of tunnels and wide bridges, the daylight in between many of them is in some cases only a coach length or two. Add a well detailed signal or two and you have a layout with operational interest. Plus a possibility of modelling some street scenes above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

That's an interesting twist on just modelling the throat with the other end of the platforms sticking out of some sort of covering structure (overall roof, department store, multi-storey car park etc).  I can visualise the operation, especially in a large scale - maybe a bit repetitive but the hobby is all about compromising one way or another (for most of us).  But how to view block adequately?  Perhaps a road bridge - a major new road built across the site in the 50s/60s after the station had had its overall roof removed due to bomb damage - could look plausible and do the business?  With ad hoardings on the far side of the road to form the endscene for the scenic area?

 

Just thinking aloud really!

 

Cheers

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between models and the real thing visually is you generally view the real thing from ground level plus 5 feet and the model from 150ft up in a helicopter/ hot air balloon/ Blackpool Tower.

 

Its actually hard to see more than about 3 coaches from most real railway viewpoints so why not restrict where one can view a model from , perhaps to a road approaching a bridge under a station throat.  I was fixing gradients the other night, under a baseboard and looked up to see a parcels train passing with a retaining wall in front and blue wall (sky) behind and it looked really good, much better than it usually does from a higher viewpoint.

 

My old bedroom layout was actually at 62" high so it was viewed at a realistic height and was difficult to see trains other than close up. The garden line looks best from the bedroom window for the opposite reason....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

This idea really caught my interest: this is how I interpreted and developed your original thinking:

 

post-6206-0-30750700-1505469762_thumb.jpg

 

There's a 3-way point there that's not obvious given the cartoony way I've done this.

 

So, tank engines arrive with suburban trains, uncouple, pull forward, run round, depart.  Main line trains arrive behind larger engines (probably in platform 2 rather than 1 as shown), which uncouple but can't clear the points to run round, so pilot leaves parking spot and (unseen) removes coaches to release train engine which then departs.  Pilot (unseen) returns coaches to other platform, returns to parking spot.  Main line train departs (engine unseen).  And there's a possibility of a variety of other moves with e.g. parcels traffic.

 

The road bridge acts as the view blocker which allows you to get away with two coaches - maybe three if  empty coaching stock is pushed in right to the buffers.  You can't see through or beyond it, which you would be able to if you used a footbridge.

 

The simplest fiddling arrangement would be cassettes which could be attached to any of the three roads leaving under the bridge.  Or maybe a traverser if you're good at woodwork!

 

And if width wasn't a problem, it could work equally well (better!) with more platform faces.

 

I don't think this would really work in OO, the models not having sufficient heft for the overall effect to be impressive.  But others might disagree  :no: .

 

Not my sort of railway operationally, but if you build it I will come ( © Field Of Dreams).

 

Cheers

 

Chris

 

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The basic concept is certainly fine. This is really a topic that should  be looked at in combination with Iain Rice's Cameo Layouts. The trick is that the view blocker has to be very carefully sited relative to the point from which the layout will be seen. So the height of the layout above ground comes into play.

 

The other solution to the "big loco - little space" conundrum is parcels or milk traffic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many A3's on the local parcel train? :)

 

@chimer exactly that in some permutation or another, it could certainly be a scenicked programming track for DCC if all else fails!

 

Having around 25' in length my desire for O is competing with my desire for broadly prototypical operations and train lengths

It would appear the solution is to stretch out a 4mm layout rather than squeeze in a 7mm one. Or try my hand at knocking it all up in S.

 

Thanks all,

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I too have been looking at this and the conclusion I came after a few experiments to was that, so long as you couldn't see anything associated with the front end of the train at the same time as anything associated with the tail end, the suspension of disbelief worked fine.

 

That's probably easier with British trains as, apart from the loco at the front and probably a brake second at the rear, the other coaches don't usually suggest whereabouts in the train they might be.

 

It's a bit more difficult with traditional American or European expresses as they tended to have head end cars (baggage car, TPO, at one end) so all of those have to disappear from sight before the last car appears.

 

In O gauge even a four coach train can look convincing even without view blockers probably because you simply don't take it all in at a single glance as you would with 00/H0.

 

The famous pre-war Maybank layout of Bill Banwell and Frank Applegate- probably the first terminus to fiddle yard layout- was thirty two feet long but that included about twelve feet of main line between the tunnel mouth concealing the seven foot traverser fiddle yard and the start of the station throat. From the first set of points to the four platform buffers the terminus itself was about thirteen feet long.  Trains were limited to four 56' carriages behind a Robinson 4-6-0 (corrected from Paciific) and the terminus had four platforms. Up to the tunnel mouth the only view blocker was an overbridge leading to the loco shed that sat on top of the fiddle yard.

 

636071926_Maybank_MR_Wealdstone1933cropped.jpg.a4faa7115ae61c751500d2ae394883ef.jpg

Maybank at its 1st showing at Wealdstone  in November 1932 signals were added before its next appearance, at the MRC Easter show in 1933 but by 1934 the high level goods sidings had gone.

 

Also in O scale,  I really enjoyed Brian Thomas' "Newford" which was a Southern Electric Minories with one additional storage road and a plaform capacity limited to a four car EMU plus a small loco but, when the 4PUL came in, it felt like the proper Brighton Belle not a truncated parody.

811646578_watfordFS030013leftadj.jpg.4d6dd9bab1a7dedef04543117390c9f0.jpg1747210766_watfordFS030020rightadj.jpg.70a3b46b1c1b82ecff31741b4fe693cd.jpg

 

Newford was fourteen feet long plus a ten foot fiddle yard (just two points to give a four track fan) and twenty inches wide.

 

 

Brian sold it in 2005 and it became part of an extended layout called Littleton but the actual terminus remained unchanged.

 

There's another really good example of this principle of not seeing everything at once in 1:1 scale near the beginning of the movie version of Murder On The Orient Express. After seeing a lot of platform activity and little vignettes of people around the train at Istanbul, we get to the shot where it leaves. We're looking from a fairly low angle alongside the track towards the train as the last doors slam, the guard's whistle blows, the  headlight comes on, the locomotive sounds its whistle and the great train approaches us slowly but with increasing speed. After the loco has passed, the camera pans slowly round and we see the sleeping cars, restaurant and pullmans slding past. As the last Pullman passes the camera continues to pan round till  we see the tail lights disappearing into the distance. It's all done in a single shot with no cuts so we know we've seen everything and really experienced the departure of one of Europe's great trains.

 

Watch the scene again a little more closely and what you've actually seen is a relatively small mixed traffic 4-6-0 (SNCF's 230G353 now sadly no longer in steam) at the head of a train consisting of a baggage car, a single sleeping car, a restaurant car and a single Pullman car for non-sleeping car passengers.  Needless to say, in the rest of the movie we never really see the train as a whole so don't quite twig just how short it really is.

 

With a model we'll never have the same control of what the viewer sees as a film director but the basic theatrical principles should still hold. 

I prefer the idea of the main throat over the front couple of carriages only appearing at the buffer end as you then get to see the main action of the station.

 

Edited by Pacific231G
restoration of images
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I too have been looking at this and the conclusion I came after a few experiments to was that, so long as you couldn't see anything associated with the front end of the train at the same time as anything associated with the tail end, the suspension of disbelief worked fine.

 

That's probably easier with British trains as, apart from the loco at the front and probably a brake second at the rear, the other coaches don't usually suggest whereabouts in the train they might be.

 

It's a bit more difficult with traditional American or European expresses as they tended to have head end cars (baggage car, TPO, at one end) so all of those have to disappear from sight before the last car appears.

 

Also, quite a few major terminals in America were stub-ended, with a reversing wye or triangular junction outside, with trains reversing into them.

Robinson Pacific

 

Do you mean thank engine? I am sure they also had a 4-6-0, which would have been longer.

With a model we'll never have the same control of what the viewer sees as a film director but the basic theatrical principles should still hold. 

 

I disagree. We have total control over what we include, and how we present it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

 

On 16/09/2017 at 19:25, Regularity said:

Also, quite a few major terminals in America were stub-ended, with a reversing wye or triangular junction outside, with trains reversing into them.

Do you mean thank engine? I am sure they also had a 4-6-0, which would have been longer.

I disagree. We have total control over what we include, and how we present it.

There was an article about this in MRR way back when this was still happening which said this was particularly common in the Southern states. As the train backed in the conductor rode in the final vestibule, which was open, armed with a special fitting attached to the brake line that included a brake valve and a whistle. Presumably the whistle didn't use enough air to cause a brake application.  There were several termini like this in France (including Tours, Orleans and the orginal Boulogne) but trains didn't AFAIK back into them

 

I've re-read the original description of Maybank and you're quite right that the Pacific (Robinson 1911) that ran on the pre-war O gauge layout was a tank loco. The longest locos, at least in 1934 when the layout was featured in MRN  would have been the two Robinson 4-6-0s

 "Valour" (1920) and "City of Chester" (1913)

MRN's description is interesting.

"Entering the station we find nothing pretentious in the way of buildings but the (four) platforms are roomy, and long enough to accomodate a tender loco and four long bogie coaches, (56 footers) and yet leave room for a shunting loco, to couple on for transfer of stock, if required, to another road" 

 

I don't think a platform only long enough for four coach trains would be considered roomy nowadays, even in O gauge, but in the 1930s large express locos hauling three coach trains were considered quite normal on indoor layouts. With larger scales you seem to be able to get away with such short trains not looking absurd even without view blockers probably because even four coaches won't be seen in a single glance from a typical viewing distance. With 00 or H0 you do seem to need view blockers and that's even more pronounced in N. 

 

We can control the scene that appears in front of viewers limiting it if necessary with view blockers or a proscenium box but we can't control what they choose to look at within that frame. In terms of film grammar we're offering a wide shot and I think that is more akin to a stage set . A film or TV director has far tighter control of which part of the set is seen within a shot so making two or three coaches look like an important express by choice of shot sizes and angles is fairly straightforward as demonstrated in Murder on the Orient Express.

 

One of the best examples I've seen of the effective use of view blockers is Geoff Ashdown's EM gauge "Tower Pier",

This puts the entire terminus including its throat in a cutting between retaining walls with a goods line on a slightly hiher level but still beteeen the walls.  That,and judicious use of road bridges and a train shed roof, ensures that you're simply not conscious when watching the layout that the whole thing is only two metres long (plus a metre long fiddle yard)

1145203432_iphone6jun20141040.jpg.08f26cbf8d975138dcd063131a74831b.jpg1191076897_iphone6jun20141046.jpg.e4a659baa90ecabb152e61e6fc1ff69c.jpg926525689_iphone6jun20141146.jpg.95330182919a0975a3f1b0586af1607c.jpg2051331477_iphone6jun20141030.jpg.30b4ade5fd5417369900efb00bc65a3d.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

My iPhone images of this wonderful layout  really don't do it justice  but I hope they illustrate the principle. .

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Many good ideas on here.

 

One thing that you may want to consider is a sector plate to effect the run round, such as was used on several Southern termini, and I guess elsewhere, a classic space saving technique in the real world. Many pictures of the one at Bembridge IOW available on the internet (or on the Bembridge thread on this site), to give you an idea. No reason why you could not utilise this in a main line terminus! It could give you an additional coach length in view.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm looking at putting together an LNER A3 in scale7 quite soon thanks to the generous advice gleaned here. When Carl Arendt's site was pumping out content monthly I even submitted some ideas for compact station plans.

 

All of them however, were reliant on not being able to see the whole train. One such simply showed the final island platform of a large station with a runaround and a pilot loco pocket. Train lengths need only be enough to show the loco and a coach and a half or so. To me. It seemed like a witty workaround to the quandary of building express, mainline steam and running tiny trains.

 

Operation on such a layout would be various consists arriving and leaving, with the pilot either releasing the loco, or clearing the (a?) runaround loop.

 

However, none of them ever got past the 3D model state! So, does this actually work in practice?

 

For what it's worth either way I'm looking trying to find a way to operate my large locos that is both urban, and not a train shed! If you have any other suggestions I would gladly gear them!

 

Although not you scale or Era, I modelled part of Bristol Temple meads in 4ft by 9inches as part of my layout using the exact same concept see post 459 in link below/photo:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/82744-peafore-yard-37114s-new-4mm-br-blue-layout/page-19

post-7400-0-18249100-1507615074.jpg

 

In answer to your question does it work?

- Operationally; yes, there are some variety you can build into the operation but it is pretty simplistic eg Mainline loco pulls train in, loco pulls forward then runs off scene. Shunter runs onto scene, backs on to train and pushes it offscene.

- Visually; nearly, to be honest it could be better, you need to restrict the viewing angle and minimise ability to see into the fiddle yard. I modelled the parcel conveyor which forms a handy break although for your era you could do the end of an overall roof. In my case modelling it on an elevated section added to the difficulties.

 

The layout is at the NFRM show at Peterborough this weekend, you are welcome to come and have a look/go at operating it to see if it works for you.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I don't think a platform only long enough for four coach trains would be considered roomy nowadays, even in O gauge, but in the 1930s large express locos hauling three coach trains were considered quite normal on indoor layouts. With larger scales you seem to be able to get away with such short trains not looking absurd even without view blockers probably because even four coaches won't be seen in a single glance from a typical viewing distance. With 00 or H0 you do seem to need view blockers and that's even more pronounced in N.

 

The human field of focus is quite narrow, about 60 degrees. This means that if you are 4 feet away from the subject, only 4 feet of it is in focus. Any train longer than this starts to look a lot longer, as you cannot - at this distance - focus on both ends, which is why we....

[...] can control the scene that appears in front of viewers limiting it if necessary with view blockers or a proscenium box but we can't control what they choose to look at within that frame. In terms of film grammar we're offering a wide shot and I think that is more akin to a stage set . A film or TV director has far tighter control of which part of the set is seen within a shot so making two or three coaches look like an important express by choice of shot sizes and angles is fairly straightforward as demonstrated in Murder on the Orient Express.

 

Which is precisely why we have to resort to much greater control of sight lines, as effective viewblockers will serve to “frame” the setting, and the eye will rest within that frame.

One of the best examples I've seen of the effective use of view blockers is Geoff Ashdown's EM gauge "Tower Pier",

This puts the entire terminus including its throat in a cutting between retaining walls with a goods line on a slightly hiher level but still beteeen the walls. That,and judicious use of road bridges and a train shed roof, ensures that you're simply not conscious when watching the layout that the whole thing is only two metres long (plus a metre long fiddle yard).

I think you might be understating the importance of that middle road bridge: it is quite low, and from the usual viewing height it is as effective as a tunnel, as from most positions it is hard to see a train both enter and leave. Because it is a bridge, and not a tall building, you cannot peer round it, so an unbroken view along the Layout is not possible. Like a low retaining wall - which this layout has in spades - the bridge effectively “stops” the eye, so instead of one single scene/setting, there are two. This leads to more time spent looking at the layout (two scenes instead of one) and the layout therefore appears longer than it is. Add to this the fact that many viewers will be less than 1 metre away, and you have a recipe for success!

 

Your photos do a great job of illustrating this principle, by the way.

Edited by Regularity
Link to post
Share on other sites

The human field of focus is quite narrow, about 60 degrees. This means that if you are 4 feet away from the subject, only 4 feet of it is in focus. Any train longer than this starts to look a lot longer, as you cannot - at this distance - focus on both ends, which is precisely why we have to resort to much greater control of sight lines, as effective viewblockers will serve to “frame” the setting, and the eye will rest within that frame.

I think you might be understating the importance of that middle road bridge: it is quite low, and from the usual viewing height it is as effective as a tunnel, as from most positions it is hard to see a train both enter and leave. Because it is a bridge, and not a tall building, you cannot peer round it, so an unbroken view along the Layout is not possible. Like a low retaining wall - which this layout has in spades - the bridge effectively “stops” the eye, so instead of one single scene/setting, there are two. This leads to more time spent looking at the layout (two scenes instead of one) and the layout therefore appears longer than it is. Add to this the fact that many viewers will be less than 1 metre away, and you have a recipe for success!

 

Your photos do a great job of illustrating this principle, by the way.

I'm not understating the middle road bridge, I think it was a key feature of Cyril Freezer's original Minories and not including it has always, in my view, been a mistake made with many layouts based on Minories. I don't think it's needed in 0 (and maybe wouldn't be in S) for the field of view reasons you mention but in OO or H0 a four coach express train that you can see both ends of at a glance does look a bit inadequate behind a Pacific . In this, photographs can be misleading. The four coach trains on Maybank look quite short in photos but I'm pretty sure, from the experience of Newford, that they wouldn't have for a viewer actually seeing it. As a home layout it occupied a long but narrow shed so you'd never have seen it from a distance and it seems to have generally been exhibited that way.  

 

It's interesting that Geoff Ashdown never intended Tower Pier for exhibition (though I'm very glad he does exhibit it from time to time) but only for his own pleasure and that of fellow operators. Even then you seem to need the suspension of belief that view blocking enables. It's only in the photo of the fiddle yard that you see clearly just how short the trains are. The front retaining wall also makes it impossible to view the whole layout from a distance so the illusion is never broken.

 

I have a small terminus layout that though very portable was supposed to be strictly a home layout (though it has been exhibited half a dozen times) with front operation and point levers and section switches along its front. I desgined it specifically to enable all shunting moves to take place "on-stage". so that it can be a shunting layout that occupies very little space. What I've found in practice is that even on my own  I almost always fit a short simple fiddle siding for operating sessions. With that, once a train has been made up it can disappear down the line and after a bit of crane shunting reappear (with the loco on the other end) as a new train. Though the extra length clutters the room, for some reason it feels far more satisfying that way even though I know I'm only driving it four feet and stopping with the last wagon barely out of sight. 

 

Ths does lead to another point. If a layout is purely intended for exhibiton then you can employ tricks like replacing half of a terminus with a traverser and only showing one end of it so the audience can simply imagine the rest. From the side of  a busy city station it's quite rare to be able to see more than about three coaches in any case and I know at least three exhibition layouts that do this very succesfully. For a personal layout though I want to be able to carry out all the relevant moves in full and, so long as it isn't staring me in the face how short trains really are, I'm satisfied.    

Edited by Pacific231G
Link to post
Share on other sites

This idea really caught my interest: this is how I interpreted and developed your original thinking:

 

Terminal jpg.jpg

 

There's a 3-way point there that's not obvious given the cartoony way I've done this.

 

So, tank engines arrive with suburban trains, uncouple, pull forward, run round, depart. Main line trains arrive behind larger engines (probably in platform 2 rather than 1 as shown), which uncouple but can't clear the points to run round, so pilot leaves parking spot and (unseen) removes coaches to release train engine which then departs. Pilot (unseen) returns coaches to other platform, returns to parking spot. Main line train departs (engine unseen). And there's a possibility of a variety of other moves with e.g. parcels traffic.

 

The road bridge acts as the view blocker which allows you to get away with two coaches - maybe three if empty coaching stock is pushed in right to the buffers. You can't see through or beyond it, which you would be able to if you used a footbridge.

 

The simplest fiddling arrangement would be cassettes which could be attached to any of the three roads leaving under the bridge. Or maybe a traverser if you're good at woodwork!

 

And if width wasn't a problem, it could work equally well (better!) with more platform faces.

 

I don't think this would really work in OO, the models not having sufficient heft for the overall effect to be impressive. But others might disagree :no: .

 

Not my sort of railway operationally, but if you build it I will come ( © Field Of Dreams).

 

Cheers

 

Chris

If I were doing this, I'd try to model the contents of the overall roof, and have the screen at the end of it as the "scenic break". Would have to include some suggestion of the supporting structure, maybe even the "ribs", but certainly not the roof or glazing itself.

Would be ideal in O (or larger) for filling with those little details - hydraulic buffers, the newsagent, ticket collection kiosk thingies, general passenger detritus...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I'm not understating the middle road bridge, I think it was a key feature of Cyril Freezer's original Minories and not including it has always, in my view, been a mistake made with many layouts based on Minories.

Apologies, I didn’t mean to appear dismissive. It was just that you made (almost) passing reference to it, and I was trying to find a way to draw out the point.

The four coach trains on Maybank look quite short in photos but I'm pretty sure, from the experience of Newford, that they wouldn't have for a viewer actually seeing it. As a home layout it occupied a long but narrow shed so you'd never have seen it from a distance and it seems to have generally been exhibited that way.

Pieces snipped out to reduce the length of the post, but some great points are made with supporting experience.

Ths does lead to another point. If a layout is purely intended for exhibiton then you can employ tricks like replacing half of a terminus with a traverser and only showing one end of it so the audience can simply imagine the rest. From the side of a busy city station it's quite rare to be able to see more than about three coaches in any case and I know at least three exhibition layouts that do this very succesfully. For a personal layout though I want to be able to carry out all the relevant moves in full and, so long as it isn't staring me in the face how short trains really are, I'm satisfied.

 

The sound we can hear is of a nail being hit fairly and squarely on the head. I have tried many. Times to come up with a “compact” layout plan for my own use, which uses one of these ploys, and it never quite does it for me.

 

You have helped me clear away a stumbling block in my own, personal, layout planning, and some options I was considering have suddenly had their flaws (from my perspective) exposed and I realise that I will never be happy with them!

 

Thank you: this has broken a log jam/“analysis paralysis” of 20 years standing.

Edited by Regularity
  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Some years ago there was a plan in Model Rail for Sheffield station in 4' x 2'. The model just covered the Manchester end of the station but allowed most of the prototypical movements. Prototypical tunnels and footbridge provided the view blockers.

 

Many moons ago I took the opposite approach on a N gauge layout. It had a short tunnel, shorter than the trains I ran, however the long train vanished out of sight in the short tunnel. The trick was a circle of track and diamond crossing in the tunnel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/10/2017 at 11:28, Regularity said:

Apologies, I didn’t mean to appear dismissive. It was just that you made (almost) passing reference to it, and I was trying to find a way to draw out the point.

[i[Pieces snipped out to reduce the length of the post, but some great points are made with supporting experience.[/i]

The sound we can hear is of a nail being hit fairly and squarely on the head. I have tried many. Times to come up with a “compact” layout plan for my own use, which uses one of these ploys, and it never quite does it for me.

 

You have helped me clear away a stumbling block in my own, personal, layout planning, and some options I was considering have suddenly had their flaws (from my perspective) exposed and I realise that I will never be happy with them!

 

Thank you: this has broken a log jam/“analysis paralysis” of 20 years standing.

I think it's more Cyril Freezer (Minories) and Geoff Ashdown (Tower Pier) that have helped you but glad to have passed on their collective wisdom. .

 

Apologies if I sounded like I thought you had been dismissive; you were quite right to emphasise the importance of the bridge. The only problem with it is how to deal with it at the back of the layout. With enough room I suppose a T junction and a low relief street overlooking the railway is one solution. French stations including termini often had overall roofs no longer than the station building with the platform ends beyond so that should provide another view blocker. to hide the shortness of trains.

 

I found Tower Pier incredibly inspiring when I first saw it at ExpoEM in I think 2011 and a couple of times since. This is my rather crude re-rendering of the track plan using Peco pointwork but what I've shown as a slip in the lower right hand corner is actually two interlaced points . 

373190223_TowerPier(eqvltwPeco).jpg.5066df9b8d2693010289ff975bb3036a.jpg

 

 

 

Geoff Ashdown's own SB diagram may be clearer

 

304549837_TowerPierSBdiagram.jpg.ba43949c475f834bbef45b6de7e39249.jpg

 

 

The only thing I didn't go for was having the goods lines effectively as a  separate layout though it's well justified by there being a junction at the next signal box and the goods lines have their own block instruments. It  does enable the goods lines to be at a slightly higher level which is visually very effective and also very Widened Lines.The "legend" that Geoff Ashdown has come up with for the layout, placing it in a real location and giving St. Katherine's Dock the rail connection it looks like it should have had is brilliant.

 

Looking at it again now is reminding me just how well thought out it is. Operatonally the passenger side is equivalent to Minories though with the addition of the loco release crossover and this plan makes platform three slightly longer but with platform 2 departures only . Overall the idea of a layout that effectively puts you in the signal box is terrific. 

I also loved this little scenic touch

73244247_iphone6jun20141145.jpg.de9075e038a0ec4c0ee85cee609bdf32.jpg

 

We really are in the City with the District and Circle passing beneath. The Underground train never moves but I used to commute on that line so no surprise there :no:

Edited by Pacific231G
restoration of images
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think personally , having viewed them at exhibitions, that small layouts are just that , " small ", where you can easily take in the full extent of the layout including non scenic parts, view blockers have little real effect, but certainly some sort of transition between scenes must be affected in order to maintain "some" pretence. 

 

as modellers, we are all good at a "suspension  of belief", god knows, some layouts require it in spades !.  So again, I think the concern is somewhat over stated. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I think it's more Cyril Freezer (Minories) and Geoff Ashdown (Tower Pier) that have helped you but glad to have passed on their collective wisdom.

 

Not at all. It was this sentence which was akin to a zen master thwacking a novice with his stick:

For a personal layout though I want to be able to carry out all the relevant moves in full and, so long as it isn't staring me in the face how short trains really are, I'm satisfied.

 

The irony with the bridge is that Cyril put it in the original Minories plan simply to hide the raised hinges, but it turns out to be a key part of the design process as more than simply arranging the tracks.

The Underground train never moves but I used to commute on that line so no surprise there.

As someone who spent 4 years working in Central London, I share that appreciation.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Has anyone ever used DCC sound to suggest that trains are much longer and more massive than the actual models?

 

For example, when your short HST set pulls into a platform and stops, play the realistic sounds of both power cars, 8 carriages and all the interlinking gubbins all coming to a stop?

 

Would that help the illusion? I wonder...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...
On 11/10/2017 at 10:40, Pacific231G said:

I think it's more Cyril Freezer (Minories) and Geoff Ashdown (Tower Pier) that have helped you but glad to have passed on their collective wisdom. .

 

Apologies if I sounded like I thought you had been dismissive; you were quite right to emphasise the importance of the bridge. The only problem with it is how to deal with it at the back of the layout. With enough room I suppose a T junction and a low relief street overlooking the railway is one solution. French stations including termini often had overall roofs no longer than the station building with the platform ends beyond so that should provide another view blocker. to hide the shortness of trains. 

 

 

 

I found Tower Pier incredibly inspiring when I first saw it at ExpoEM in I think 2011 and a couple of times since. This is my rather crude re-rendering of the track plan using Peco pointwork but what I've shown as a slip in the lower right hand corner is actually two interlaced points . 

 

post-6882-0-17837200-1507677568_thumb.jpg

 

Geoff Ashdown's own SB diagram may be clearer

 

post-6882-0-51407000-1507677880_thumb.jpg

 

The only thing I didn't go for was having the goods lines effectively as a  separate layout though it's well justified by there being a junction at the next signal box and the goods lines have their own block instruments. It  does enable the goods lines to be at a slightly higher level which is visually very effective and also very Widened Lines.The "legend" that Geoff Ashdown has come up with for the layout, placing it in a real location and giving St. Katherine's Dock the rail connection it looks like it should have had is brilliant.

 

Looking at it again now is reminding me just how well thought out it is. Operatonally the passenger side is equivalent to Minories though with the addition of the loco release crossover and this plan makes platform three slightly longer.. Overall the idea of a layout that effectively puts you in the signal box is terrific. 

I also loved this little scenic touch

post-6882-0-07164900-1507679588_thumb.jpg

We really are in the City with the District and Circle passing beneath. The Underground train never moves but I used to commute on that line so no surprise there :no:

I had been interested in Geoff Ashdown's Tower Pier for some time and as a result of this thread have managed to get the answers to a couple of mysteries. I'd never seen the photo with the underground train before nor had I found any photos of his fiddle yard. I have one question however in your drawing of the layout you show the second line to Saint Catherine Dock as if it was in use on the layout. My impression from the signalling diagram that there was only one line to the docks in use and it seems to be signalled that way. Do you remember if this was the case and whether or not Geoff used the other line as storage or was it "lifted" ?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...