Theory of General Minories

[The Stationmaster]

That is my photograph of my diagram ... I know it can only have come from me because I own the original (book of diagrams) and have done for many years, it also cost me a not inconsiderable amount of money to buy it. It's even numbered as DASnnnn.jpg.

I thought I'd seen it somewhere else so had a look round the site and found you had posted it in another thread. In just the same way as someone apparently had pics copied from his gallery into someone else's so it seems people treat stuff as 'public - ok to use as you want' instead of linking to the original post and crediting the right person, While there has been a suitable apology and the post has been removed this sort of thing has now happened at least twice within the site in a short space of time so I think a suitable reminder is becoming needed about the ownership and re-use (not) of images on here. (So I will report this post).

[clecklewyke]

 

Hello,

 

Yes it is you diagram. I am sorry for reposting it without your permission. I assumed you would be happy with this as you have posted it on RMWeb before. I simply copied it from another thread.

 

I have removed the image from this thread and I apologise for any offence.

 

Could we lease have a link to Birkenhead Woodside restored? It's such a useful prototype.

 

Ian

[beast66606]

Hello,

 

Yes it is you diagram. I am sorry for reposting it without your permission. I assumed you would be happy with this as you have posted it on RMWeb before. I simply copied it from another thread.

 

I have removed the image from this thread and I apologise for any offence.

 

No offence taken, I'm happy for my stuff to be either linked or used directly as long as it's credited to me, whilst I accept you were being helpful and not malicious, the way the image was displayed implies it's your information, which I know was not your intention.

 

Don't worry, I don't get upset easily, you are welcome to use it (with an acknowledgement) now everyone knows about it.

 

I see Andy has posted a thread reminding people of this.

[beast66606]

 

 

Could we lease have a link to Birkenhead Woodside restored? It's such a useful prototype.

Ian

This is the second signal box at Woodside, the turntable was filled in to allow this box to be built, which means the earlier plan is even better for a minories, I haven't got that scanned though I'm afraid.

[definate maybe]

For a minories feel plan but with added freight facilities may I suggest Walford Town. A layout that I personally feel was one of the best modern image layouts of its time and could easily be transformed into a rural setting in any major town.

[Orion]

Alexandra Palace runs Minories close - especially if you place the scissors crossing in an imaginary location beyond the scenic area. It has a couple of freight sidings.

 

See http://signalbox.org/diagrams.php?id=270

[The Stationmaster]

Alexandra Palace runs Minories close - especially if you place the scissors crossing in an imaginary location beyond the scenic area. It has a couple of freight sidings.

 

See http://signalbox.org...rams.php?id=270

The layout is fairly typical of what could be seen and numerous urban and suburban (or even more remote) termini over the years For example Bromley North, albeit with only two platform faces http://www.s-r-s.org...l/sra/R1633.htm Allhallows-On-Sea http://www.s-r-s.org...l/sra/R1888.htm Margate Sands has plenty to offer but follows the same basic layout albeit with arrival and departure platforms http://www.s-r-s.org...l/srb/T1010.htm Caterham was another variation http://www.s-r-s.org...l/src/R1795.htm Seaford offered another variation on the theme, complete with turntable http://www.s-r-s.org...l/srh/R1049.htm the double line version of the GW station at Windsor & Eton with 4 platforms offered the ability to make parallel moves to/from every successive pair of platforms right across the layout http://www.s-r-s.org...ml/gwa/S108.htm In other words the opportunities are endless, the beauty of Minories is in its apparent complexity from a very simple and fairly typical layout but putting it on a curve to save length in the pointwork while adding to the visual impression. Add in the urban small but potentially very busy element and use it as it should be used and you finish up with a layout to tax operational skills (as already noted in one previous post) as well as give a good visual impression - in that respect I think it is an extremely difficult design to better.

Edited August 15, 2012 by The Stationmaster

[JohnR]

Alexandra Palace runs Minories close - especially if you place the scissors crossing in an imaginary location beyond the scenic area. It has a couple of freight sidings.

 

See http://signalbox.org...rams.php?id=270

 

The layout must have changed at some point - perhaps in anticipation of the arrival of tube trains? The picture here shows the station just before closure http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/a/alexandra_palace/index6.shtml

[Orion]

The layout must have changed at some point - perhaps in anticipation of the arrival of tube trains? The picture here shows the station just before closure http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/a/alexandra_palace/index6.shtml

 

It was changed before WW1 as the original timber platforms were decaying. There are photos in the Middleton Press book "Finsbury Park to Alexandra Palace", showing it in original form. Also a sketch here

[RJS1977]

Now, how about a model of it at the London Festival of Railway Modelling?

[clecklewyke]

 

As an aside, if you want a good example of a slightly larger terminus that did bear a strong resemblance to Minories then have a look at Birkenhead Woodside. The throat is basically Minories, the main changes are an extra pair of platforms and the centre roads. They have even used a slip to save space.

 

 

 

A very useful diagram - thanks to Beast for restoring it it.

 

I cannot see the point of crossover 31a/b. It seems to duplicate 39a/b? If basing a model on this I think I would eliminate 31a/b.

 

Incidentally, in P4 this throat would be about seven feet long.

 

Ian (Who is planning a similar sized terminal)

Edited August 15, 2012 by clecklewyke

[beast66606]

I cannot see the point of crossover 31a/b. It seems to duplicate 39a/b? If basing a model on this I think I would eliminate 31a/b.

 

31a+b allows a train to arrive in platform 1 (the distant could be cleared if this route was set) whilst another departs platform 2, notice both routes from platform 2 are provided with signals.

[edcayton]

The layout is fairly typical of what could be seen and numerous urban and suburban (or even more remote) termini over the years Caterham was another variation http://www.s-r-s.org...l/src/R1795.htm , the beauty of Minories is in its apparent complexity from a very simple and fairly typical layout but putting it on a curve to save length in the pointwork while adding to the visual impression. Add in the urban small but potentially very busy element and use it as it should be used and you finish up with a layout to tax operational skills (as already noted in one previous post) as well as give a good visual impression - in that respect I think it is an extremely difficult design to better.

 

Iain Rice makes a useful comparison between Caterham and Minories in one of his books ( I think it's Urban Layouts) and it makes a very nice-looking layout. I don't know how faithful it is to The prototype though.

[Karhedron]

Iain Rice makes a useful comparison between Caterham and Minories in one of his books ( I think it's Urban Layouts) and it makes a very nice-looking layout. I don't know how faithful it is to The prototype though.

Inspired by rather than based closely on I believe. The basic layout of a terminus with island platform at the bottom of a narrow valley is accurate. Whether the other features resemble the real Caterham of 50+ years ago I do not know. Rice's Caterham-based version of Minories (Harestone) is quite nice as it offers the possibilty of a bit of freight and shunting alongside the intensive passenger service. As Rice himself points out, it is also a nice way to mix early SR EMUs with steam on the freight if you enjoy that combination.

[Dave777]

The layout is fairly typical of what could be seen and numerous urban and suburban (or even more remote) termini over the years For example Bromley North, albeit with only two platform faces http://www.s-r-s.org...l/sra/R1633.htm Allhallows-On-Sea http://www.s-r-s.org...l/sra/R1888.htm Margate Sands has plenty to offer but follows the same basic layout albeit with arrival and departure platforms http://www.s-r-s.org...l/srb/T1010.htm Caterham was another variation http://www.s-r-s.org...l/src/R1795.htm Seaford offered another variation on the theme, complete with turntable http://www.s-r-s.org...l/srh/R1049.htm the double line version of the GW station at Windsor & Eton with 4 platforms offered the ability to make parallel moves to/from every successive pair of platforms right across the layout http://www.s-r-s.org...ml/gwa/S108.htm In other words the opportunities are endless, the beauty of Minories is in its apparent complexity from a very simple and fairly typical layout but putting it on a curve to save length in the pointwork while adding to the visual impression. Add in the urban small but potentially very busy element and use it as it should be used and you finish up with a layout to tax operational skills (as already noted in one previous post) as well as give a good visual impression - in that respect I think it is an extremely difficult design to better.

 

Allhallows-on-Sea looks very modellable.

[The Stationmaster]

Allhallows-on-Sea looks very modellable.

I think a number of them are, or at least offer inspiration.

 

But the basic point of that post was to give some examples of fairly typical double line termini with 2 or 3 platforms (in most cases) and illustrate the fact that their layouts usually allowed parallel arrivals and departures (or an arriving train to be accepted on the block while another was signalled to depart - always assuming platforming in the correct order of course). Although the prototype is seeing more flexible layouts gradually appearing we seem to have forgotten that track layouts were like that prior to the years of rationalisation - you can probably learn far more from looking at even drawings of the real thing as it once was rather than looking at umpteen 'plans for modellers' (which are very often purely model railways rather than models of railways).

[JohnR]

Seeing some of those designs make me wish Peco did a OO guage version of their n guage scissors crossing.

[Orion]

Seeing some of those designs make me wish Peco did a OO guage version of their n guage scissors crossing.

 

But if you put an overbridge between the platforms and the scissors crossover, like Margate Sands, the scissors need only exist in your imagination.

[hayfield]

Seeing some of those designs make me wish Peco did a OO guage version of their n guage scissors crossing.

 

The flippant answer is to build your own, but un-like a standard turnout which are far easier to build than most modellers think and well within most modellers ability to build, a scissors is a different beast all together.

 

Firstly most go for the smallest unit they can find which will restrict some of the larger locos and long wheelbase 4 wheel stock.

 

Secondly they do take some skill to build and most average modellers would be advised to get a few standard turnouts built first, having said that there will be the odd skilled person would be able to build one as a starter.

 

Wrenn used to make them years ago, but I think they were on fibre sleepers

 

Marcway charges £170 to make them, they also sell the SMP kit but this should be seen as a scratch aid type of kit, as it comprises of PCB sleeper strips and plain un-prepaired lengths of rail along with a plan and brief instructions.

 

I think there are RTR H0 scissors available but no idea who makes them.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Seeing some of those designs make me wish Peco did a OO guage version of their n guage scissors crossing.

 

Shinohara do one in Code 100 which matches OK with Peco.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Shinohara do one in Code 100 which matches OK with Peco.

 

Come to think of it, I think they do 2 versions (check with Scalelink) a no4 (about equivalent to 2' radius) and a no6.

[Pacific231G]

31a+b allows a train to arrive in platform 1 (the distant could be cleared if this route was set) whilst another departs platform 2, notice both routes from platform 2 are provided with signals.

I think a number of them are, or at least offer inspiration.

 

But the basic point of that post was to give some examples of fairly typical double line termini with 2 or 3 platforms (in most cases) and illustrate the fact that their layouts usually allowed parallel arrivals and departures (or an arriving train to be accepted on the block while another was signalled to depart - always assuming platforming in the correct order of course). Although the prototype is seeing more flexible layouts gradually appearing we seem to have forgotten that track layouts were like that prior to the years of rationalisation - you can probably learn far more from looking at even drawings of the real thing as it once was rather than looking at umpteen 'plans for modellers' (which are very often purely model railways rather than models of railways).

 

That's a good point. It obviously gets more complicated for four track main lines but for maximum capacity at a terminus at the end of a double track main line handling an intensive service you need to be able to set up simultaneous arrival and departure routes using any pair of platforms. With Minories you can do that with platforms 1 and 2 but not 2 & 3. For that you'd need to add an arrivals track connecting platform 3 to the "up" main line which would lengthen the throat by a pointslength.

 

 

Most main line termini - Fenchurch St. for example- seem to do this over some distance with the number of running tracks gradually reducing to the final two but there are places where a really compact throat is needed. The neatest arrangement for doing this I've come across was the former Bastille station in Paris where a very cramped five platform terminus went almost immediately via a fairly sharp curve onto a narrow and very long viaduct. In the peak of the evening rush hour it could handle departures every two or three minutes with a corresponding level of arriving ECS or service train workings.

 

 

This signalling diagram shows a throat just eight points lengths long and, apart from a three way point within the three road engine shed, the whole throat was laid out with standard short (0.13 crossing) and long (0.11 crossing) turnouts. These were quite sharp but as I think is apparent from the scale drawing below (each scale division is 5 metres) no train arriving or departing ever met a reverse curve. Until push -pull working was introduced in the early 1960s arriving locos had to be worked back onto a following departure and were released using three electric traversers though tracks II-III and IV-V also had releasing crossovers.

 

 

The operation of the terminus had been rationalised in the mid1920s (when rationalisation wasn't a weasel word for closure) to handle growing commuter traffic without expanding the very cramped station and in the rush hours trains departed in a regular cycle in turn from platforms 5 to 1 with arriving trains filling the platforms in the same order. That enabled a complete cycle of five arrivals and five departures to be completed three times an hour though with light engine moves as well it must have been a real ballet. French signalling requires fewer signals than ours but I assume this throat could be signalled for British practice.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Pacific231G

[gordon s]

Oh David, I really wish you hadn't shown me that last pic. It would be perfect for the terminus version of ET I was working on a few years back. Jeez, I'm going to need a king size dose of will power now....

[clecklewyke]

Please remind me. Did they drive on the left as on BR at the Bastille? The signalling seems to imply this.

 

Ian

[Pacific231G]

Oh David, I really wish you hadn't shown me that last pic. It would be perfect for the terminus version of ET I was working on a few years back. Jeez, I'm going to need a king size dose of will power now....

It's an amazingly elegant design isn't it. I dread though to think how many signals it would need to meet British practice- Bastille itself was controlled by a mere 33 levers in a small Saxby box perched on the side of the viaduct above the Rue de Lyon.