Great Eastern based EMU Terminus.

[Joseph_Pestell]

The 309s are the issue if it is to be a London terminus. Nothing suburban is going to do the trick so it really needs to be a second Central London Terminus.

 

Three platforms, that sounds a lot like Minories.

[Zomboid]

Could get away with 309s by saying it's the East London version of Shepperton, where all sorts of things would turn up on a test run.

[jonny777]

The 309s could be stabled in the sidings during off-peak hours. I know it is a bit of a stretch of the imagination, but a lot of units were stabled at what we used to call London Fields during the day, and also Stratford. They would run as ECS into Liverpool Street even as late as the 1980s as seen here.  

 

 

[Spikeyorks]

I remember all the carriage sidings around Stratford full of EMUs and other ECS. Long gone now of course.

 

I don't think I will use the Minories template because I would also like other things in my layout (ie the carriage washing plant and the diamond crossing).

 

As for possible station names then London (Aldersgate), London (Folgate) or London (Brick Lane) are good contenders. However I still think I prefer the suburban terminal rather than the City one.

 

There is the possibility of a Tilbury Riverside type option assuming that Tilbury had developed more into a passenger port. The CL309s could be running as boat trains to and from London and to and from East Anglia?

[DCB]

I think the original plan falls somewhere between a steam era plan and an EMU era plan. The plan would work for steam era as there is a run round on the top platform for off peak workings when a station pilot probably would not be available, and it was normal to move stock between arrival and departure platforms, but by the EMU era surely the bottom platform would be out of use or used as a parcels or stabling road as arrivals can't use it.

 

It is not easy to add an arrival facility for the bottom platform to your plan, the beauty of the Minories design is its flexibility crammed into such a short length of pointwork

 

The main line  track round the back of the signal box looks a bit odd.

 

EMUs should be able to come and go simultaneously, that's what looks good.  Even better if two trains can depart simultaneously as the GC used to do at Marylebone as a bit of theatre, or the NB did at Waverley 

Edited January 28, 2018 by DavidCBroad

[Spikeyorks]

I think the original plan falls somewhere between a steam era plan and an EMU era plan. The plan would work for steam era as there is a run round on the top platform for off peak workings when a station pilot probably would not be available, and it was normal to move stock between arrival and departure platforms, but by the EMU era surely the bottom platform would be out of use or used as a parcels or stabling road as arrivals can't use it.

 

It is not easy to add an arrival facility for the bottom platform to your plan, the beauty of the Minories design is its flexibility crammed into such a short length of pointwork

 

The main line  track round the back of the signal box looks a bit odd.

 

EMUs should be able to come and go simultaneously, that's what looks good.  Even better if two trains can depart simultaneously as the GC used to do at Marylebone as a bit of theatre, or the NB did at Waverley 

 

Thanks for your thoughts. They all help. Note that the original plan is loosely based on Enfield Town where, in fact, the bottom platform (PL3) is still in use today although all the other sidings have gone. In the 1970s, when I was familiar with the location, most of the track layout still existed and was electrified. That is my time period. (I just wish I could fit in the 4 stabling sidings that were in use at that time).

 

The platform at the top (PL1) used to run alongside the engine shed where there was an additional loop. In my plan, however, the very top loop is completely fictional and I added it simply to add an additional traffic flow where there might have been a need to run round. Perhaps I should remove the crossover from this area and instead put in between the tracks in PL2 and PL3......which is where it is in real life in Enfield Town? This would enable me to run CL31 and blue suburbans into these two platforms.

 

The arrival facility for PL3 is via an 'off plan' crossover between the running lines the other side of the over bridge. Again this is how it was in real life and this will be facilitated by the traverser. In the plan as is you can have EMUs arriving and departing simultaneously however, as things stand at the moment, you would never have two arrive or depart at the same time as the station is only approached by a double running line. What you are more likely to see is an EMU shunting or going through the carriage wash whilst another EMU move happens.

 

The main line 'loop' around the signal box is fictional but I added it in to avoid just having straight running lines. I quite like the idea of an emu snaking around it and it does remind me of a location somewhere.....possibly on the Southern region.

 

If we still to real life then the Enfield line would see mainly 305s with some 308s and 302s. However just having these units would be quite dull hence all my other ones. (I'll hopefully be getting a 306 soon and then things really will take a more imaginary turn).

 

All of this was why my original layout name was going to be "Greastern" as a play on words of Great Eastern would enable me to run anything.

[Spikeyorks]

Have tweaked the original plan slightly to achieve the following.

 

1) Add a third emu stabling siding.

2) Move all three sidings further 'south' to make more room for the traverser.

3) Hopefully to now have enough room for a 5 road traverser without widening the baseboard.

4) Still keep nearly all the point work on the 5 foot centre board.

 

I still don't particularly like the top of the plan. The run round is important as I would like to have a small amount of freight coming in, reversing and then heading off-site.

I also want to run the odd CL31 with BR blue suburbans and the engine release crossover will help with that.

It is still very tempting to add some sort of shed / industry to the single siding top left but that might make things too busy.

My plan re the low relief depot at the end of the stabling sidings is to use the PECO shed and, if you squint, it could look a bit like East Ham (see final image below).

Any more thoughts from anyone?

 

I am particularly interested to hear how wide a 5 road traverser top would be. Do I have the room as things stand? (Note that the traverser will slide under the roadway running parallel with the stabling sidings).

 

I have also now taken delivery of a CL125 DMU so things won't all be electric.

 

Thanks

 

David

[Satan's Goldfish]

Question before I work on this one; do you want all your arrivals/departures to be arriving and departing on the 'correct' directional line? or are you happy with bi-directional running to off scene? (imagining there's crossovers just out of view)

[Satan's Goldfish]

I'll apologise, I've only skim read the thread so I may have missed some info, and this is a very crude drawing! I've moved your loop from the top of the plan to the bottom. You could still add a kick back from platform 1 for a freight siding if you felt you really wanted to. Having the 2 lines from off-scene feeding between 2 platforms rather than splitting looks more natural to me, but there's a prototype for everything! The main throat point work is still quite compact. HTH

[Spikeyorks]

I have had a look at all the recent suggestions (Thanks very much) and have now come up with the following,

 

1) There are now 3 emu sidings.

2) I have added the Hertford East type centre storage road.

3) I have drawn in a kickback siding for a possible off site engineers yard.

4) I have moved the signal box.

5) Simultaneous platform arrivals and departures are now possible on the layout.

6) Loco release siding for CL31s pulling blue suburbans (PL1 & PL2). 

 

What does everyone think now? Better or worse?

(There is a lot of track but I think I will, just about, get away with it).

 

Thanks

David

[Mike Storey]

I have had a look at all the recent suggestions (Thanks very much) and have now come up with the following,

 

1) There are now 3 emu sidings.

2) I have added the Hertford East type centre storage road.

3) I have drawn in a kickback siding for a possible off site engineers yard.

4) I have moved the signal box.

5) Simultaneous platform arrivals and departures are now possible on the layout.

6) Loco release siding for CL31s pulling blue suburbans (PL1 & PL2). 

 

What does everyone think now? Better or worse?

(There is a lot of track but I think I will, just about, get away with it).

 

Thanks

David

 

I think you need to think through your Class 31 plus suburbans operation David. I assume you want to run at least 3 coaches with the 31?

 

A loco draws a set into Platform 1. The crossover faces the wrong way for loco release, so a complex reversal is needed, but the run-round is not long enough for 3 coaches plus loco. You just need to reverse the direction of the crossover and this should work ok.

 

A loco draws a set into Platform 2. It cannot get out, That means another loco must be attached at the other end, but to be inside the signal for departure, the train must be limited to two coaches.

 

So unless you only want to run hauled sets of two coaches (which to my mind would not look authentic), I would abandon the loco release, reverse the crossover on Platform 1, and just run your loco hauled trains to and from there. That will also simplify your trackwork further, which will look better and be more correct for the 1970's at such a small location?

 

Alternatively, keep the loco release but use it to store a brake van or two, or something else?

[Spikeyorks]

I think you need to think through your Class 31 plus suburbans operation David. I assume you want to run at least 3 coaches with the 31?

 

A loco draws a set into Platform 1. The crossover faces the wrong way for loco release, so a complex reversal is needed, but the run-round is not long enough for 3 coaches plus loco. You just need to reverse the direction of the crossover and this should work ok.

 

A loco draws a set into Platform 2. It cannot get out, That means another loco must be attached at the other end, but to be inside the signal for departure, the train must be limited to two coaches.

 

So unless you only want to run hauled sets of two coaches (which to my mind would not look authentic), I would abandon the loco release, reverse the crossover on Platform 1, and just run your loco hauled trains to and from there. That will also simplify your trackwork further, which will look better and be more correct for the 1970's at such a small location?

 

Alternatively, keep the loco release but use it to store a brake van or two, or something else?

 

Hi Mike. Thanks for your thoughts.

 

The run round is actually there for any engineers trains to reverse direction. That is why the points are laid out that way around so as to maximise the loop at the top.

I did initially plan to leave out the engine release crossover as I felt PL1 could be made long enough to have a CL31 on each end of 3 blue suburbans.

However that would've required me to have a station pilot for any goods services. (Class 03?)

 

You are right about PL2. I think I will have to abandon any thought of that having a diesel hauled service from that platform.

So I could disconnect that platform from the loco release road and simplify the pointwork there.

There would then be more room for extending PL1. (I like the idea of PL1 and PL2 being different lengths).

 

Actually I have just realised that I could then make PL1 long enough to take a 6 car emu.

(That wouldn't fit in the traverser but that could be a dream for the future).

Class 309s / 306s and 305s would sit nicely as 6 car trains.

 

So if I put a fuelling point on the loco release siding would it look OK to have a separate loco take any engineers wagons to the yard whilst the train engine was refuelled?

Arguably I could then take the run round out altogether?

So should the loop stay or go?

 

David

[Spikeyorks]

I have updated the plan to include an extension to PL1 which should now be long enough to accommodate a CL31 together with 3 blue suburbans and still have room to attach a second loco at the other end.

I have also disconnected PL2 from the original loco release siding.

 

So PL1 will now host all diesel services, (Still might try for 6 car emu length)

PL2 4 car emu services.

PL3 3 car emu services (not sure if a 4 car will fit).

It also looks like I could now shift all my pointwork on the central board 2-3 inches to the left and get away with it. I will try this later on as it might give me that extra length in the platforms.

 

Any other thoughts / ideas?

[woodenhead]

I've always worked off 11-12 inches per carriage for anything BR and 10 inches for big four and looking at your station and coach sidings I would say all are only good for three coaches apart from platform one but even that is too short when a locomotive is attached.

 

I would be adding a couple of foot to the overall length or replanning the station throat to extend the sidings and platforms.

[Spikeyorks]

I've always worked off 11-12 inches per carriage for anything BR and 10 inches for big four and looking at your station and coach sidings I would say all are only good for three coaches apart from platform one but even that is too short when a locomotive is attached.

 

I would be adding a couple of foot to the overall length or replanning the station throat to extend the sidings and platforms.

 

The layout is designed for emus. Each emu carriage is approximately 10.5 inches long.

I have therefore allowed 11 inches per carriage in my plans. At the moment,

 

Platform 1 is approx. 63 inches long and would take a 5 car emu (or 2 locos and 3 blue suburbans).

Platform 2 is approx. 48 inches long and would take a 4 car emu.

Platform 3 is approx. 34 inches long and would take a 3 car emu.

 

I think I can move the throat to the left by approx. 2 inches so will do that and add the extra length to the platforms.

So I'm not sure why you think all platforms will only take 3 coaches?

Have I missed something?

 

David

[Spikeyorks]

Below is my latest tweak to the layout plan. I have moved the whole station throat slightly closer to the traverser and can now see that my platforms will be long enough.

(PL1 = 6 car, PL2 = 4 car and PL3 = 3 car long).

I have also now moved the washer onto the central board and, as a result, am more confident that the washing siding will easily accommodate a 4 car emu.

 

Then there are the emu stabling sidings. As the 3 way point accessing them is not on the traverser board then, in theory, all 3 of them will be 48 inches long so should all accommodate a 4 car emu so long as my low relief depot isn't any deeper than, say 1 inch.

 

I will add scenery to suggest that there was once a PL4 but that this has now been turned into a car park. (I will fence off the washing siding on the car park side).

 

At the moment I am planning to create a low relied station building across the platforms at the right hand end. However I think I won't have much depth at all to play with and this might limit the effect. Initially I was thinking about going Art Deco and using the Bachmann building but now I'm not so sure. Perhaps I should raise the station building above the tracks for the final 6 inches or so? Doing so would mean that I could run the platform tracks practically up to the baseboard edge perhaps even allowing PL3 to take a 4 car emu after all. (However doing so might be hard to pull off from a scenery point of view).

 

Again any thoughts? (I think I am nearly there now).

[Mike Storey]

Looks much more like a workable solution now you have explained your thoughts about the loco hauled sets and the engineering siding.

 

I know the middle road is meant to look like a particular location, but what will you most likely use it for? If you lost it, you could get all your platforms to handle 4 cars?

 

Raising the station building to give you extra room is a good idea. This would be fairly typical of many North London stations, if not termini, but hey!

Edited April 3, 2018 by Mike Storey

[Spikeyorks]

Looks much more like a workable solution now you have explained your thoughts about the loco hauled sets and the engineering siding.

 

I know the middle road is meant to look like a particular location, but what will you most likely use it for? If you lost it, you could get all your platforms to handle 4 cars?

 

Raising the station building to give you extra room is a good idea. This would be fairly typical of many North London stations, if not termini, but hey!

 

Hi Mike.

 

I'm glad it all makes a bit of sense. Thanks very much for your input. It is all very helpful.

It is interesting that you mention North London stations as I think the Bachmann 'March' station buildings have a hint of NLR about them.

The problem with raising the station buildings is that I will then need to do something about ground height and the washer siding which might be tricky.

I supposed creating a derelict area that goes under another road bridge could work?

 

The centre road has been put in to mimic Hertford East.

You are right in that adding this line limits the length of PL3 however it also gives me that bonus of another stabling line.

The centre siding also gives access to and from the depot stabling sidings without having to use a platform road, as does the washer road, which will be handy.

(I will have a number of 3 car emus so I don't think that the shorter PL3 will be a problem).

 

I think I should be able to have 2 emus in platform roads, 2 in the stabling sidings and 1 in either the washer or the centre road.

That's 5 on display before I have to even consider things clogging up.

(The diesel hauled services would only run in the rush hour and would be interspersed with short engineers trains).

 

It's all starting to sound quite busy !!!

 

David

[Zomboid]

Do you have any 3 car EMUs? Or at least enough to make the short platform used much? And is the centre road long enough for a 4 car without blocking access to a platform?

[Calimero]

You could add a second road next to the carriage washer, usually referred to as "Bypass" so as to allow shunting movements without setting the carriage washer off.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Calimero

[Mike Storey]

Hi Mike.

 

I'm glad it all makes a bit of sense. Thanks very much for your input. It is all very helpful.

It is interesting that you mention North London stations as I think the Bachmann 'March' station buildings have a hint of NLR about them.

The problem with raising the station buildings is that I will then need to do something about ground height and the washer siding which might be tricky.

I supposed creating a derelict area that goes under another road bridge could work?

 

The centre road has been put in to mimic Hertford East.

You are right in that adding this line limits the length of PL3 however it also gives me that bonus of another stabling line.

The centre siding also gives access to and from the depot stabling sidings without having to use a platform road, as does the washer road, which will be handy.

(I will have a number of 3 car emus so I don't think that the shorter PL3 will be a problem).

 

I think I should be able to have 2 emus in platform roads, 2 in the stabling sidings and 1 in either the washer or the centre road.

That's 5 on display before I have to even consider things clogging up.

(The diesel hauled services would only run in the rush hour and would be interspersed with short engineers trains).

 

It's all starting to sound quite busy !!!

 

David

 

All sounds like you have thought this through enough now to settle the design!

 

Look forward to seeing its development. There are only a very few layouts based on what you are doing, so this will be interesting. The stock you have accrued/built already is seriously interesting already, so somewhere to show them off in context will be good to see.

[Spikeyorks]

Do you have any 3 car EMUs? Or at least enough to make the short platform used much? And is the centre road long enough for a 4 car without blocking access to a platform?

 

I have 2 x CL305 3 car units and also can run a 3 car Class 309 if I so wish. (I can also park a 2 car CL309 there too).

Later on this year I should get 2 x CL306 3 car units.

Finally I have a Royal Mail liveried 3 car Class 302. (Out of period but its nice and bright red).

On the DMU front I have a 3 car CL125 and also a 2 car CL105.

All of these could use the shorter platform which could maybe become a parcels and rush hour platform.

 

The length of the centre road is going to be tight. My guess is that with a low relief station it would be approx. 46 inches long but that if I raised the station above the platforms I could then get the full 48 inches.

As always an extra two inches could prove critical to success !!!

(I am keen to get a 4 car emu into that centre road).

 

It is similar with the emu stabling sidings where I can't afford to lose too much space to the low relief depot. Although, at this end, I think I could work around any problem by again having some 3 car units running.

It isn't impossible that I might be able to lengthen a board by an inch or two but that would take careful planning when the time comes.

 

Kind Regards

 

David

[Spikeyorks]

You could add a second road next to the carriage washer, usually referred to as "Bypass" so as to allow shunting movements without setting the carriage washer off.

 

At one point I did have a double slip to the left of the washer (where the point is now).

That gave me a second siding, as you suggest, although it seemed to make the layout look too busy.

I suppose I could lose the centre road (but I don't really want to) and put that other siding back in?

 

Platform 3 moving away from the washer might make that end look less cluttered (and it could then take 4 cars).

The new siding would definitely then also take 4 cars but the washer would have to move back on the end board.

As a result the washer siding might come up a fraction short.

It is a bit of a puzzle at the moment.

 

I will plot this new version, with the bypass, and see what I think.

 

David

[Harlequin]

Some questions that occur to me:

 

Is there enough room for the traverser to connect all roads to the incoming and outgoing lines?

Is the loco release crossover above platform 1 the right way round?

Is the dead-straight double track from traverser into platforms 2 and the middle road a bit boring? Wouldn't it be more pleasing to see trains wiggle somewhat on entry and exit?

If you have a washer passing loop, could you access the stabling sidings from it alone and remove the scissors crossing? That would reduce track density in the middle and allow longer platforms. (Operations them might not be as smooth but could be considered more interesting.)

[Spikeyorks]

Some questions that occur to me:

 

Is there enough room for the traverser to connect all roads to the incoming and outgoing lines?

Is the loco release crossover above platform 1 the right way round?

Is the dead-straight double track from traverser into platforms 2 and the middle road a bit boring? Wouldn't it be more pleasing to see trains wiggle somewhat on entry and exit?

If you have a washer passing loop, could you access the stabling sidings from it alone and remove the scissors crossing? That would reduce track density in the middle and allow longer platforms. (Operations them might not be as smooth but could be considered more interesting.)

 

Hi Phil

 

The traverser is probably the most sketchy bit of the whole plan. I'm not too fussed if not every line connects up as, really, I want most of my emus on show rather than in the traverser. Having said that they do need to go somewhere when they set off from my station. I will be able to make the traverser a bit wider but accept that I won't know exactly what can be done until I build a full size mock up.

 

The loco release above platform one is that way round to have the loop line as long as possible. I envisage engineers trains pulling into the top loop road and then running round when PL1 is empty. (Either that or a shunter attaching to the other end and pulling the wagons away). Any loco hauled trains serving PL1 would have a second engine attach to the other end and then take the train away. (A good excuse to have 2xCL31s on site).

 

Yes the dead straight line is boring. If you look at the earlier plans I did have one line looping round the signal box to add a bit of variety. However I have now realised that I like the idea of fitting a 6 car emu into PL1 (even though I know it won't fit into the traverser at the moment). I also have now become quite attached to the centre road so long as I can get a 4 car emu into it. Mind you I'm with you on the "wiggle" front. Perhaps I'll have a look at that again.

 

The scissors crossing was common to GE station layouts and is one of my requirements. I like the look of it as I have fond memories of Enfield Town which sort of had that type of layout. From other comments I have now drawn a plan which puts a second siding by the washer and which could arguably create a 4th platform. It doesn't look too 'busy' but it does mean that the washer has to go on the RH board meaning that I have concerns about the washer siding length.

 

Questions that I am mulling over are as follows;

1) Should I do away with the short engine release/refuelling road? (Any waiting locos could stand on the engineers siding).

2) Should I keep this siding but have the access point actually on the engineers siding itself rather than on the PL1 approach road?

3) If I ditched the siding I could mock up some fake siding ends suggesting that there was a yard the other side of the overbridge. (Could even be connected to the traverser).

4) Keep or ditch the engine release crossover?

 

As always any thoughts will be appreciated.

 

David