Making Authentic Timetables for Fictional Lines

[FPH 603]

Hi all,

 

I'm currently planning a timetable for my layout and I need help in making it as authentic as possible. My layout may be complete fiction, but I'd still like to be realistic about it. My layout is the terminus of a North Eastern Region branch line (an 11 station long one, to be exact) and all passenger services are run solely by DMU's. The line starts somewhere in between Tollerton and Thirsk, and the services (as I've originally planned) are:

 

Trains will go to York, and some continue into Leeds

 

I will note that I don't know anything about making authentic timetables or services, so this is simply a lousy attempt at what I think will work. Does anyone have any advice or suggestions, or even good sources to look at?

 

Thanks to all that contribute.

 

EDIT: My crude attempts at service making.

Edited December 31, 2017 by DoubleDeckInterurban

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Logically this is a non-starter, as Pilmoor is on the ECML.

 

But if we reroute the ECML (the NER were feeling heroic when they built their main line and drove due North from York, through Helmsley to Middlesbrough, and Fie! to the 1 in 30 gradients) then you could have your branch following the current ECML route. Stilll a problem, why the through services? A DMU shuttle to York does all that is required, At this major interchange you find trains for 'everywhere else'. You need a very special reason to run through services on two routes to Leeds

[HillsideDepot]

The starting point is to map out your branch line. You already know that it has 11 stations, so that's a start. But how far is it between stations? How far in terms of minutes rather than miles, as far as the timetable is concerned, although obviously the two are closely related. To really do it in detail you need to look at gradients and how they affect train speeds, similarly sharp curves will impose restrictions and so on, but purely from a timetabling point of view these "facts" are merely ingredients to give you running times.

 

Then you need to know if the line is double track or single. If it is single, where are the passing places? Trains can only pass on double track, so that adds a constraint to the timetable, but the type of control of the passing loop also adds time to the process. Does the signaller have to collect both tokens, and work mechanical signals? Or does the branch have colour lights controlled centrally? Both dictate the length of time between the train arriving and it departing onwards. 

 

One problem of writing timetables for fictional lines is that we come to it at the finish, and without 100+ years of development, growth, decline, rationalisation. In reality the train service is dictated by the track layout, but in turn the track layout is dictated by the revenue the branch brings in. But revenue growth can be restricted by track layouts, and so on. Sometimes lines have a "skip-stop" service pattern to enable things to fit together, but without an existing railway it's difficult for us to work out where we are starting from. And that's before we consider crew workings! 

 

Ideally I'd suggest you also need to know the timetable of connecting trains for your branch. You mention trains running through to York, and Leeds, so are there actual trains which you could extend onto you branch? Obviously if they travel along your line they can't make their actual return trips, but it would be good if they could get back to York to form the next, or next but one service to the one they really work.

 

But as 34theletterbetweenB&D says, back in BR DMU times a shuttle to York is most likely. The idea of linking several services end-on-end to make things like Weymouth - Great Malvern workings (sorry, not a NE example, but one from my area) is a recent thing, and one which brings its own problems.

 

I think such projects are great fun, but I am in a very small minority, and I did schedule 165 buses working from 10 depots and driven by 300 drivers for 10 years! On a model I like to try to fit things in with reality; only yesterday evening I was working between two versions of the Working Timetable and the local Trip Working Book for Bristol in 1975 trying to bend and twist reality to suit one of my layouts - and there's plenty more to do on that project yet!

[john flann]

Why timetable working with all its complications?

 

Why not a sequence of trains that represent timetabled trains?

 

I have a few words about that in my RM January 2018 article, on operating Port Bredy.

[FPH 603]

The starting point is to map out your branch line. You already know that it has 11 stations, so that's a start. But how far is it between stations? How far in terms of minutes rather than miles, as far as the timetable is concerned, although obviously the two are closely related. To really do it in detail you need to look at gradients and how they affect train speeds, similarly sharp curves will impose restrictions and so on, but purely from a timetabling point of view these "facts" are merely ingredients to give you running times.

 

Then you need to know if the line is double track or single. If it is single, where are the passing places? Trains can only pass on double track, so that adds a constraint to the timetable, but the type of control of the passing loop also adds time to the process. Does the signaller have to collect both tokens, and work mechanical signals? Or does the branch have colour lights controlled centrally? Both dictate the length of time between the train arriving and it departing onwards.

 

One problem of writing timetables for fictional lines is that we come to it at the finish, and without 100+ years of development, growth, decline, rationalisation. In reality the train service is dictated by the track layout, but in turn the track layout is dictated by the revenue the branch brings in. But revenue growth can be restricted by track layouts, and so on. Sometimes lines have a "skip-stop" service pattern to enable things to fit together, but without an existing railway it's difficult for us to work out where we are starting from. And that's before we consider crew workings!

 

Ideally I'd suggest you also need to know the timetable of connecting trains for your branch. You mention trains running through to York, and Leeds, so are there actual trains which you could extend onto you branch? Obviously if they travel along your line they can't make their actual return trips, but it would be good if they could get back to York to form the next, or next but one service to the one they really work.

 

But as 34theletterbetweenB&D says, back in BR DMU times a shuttle to York is most likely. The idea of linking several services end-on-end to make things like Weymouth - Great Malvern workings (sorry, not a NE example, but one from my area) is a recent thing, and one which brings its own problems.

 

I think such projects are great fun, but I am in a very small minority, and I did schedule 165 buses working from 10 depots and driven by 300 drivers for 10 years! On a model I like to try to fit things in with reality; only yesterday evening I was working between two versions of the Working Timetable and the local Trip Working Book for Bristol in 1975 trying to bend and twist reality to suit one of my layouts - and there's plenty more to do on that project yet!

Here's a list of the distances between stations

Starting from the layout location working down into the main line to York

 

1. Island Platform - Location of Layout

 

- 1 min 32 secs between stations

 

2. Single Platform on single track

 

- 2 min 47 secs between stations

 

3. Dual Platforms on twin tracks

 

- 2 min 22 secs between stations

 

4. LSingle platform on single track

 

- 2 min 32 secs between stations

 

5. Island platform on twin tracks

 

- 3 min 1 sec between stations

 

6. Single platform on single track

 

- 3 min 49 secs between stations

 

7. Dual Platforms on twin tracks

 

- 2 min 25 secs between stations (Single track between stations 7 and 8)

 

8. Island platform on twin tracks

 

- 3 min 49 secs from second site, double track from here onwards

 

9. Island platform on twin tracks.

 

- 2 min 36 secs between stations

 

10. Island Platform on twin tracks

 

- 2 mins 27 secs between stations

 

11. Island Platform on twin tracks

 

From here train continues to York

 

All stations with two platforms will have two trains coming in at the same time.

 

Why timetable working with all its complications?

 

Why not a sequence of trains that represent timetabled trains?

 

I have a few words about that in my RM January 2018 article, on operating Port Bredy.

That is very much what I'll end up doing. I don't have my entire branch line in one layout. (yet!) I think just get around the complications and as you say, run a sequence of train representing the timetable. Basically what I intend on doing is a bit of both.

 

EDIT: Minor fix ups

Edited January 1, 2018 by DoubleDeckInterurban

[DCB]

Are you sure this in the North East?  The frequency sounds more like the London Underground.  Try train A arrives at 7.50 and departs at 8.00.  Train B arrives at 8.50 and departs at 9.00, Train C arrives at 9.50 and departs at 10.00,  Train A arrives at 10.50 etc    Bit like Barnstaple

 

[FPH 603]

The timings of the stations actually came from a railway line I know of - The Richmond Line, NSW. I timed how long it takes to get from one station to another. Then I slightly changed the times around so it isn't identical, but still similar to that of the Richmond Line. It's probably the way I've written it that looks London Underground. I don't think trains would come every 10 minutes either, probably 15 minutes apart at the very least in peak hour running. Half an hour for normal off peak running I'd think, unless there was some special way BR timetabled their trains.

 

EDIT: The line I'm looking at is much more rural, rather than in the middle of the city. Some of the runnings are pretty slow between stations, which I'd think would only go 30mph, whereas other sections are more like 60 - 75mph in longer sections towards the main line. I'd try to be consistent with the speed limits, too. My timings don't determine how long the line is, it only determines how long the train takes to get there.

Edited January 1, 2018 by DoubleDeckInterurban

[peach james]

Are you sure this in the North East?  The frequency sounds more like the London Underground.  Try train A arrives at 7.50 and departs at 8.00.  Train B arrives at 8.50 and departs at 9.00, Train C arrives at 9.50 and departs at 10.00,  Train A arrives at 10.50 etc    Bit like Barnstaple

 

What I would imagine is a pair of trains running to/from York, to give hourly service on this branch to Tuktoyaktuk.  (with stops in both upper and lower rubber boot...).  I would anticipate that there would be 1 train through to London, and another to points north (* if the track plan at the junction allows).  So, from that, I would look and see at what station you are most likely to have meets at, and have that one double track, and possibly the ones E&W of it.  Unless the freight demands are very high on the line as well, in which case the entire lot might be double track.   I would expect that the schedule would have to be 4 trains/hr for it to be worth double track, with stations at 4 mile intervals or so.  

 

James

[HillsideDepot]

As DavidCBroad commented, this doesn't sound at all like a BR branch line, indeed the only line in the NE which has anything like this is the Tyne & Wear Metro. Whilst that network is based on former BR lines, it added many more stations than existed in BR days. 

 

Whilst BR used half minutes in working documents, it only ever quoted whole minutes in public timetables, so ignore seconds and round up. 30mph is probably reasonable as a speed limit, but DMUs could only reach 70mph, and then took a while to get to that speed, and certainly not with station stops 3 minutes apart.

 

Here is the timetable for the Exmouth - Exeter line in SW England, which is the wrong area, but is as high a frequency as I can think of whilst not being in a completely built up area.

The line is operating at its maximum capacity, and trains in one direction have a longer wait at the passing point than the other due to unbalanced times either side of the loop. As the table shows, trains run on to Barnstaple or Paignton, rather like York or Leeds in your example, although Barnstaple and Paungton are in opposite directions from Exeter, rather than one beyond the other.

This is the track layout of the branch

However, back in winter 1982/83 - DMU days - the timetable looked like this 

Of course, it's your railway, but hopefully this will give you more of an insight into British railways and their style of operation. 

 

As I was about to add this reply I thought of a possible NE example - Bishop Auckland to Darlington. The service here extends to several different places beyond the branch. The timetable is Northern-3-Bishop-Auckland--to-Saltburn-1017.pdf . Back in the winter of 1982/83 the frequency was the same, to the minute in some cases!

[FPH 603]

Thanks, I appreciate your help in this, although I have a few questions. What exactly makes a BR Branch Line? What is my railway missing, and what shouldn't it have in order to be like one? I'd just like to know what to improve on what I have planned and what else I can do with it. The prototype I based it is certainly unusual for a BR Branch Line, but this is only the base, and I'm willing to make changes when needed.

 

EDIT: DAMN YOU AUTOCORRECT!

Edited January 1, 2018 by DoubleDeckInterurban

[rovex]

What makes a BR branchline?

 

The main theme I'm taking from these replies is that many BR branchlinrs were underinvested and under utilised. Demand was limited and so few trains were run.

 

I now live in Redditch and with the cross city line trains to Birmingham are every twenty minutes but that's only after several million was invested in building a passing loop at Alvechurch. Before that it was every thirty minutes. I understan in the seventies the service was hourly at most.

 

So a prototypical BR layout would have an hourly service at most. But that might be a tad boring to operate.

Edited January 1, 2018 by rovex

[salop89a]

What makes a BR branchline?

 

The main theme I'm taking from these replies is that many BR branchlinrs were underinvested and under utilised. Demand was limited and so few trains were run.

 

I now live in Redditch and with the cross city line trains to Birmingham are every twenty minutes but that's only after several million was invested in building a passing loop at Alvechurch. Before that it was every thirty minutes. I understan in the seventies the service was hourly at most.

 

So a prototypical BR layout would have an hourly service at most. But that might be a tad boring to operate.

When I moved to Redditch in 1974 there was a minimal service - two morning commuter trains to Birmingham (1 on Saturdays) and 2 from Birmingham in the evening on weekdays. Service frequencies on many lines were much less than today.

[rovex]

When I moved to Redditch in 1974 there was a minimal service - two morning commuter trains to Birmingham (1 on Saturdays) and 2 from Birmingham in the evening on weekdays. Service frequencies on many lines were much less than today.

Yes I understood it was fairly dire. But I guess fairly typical of branches of the time. Hanging on by the skin of their teeth.

 

How things have changed

[DCB]

To get your service frequency in a fictional small terminus I would suggest it has to be somewhere more than one line terminates, a small Town maybe 30 000 population where more than one pre 1923 (or 1948) company had lines and where the tracks were rationalised and one of the stations closed, leaving the other to serve two lines.  That way you could have one breed of York based  DMU on service A to Yorkd and a different breed of Newcastle based DMUs on service B to Newcastle.  To bring it into the 2000s you could have DMUs on the Newcastle service and Heritage Steam and Heritage Diesel on the York service one now truncated to Pickering...  (Thinking Pickering here)

 

Those NSW service frequencies are very suburban by UK standards, I think you are looking at 8 coach formations on double track for the UK, and these will be HST or Electrified.

 

The 1960's era DMUs are fun to watch and easy to create compared to 2010 era but they ran empty and infrequently on run down tracks with huge over capacity while in 2017 we have impossible colour schemes and services running on pared down infrastructure which absolutely maximise track capacity.

 

If you do build a terminus you need either a portacabin or Bus shelter for 1970s on or a full largely derelict North Eastern Railway terminus from the 1860s which last had a lick of paint in the 1930s and lots of disused track and semaphore signals with lots or arm less out of use signals.  Just thinking of it makes me depressed..  Its why I model pre 1963 or post 1985....

[Butler Henderson]

The one big thing that lets branch layouts down IMO is train leaves station for fiddle, train arrives from fiddle into the station. Unless very oddly there is a passing loop immediately outside the station that cannot portray reality. I always try to run a train into the station before one departs, then the time taken sorting the arrived train out balances out enough time before another arrives.

A possible solution for a branch with a frequent service is, I agree, for the branch to split to two different key locations. Somewhere like Wetherby if it was still rail connected and subject to junctions being arranged right could have a half hourly service to Leeds and a hourly to York with the odd through service to London.

Edited January 1, 2018 by Butler Henderson

[mjkerr]

Why timetable working with all its complications?

Why not a sequence of trains that represent timetabled trains?

I would agree with the above

 

The main issue is if there is any single line sections

The next is the number of destinations and the time taken to reach that destination, and to then return if appropriate

 

Short destinations can see the same DMU return within 60 minutes (making an hourly service or alternating)

Further destinations often see DMU only appearing a few times or only once

Equally, when reaching that destination the DMU may then sit idle or a new route

Furthermore it may split / join with another DMU, and that in turn may join / split later

 

The next issue is what timing method are you using on your layout

If it is real time / quick time, then timings need to be possible

An alternative is the turn card, which even though it can include a time does not require a clock

This is ideal for the sole operator as a break can then be taken at any time, and the layout can continue from that card

[FPH 603]

What makes a BR branchline?

The main theme I'm taking from these replies is that many BR branchlinrs were underinvested and under utilised. Demand was limited and so few trains were run.

I now live in Redditch and with the cross city line trains to Birmingham are every twenty minutes but that's only after several million was invested in building a passing loop at Alvechurch. Before that it was every thirty minutes. I understan in the seventies the service was hourly at most.

So a prototypical BR layout would have an hourly service at most. But that might be a tad boring to operate.

To get your service frequency in a fictional small terminus I would suggest it has to be somewhere more than one line terminates, a small Town maybe 30 000 population where more than one pre 1923 (or 1948) company had lines and where the tracks were rationalised and one of the stations closed, leaving the other to serve two lines.  That way you could have one breed of York based  DMU on service A to Yorkd and a different breed of Newcastle based DMUs on service B to Newcastle.  To bring it into the 2000s you could have DMUs on the Newcastle service and Heritage Steam and Heritage Diesel on the York service one now truncated to Pickering...  (Thinking Pickering here)

 

Those NSW service frequencies are very suburban by UK standards, I think you are looking at 8 coach formations on double track for the UK, and these will be HST or Electrified.

 

The 1960's era DMUs are fun to watch and easy to create compared to 2010 era but they ran empty and infrequently on run down tracks with huge over capacity while in 2017 we have impossible colour schemes and services running on pared down infrastructure which absolutely maximise track capacity.

 

If you do build a terminus you need either a portacabin or Bus shelter for 1970s on or a full largely derelict North Eastern Railway terminus from the 1860s which last had a lick of paint in the 1930s and lots of disused track and semaphore signals with lots or arm less out of use signals.  Just thinking of it makes me depressed..  Its why I model pre 1963 or post 1985....

8 carriage trains are ridiculously long in OO or HO scale. A 5 car train would be spanning the entire length of the layout! Mainly the trains I'll be running are going to be 2 - 3 carriages in length, maybe with the rare multiple working spanning 4 carriages, which might even end up separating when they arrive at the station. A bus shelter is a good idea for the upper section of the layout, where I've only got the road and the backscene planned. Although there's not enough space or road to have the vehicles moving around. Regarding splitting the location, I have a lower level, which I've been planning to make as an interchange point for a further branch, although a much smaller and less frequent one. The signalling will be all semaphores, hopefully working ones too. I am thinking of making the station look sort of poorly maintained or declining, but I'll look at this further once I have started building it.

[HillsideDepot]

At work I have some timetabling software (OmniTIMES) so one lunch time I fed in the details given at the start of this thread. 

 

First of all I needed to adjust the running times as they were too precise for BR (and for ease of working the example!). I assumed that trains couldn't run any faster than shown, so rounded every time up to the next whole minute. For ease of identification I called all the single platforms "Halts" and all passing places "Stations". 

 

I then added 1 minute dwell time at each stop (probably not really enough) and added an extra 2 minutes at stations to allow for the token exchange (almost certainly not enough time).

 

Feeding that information in to OmniTIMES and a taking a sample trip from the terminus to the mainline it looks like this:

 

We are told that trains always pass another each time they stop at a station, so based on that information the list of trains from the mainline to the terminus passing our 09:00 journey looks like this:

 

This is very, very frequent for a BR branch line, and trains are not evenly spaced as usually happens on high frequency routes.

 

When the timetable is converted into a graph format it looks like this:

 

Which highlights the irregular intervals, and more importantly, if you try to add the next journey from the terminus back to the mainline, unless it waits until 10:00 to run, you find that it meets trains coming the other way on single track sections!

 

The timetabling software is by Omnibus: Passenger Transport Solutions of Oldham, and is used under my employer's licence for illustrative purposes.

[Pteremy]

I think that 'adapting' a real timetable would be a good thing to do.

 

Some years ago I spent a summer studying the public timetables for the line and period I intend to model in retirement, generating diagrams a bit like the one that Adrian created. This revealed how many sets of coaches I would need for 100% accuracy, crossing places, how the freight trains fitted round the passenger timings and so on. And it through up all sorts of questions. Some of these I have now resolved through access to further information (for example, working timetables). And cross referencing the information provided by published photos is also helpful. I doubt that even now my understanding is 100% accurate. But I can live with the likely margin of error. More than anything it gives me a great sense of how the whole line was operated, and how those operations changed through time, over and above the plain numbers in the public timetables. And hopefully - some day - I will be able to replicate that to some degree or other.

[The White Rabbit]

I've looked at this issue for my own layouts. I can't add much to what Hillside Depot's already covered, but one visual aid I've used was a schematic of the line showing passing places and loops, using tiddlywinks counters as trains. This helped a lot with producing a graph similar to HD's illustration to check we weren't going to have a 'cornfield meet'.

 

The only other thing to mention is station waiting time, whether it's any time difference to get 10 or 100 passengers on/off or to allow for loading/unloading of parcels. OK, I recall you saying DMUs, but in former decades, they still might have some packages carried in the guard's compartment. And are there any 'special operational requirements', such as dropping containers of drinking water off at signal boxes or for camping coaches by the first/last train of the day? 

[FPH 603]

At work I have some timetabling software (OmniTIMES) so one lunch time I fed in the details given at the start of this thread. 

 

First of all I needed to adjust the running times as they were too precise for BR (and for ease of working the example!). I assumed that trains couldn't run any faster than shown, so rounded every time up to the next whole minute. For ease of identification I called all the single platforms "Halts" and all passing places "Stations". 

 

I then added 1 minute dwell time at each stop (probably not really enough) and added an extra 2 minutes at stations to allow for the token exchange (almost certainly not enough time).

run times.JPG

 

Feeding that information in to OmniTIMES and a taking a sample trip from the terminus to the mainline it looks like this:

T to M.JPG

 

We are told that trains always pass another each time they stop at a station, so based on that information the list of trains from the mainline to the terminus passing our 09:00 journey looks like this:

M to T.JPG

 

This is very, very frequent for a BR branch line, and trains are not evenly spaced as usually happens on high frequency routes.

 

When the timetable is converted into a graph format it looks like this:

Graph.jpg

 

Which highlights the irregular intervals, and more importantly, if you try to add the next journey from the terminus back to the mainline, unless it waits until 10:00 to run, you find that it meets trains coming the other way on single track sections!

 

The timetabling software is by Omnibus: Passenger Transport Solutions of Oldham, and is used under my employer's licence for illustrative purposes.

That looks great! I'm liking what's happening here, but I might change the frequency of the services going to the terminus. Originally I opted that at every station two trains would meet. This is (in my opinion) unrealistic, so I think it'll be better to reduce that a little. This will make it a little more logical and balanced out.

[Dungrange]

A lot of valid points have already been made, but one point that hasn't really been highlighted is the quantity of stock that will be required to operate this branch line.

 

When looking at a similar exercise for my own fictitious terminus (post privatisation era), I concluded that I don't care too much where any passing loops are located on my fictitious branch line, as I don't intend to model the entire branch.  I just need to assume that loops are provided at the locations that they need to be provided.  All that really matters to me is the time that it would take a unit to depart, reach its destination and then make an appearance back at my terminus.  My starting point was therefore to establish timings for a departing train as Adrian has done in post #18.  In this example, a train departing at 09:03 would arrive at the junction station at 09:51.  If we ignore the possibility of working through to York or Leeds and assume that all passengers interchange at this station, then the departing unit could conceivably form a return journey departing the junction station around 10:03 (12 minute turnaround) and would therefore arrive back at the terminus around 10:51.  As such, the same unit could form an 11:03 departure (again assuming a 12 minute turnaround).  This therefore means that a single DMU on this fictitious branch could provide a two-hourly service.  If you want an hourly service, then two units would be required.  If you want a half hourly service, then four units are required.  How much space is there in the fiddle yard to accommodate these units?

 

Moving on to thinking about through services, how many minutes will it take to travel from the junction station to York?  Clearly if all services are through services to York, then a single unit can't even provide a two hourly service and if through services run to Leeds or even further afield, then the number of trains required becomes larger still to maintain the same frequency.  The conclusion that I came to when undertaking a similar exercise was that to limit the amount of stock that would be required, I would need to operate most services to closer destinations and have fewer through trips and consider less frequent services (hourly instead of every 30 minutes).  If not, I run out of space in the fiddle yard.

 

In this particular example, I would be tempted to assume that services in BR days were most likely provided by a single unit that would shuttle back and forth between the terminus and the junction station (providing a regular service every two hours) and that in addition there would be a second unit that would depart early in the morning, operating through to York / Leeds, to serve commuter traffic and this same unit would operate back in the evening with workers returning from the city.  The same unit may also make an appearance in the middle of the day around lunch time.  However, whilst this may be representative of the service frequency on a BR branch line, I suspect that you are looking for a little higher frequency of service, but that all depends on what you are trying to create.  Why do all trains need to be operated by DMUs?  Could a couple of DMUs provide a shuttle to the mainline and a couple of loco hauled services provide the through trains?  Could the through trains be four car sets to provide additional capacity for passengers boarding on the East Coast Mainline compared to the branch shuttle, which will presumably be a two-car unit? 

 

Good luck with whatever you decide.

[Corbs]

I find this kind of thing fascinating, all these posts have given me food for thought on my own timetabling. I've made a start, detailed here in this blog post in case anyone finds it useful:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1365/entry-20165-timetables-and-traffic-requirements/

[FPH 603]

Very valid points there.

 

My 'Fiddleyard' would (most likely) be up four cassettes stowed underneath the layout, each would span over a metre. In terms of times in between trains, for off peak services, the gap between trains would be 1 - 2 hours. However since my layout is a dual platform terminus, the trains would remain at the platform for 5 - 10 minutes, at times up to 15 minutes if the service they run goes back to the depot. Somewhere in between that waiting time another train would run into the second platform. This would give the 'All Clear' for the first train, allowing it to depart. I'd run departmental and parcels trains in between too. These would come once or twice a day. Peak hour times would be halved, meaning that trains would be only 30 minutes to an hour apart. And the trains would leave a bit quicker too, meaning they only wait a few minutes before departing.

 

Getting to York from the junction station would take about half an hour, assuming that's how far away from York it is. If I was to run only one DMU and one service, it's pointless to have a dual platformed terminus, and really there's a lack of variety. I'd prefer to have a few services or a few different trains to add variety.

 

Regarding the reason why the trains are mostly DMU's, this is what a branch line would usually have. It's only really the 1980's period that has more DMU's on my layout, as I'd think BR would have eliminated most locomotive hauled services from branch lines. It's also a pain (for BR) to operate them on my terminus as there's no run around point, meaning the locomotive is trapped. Another locomotive would have to come along and couple up, and depart with the train. The other locomotive would have to go light engine and wait in a siding for the next locomotive hauled service, and then take it when it's ready to depart. After that it goes in a cycle, over and over again. This is the sort of thing I'd do with the parcels train, and a couple of the 1960's services. There is actually only one DMU service in the 1960's, the other three (including the parcels train) are steam hauled.

 

Multiple working is also a bit of a pain for BR. My station can only fit a three car train at the most. 4 car sets would have to comprise of two 2 car sets. These would split after they arrive and the rear half of the train would have to go the other platform. If necessary, at departure they would couple up again and leave as the 4 car set again.

 

Shorter two car trains would provide shuttles along the branch line, whilst three or four car trains would continue to York. In the 1960's as you say locomotive hauled trains run the through trains, whilst the single DMU unit will do shuttles to the main line.

[adb968008]

not sure if I missed it in the above posts, but which era are you modelling this branch ?

 

Many branch lines didn't start out as Branchlines, so a service to York and Leeds isnt beyond comprehension.. Blackpool South comes to mind.. they don't terminate at Kirkham or even Preston.

I recently was at Bolton station and saw a 142 arriving in the bay platform.. with a service from Crewe !

 

Logical terminating at junctions was much part of the older railway, todays railway is combined with Diagramming of stock and crews too, and Neville Hill is in Leeds, not York.

Another example is Morecambe, with thru services to Leeds as well as Lancaster.

Edited January 11, 2018 by adb968008