Barnoldswick (Barlick) Station - Trackplan

[Guest Kevin_T]

13 minutes ago, Grovenor said:

...this station really cries out for DIY pointwork to look good.

...not sure about DIY pointwork, it would be more like "finding a point building wizard".

 

The collection of points, crossover and traps at the level crossing and coal sidings could probably benefit from being built from scratch in a job lot for consistency.

 

However, I'll stick to proprietary on this occasion.

[Grovenor]

1 hour ago, Happy Hippo said:

I looked up Barnoldswick and the pictures would indicate a level crossing or some such immediately at the platform end.  From that I'd assume that it was a diamond crossing into the coal yard and not a single slip.

 

Definately a diamond crossing as evident in all the plans and photos.

[Jub45565]

3 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

I can't see traps within the point in that photo (I have not got Midland Record). And I don't see that one would be needed given that passenger trains would not usually pass over that diamond.

 

I did once try making such a piece of pointwork for a model of Swanage by splicing two Peco turnouts (Code 100 back then). Not too difficult to do until you want to make it work. They were quite common in the real world but quite rarely modelled.

 

It is clearer in the Midland Record, but can be seen here. The left hand one diverging more obvious, the right hand one seen if you know it is there...

 

 

Thanks Keith re 10/11 - I've updated my post.

 

Correct Richard - not obvious on the photos on the disused station site, but is in photos in the Midland Records.

[Jub45565]

For an example of where they (edit: traps within points) have been modelled (bit of a different configuration) see this layout:

 

 

Edited February 28, 2019 by Jub45565

[Harlequin]

Hi Kevin,

 

Here's my adaptation:

 

I've taken some liberties with the prototype track plan to fit it onto your 4ft + 5ft + 5ft baseboards. Most notably I have combined the diamond crossing and the crossover in the coal yard by using a single slip. The prototype arrangement really limited the siding lengths. I think the new design is a reasonable compromise for a compressed model and retains the character of the original. The topmost coal yard siding has been lost so that the entire plan can be pushed back and more room given to the goods yard.

 

While I was concentrating on making the basic geometry work people were discussing the locations of traps - so no traps are shown yet.

 

The sizes and positions of the buildings are more educated guesses then anything at the moment. I don't know how deeply the tracks penetrated into the good shed but it seemed sensible to stop short of the baseboard join!

 

A 6 road traverser fits with enough travel to connect all roads to either the mainline or the loop. I've suggested putting a crossover between two traverser roads so that you wouldn't have to reposition it so often for run round movements.

 

I can give you a PDF version if you want.

 

Edit: The red points are all Medium radius, the green is a large Y, and I forgot to colour the slip, which is currently black like the plain track.

Edited February 28, 2019 by Harlequin

[tractionman]

Good to see this plan, I agree about having the single slip in there, to combine the crossing and crossover at the level crossing, I'd put that in my plan too, but a key difference is I'd imagined putting the backscene on the opposite side to the station so the higher ground and terrace backs above the goods yard formed the backdrop. 

 

Interesting stuff.

 

Cheers, 

 

Keith 

 

 

 

[Harlequin]

Hi Keith,

 

Yes, interesting differences! Maybe I made a mistake in assuming that the bottom of Kevin's plans was the viewing side - that's just the way I always draw designs.

 

I think the ground rises on both sides towards Rainhall road bridge. On the platform side the rise is contained by a retaining wall rather than an embankment. The stationmaster's house is in front of the wall (could be fully modelled), Fernlea avenue runs just behind the wall, rising to Rainhall road, and varied larger buildings behind that could be low relief or painted on the backscene.

 

Good to know that you combined the crossovers too! You got there before me - sorry I should have looked more closely at your design.

 

Edited February 28, 2019 by Harlequin

[Guest Kevin_T]

Hi Phil,

 

I like the changes to the pointwork - got rid of the visual clunkiness of the original at the level crossing - makes a lot more sense overall now. Thanks very much for this.

 

Could you provide a list of the Peco track components (part numbers) please? 

 

Hi Keith, scenery... I was thinking of looking onto the station, toward Fernlea Road and the retaining wall between platform and road bridge. There's a "Tudor-framed" looking building across the road from the station.

 

One question outside of this stream I'll be looking at, are the coal shoots using the embankment next to the road. 

 

Thanks both!

 

Kevin

 

 

[tractionman]

hi Kevin,

 

Sounds like a good plan, there's a lot to be said for viewing towards the station on layouts, rather than 'viewing from behind'.

 

One of the the permutations of Barnoldswick I tried out in Anyrail included a 3-way point in the good yard, they're not my favourites but are useful space-savers, so below is a list of Peco track based on this, in case it's of any interest/use:

 

Track
SL-100, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Flex 36". (wood)    14     (Minimum number of units: 10)
SL-87, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Left curved turnout 12º    1
SL-88, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Right turnout 10".    2
SL-89, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Left turnout 10".    1
SL-90, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Double slipswitch 9 3/4".    1
SL-91, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Right turnout 7 1/4".    1
SL-E99, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Threeway turnout 8 1/2". (conductive frog)    1
ST200, 00/H0 Peco Setrack Code 100, Straight 6 1/2".    2
ST201, 00/H0 Peco Setrack Code 100, Straight 13 1/4".    2
ST202, 00/H0 Peco Setrack Code 100, Straight 3".    1

 

Track lengths
SL-100, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Flex 36". (wood)    345 1/2
SL-87, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Left curved turnout 12º    20
SL-88, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Right turnout 10".    39 3/4
SL-89, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Left turnout 10".    20
SL-90, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Double slipswitch 9 3/4".    39
SL-91, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Right turnout 7 1/4".    14 1/2
SL-E99, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Threeway turnout 8 1/2". (conductive frog)    25 3/4
ST200, 00/H0 Peco Setrack Code 100, Straight 6 1/2".    13 1/4
ST201, 00/H0 Peco Setrack Code 100, Straight 13 1/4".    26 1/2
ST202, 00/H0 Peco Setrack Code 100, Straight 3".    3
 

The plan below is a bit 'straight' but gives a flavour of what I had in mind--interesting to compare with Harlequin's plan.

 

cheers,

 

Keith

 

 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2019 by tractionman
clarity

[Jub45565]

I personally think it loses a bit of the prototypes feel, but can see the attraction of combining the crossover and diamond.  However I would keep it as a single slip, as reaching the sidings from the platform road couldn't be done on the prototype.

[Guest Kevin_T]

Thank you all very much for your time and help with my trackplan - a very collegiate response to my request for help and the plan is much the better for it!

 

I'll use Phil's design, with the single slip, as the basis for next steps in the modelling process. Thanks for the track component details Keith, they'll be a great help.

 

Wiring and control, infrastructure and scenery research/planning next. Once I produce something tangible, I'll create a layout topic in the relevant area.

 

Kevin

[Flying Pig]

12 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Hi Kevin,

 

Here's my adaptation:

 

I've taken some liberties with the prototype track plan to fit it onto your 4ft + 5ft + 5ft baseboards. Most notably I have combined the diamond crossing and the crossover in the coal yard by using a single slip. The prototype arrangement really limited the siding lengths. I think the new design is a reasonable compromise for a compressed model and retains the character of the original. The topmost coal yard siding has been lost so that the entire plan can be pushed back and more room given to the goods yard.

 

While I was concentrating on making the basic geometry work people were discussing the locations of traps - so no traps are shown yet.

 

The sizes and positions of the buildings are more educated guesses then anything at the moment. I don't know how deeply the tracks penetrated into the good shed but it seemed sensible to stop short of the baseboard join!

 

A 6 road traverser fits with enough travel to connect all roads to either the mainline or the loop. I've suggested putting a crossover between two traverser roads so that you wouldn't have to reposition it so often for run round movements.

 

I can give you a PDF version if you want.

 

Edit: The red points are all Medium radius, the green is a large Y, and I forgot to colour the slip, which is currently black like the plain track.

 

I like this - the compromise in the coal yard helps considerably and single slip access to sidings is a signature Midland feature so sits quite happily in the scene. I think the top coal siding is now the only one that needs to be trapped as none of the others impinge on a passenger line.

 

My only but is the goods shed which simply would not work as drawn. A goods shed is quite a wide building which needs to cover at least the siding and a platform for loading and unloading, as well as road access (which may be outside under an awning). 

 

There is however a workaround if the sidings are placed at the back of the layout, as the goods shed siding could be placed against the backscene with the shed modelled in part relief, road access on the hidden side.

[Harlequin]

1 hour ago, Flying Pig said:

 

I like this - the compromise in the coal yard helps considerably and single slip access to sidings is a signature Midland feature so sits quite happily in the scene. I think the top coal siding is now the only one that needs to be trapped as none of the others impinge on a passenger line.

 

My only but is the goods shed which simply would not work as drawn. A goods shed is quite a wide building which needs to cover at least the siding and a platform for loading and unloading, as well as road access (which may be outside under an awning). 

 

There is however a workaround if the sidings are placed at the back of the layout, as the goods shed siding could be placed against the backscene with the shed modelled in part relief, road access on the hidden side.

The real shed was a tight fit on the site. I will post a map image later when my technology allows.

 

The shed was demolished sometime between 1956 and 1964.

Edited March 1, 2019 by Harlequin

[Guest Kevin_T]

Barnoldswick Goods Shed Images.pdf

 

I have put a few images that are available via internet (copyrights acknowledged) in the attached PDF. One is a pencil sketch which gives a representation. They may or may not help the discussion...

 

 

[Joseph_Pestell]

16 hours ago, Jub45565 said:

 

It is clearer in the Midland Record, but can be seen here. The left hand one diverging more obvious, the right hand one seen if you know it is there...

 

 

Thanks Keith re 10/11 - I've updated my post.

 

Correct Richard - not obvious on the photos on the disused station site, but is in photos in the Midland Records.

 

Those are a bit strange! With only a single blade, it should be on the other rail.

 

The Swanage example I mentioned had blades on both rails.

[Joseph_Pestell]

1 hour ago, Flying Pig said:

 

I like this - the compromise in the coal yard helps considerably and single slip access to sidings is a signature Midland feature so sits quite happily in the scene. I think the top coal siding is now the only one that needs to be trapped as none of the others impinge on a passenger line.

 

My only but is the goods shed which simply would not work as drawn. A goods shed is quite a wide building which needs to cover at least the siding and a platform for loading and unloading, as well as road access (which may be outside under an awning). 

 

There is however a workaround if the sidings are placed at the back of the layout, as the goods shed siding could be placed against the backscene with the shed modelled in part relief, road access on the hidden side.

 

I went for the single slip option as well when planning Barnstoneworth. I take the point about losing a bit of the Barnoldswick character. It was a station built by an independent company and only latterly being taken over by the Midland. So it was atypical.

 

As Harlequin says, it was a very constricted site - ideal for us modellers. Sometimes road access to a goods shed could be across a railway track embedded into granite setts or similar. Or sometimes it was from the end of the shed rather than the side.

 

That said, I think it might look better with one road removed from the goods yard and the goods shed parallel with the runround loop. Still leaves plenty of sidings to shunt. Or one could add another siding with loading dock behind the platform. I like having three places to shunt to on a layout.

Edited March 1, 2019 by Joseph_Pestell
Add

[Joseph_Pestell]

Which part of the coal sidings was it that had the coal drops? They would be better visually at the front of the layout.

[Harlequin]

Could somebody go to old-maps or the nls site, grab an image of the goods yard on the 1909 1:2500 OS map (specifically including the goods shed) and post it here please?

 

I seem to be having terrible trouble uploading things at the moment. It's touch-and-go if this post will even make it...

 

[tractionman]

Here's the 25" from NLS.

 

cheers,

 

Keith

 

 

[Guest Kevin_T]

[Guest Kevin_T]

50 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

Which part of the coal sidings was it that had the coal drops? They would be better visually at the front of the layout.

 

Hi Joseph, the following note is in the Midland Record article by Robin Higgins...

 

The 1892 map shows Skipton Road some distance to the north of the small coal yard across a field. The ground sloped down here, and a considerable embankment was required before the first extension to the yard took place, I believe in 1907. A further extension became necessary, and if the locomotive shed closed in 1902, as recorded by F.H. Clarke, this fits in well with the increase to 33,000 tons in 1913. Presumably at this time the further extension of the yard right up to Skipton Road took place. An undated plan in my possession showing proposed changes to the yard marked in red ink, includes slewing the No. 5 road by 12-18in towards the coal shoots

 

 

[Guest Kevin_T]

33 minutes ago, tractionman said:

Here's the 25" from NLS.

 

cheers,

 

Keith

 

 

 

Here's a 1938 revision from the map held in the National Library of Scotland...

Copyright: Reproduced with the permission of the National Library of Scotland - https://maps.nls.uk/index.html - for non-commercial, educational and private use of map images only

[tractionman]

hi Kevin,

 

The 6-inch OS oversimplifies trackwork compared to the 25", there is an article about this in 'Sheetlines', the magazine of the Charles Close Society if it's of interest, the CCS is worth joining for a modest £15 sub, there're meetings and quite a bit of members' interest in the OS and railways on maps.

 

cheers,

 

Keith

 

 

PS--isn't the NLS site brilliant!!

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2019 by tractionman
typo

[Jub45565]

4 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Those are a bit strange! With only a single blade, it should be on the other rail.

 

The Swanage example I mentioned had blades on both rails.

 

Yes, my guess is that the idea is that there wouldn't be anything propelled towards them, so maybe hoped that rather than specifically throw errant vehicles in the dirt they would just stop at the pinch point?

 

On the topic of goods shed photos, there is one of the goods yard after the shed was demolished, which does help show the place in sat in relation to the (remaining) sidings and loading dock (P47 of the Donald Binns book, just below the photo from which the sketch in the pdf Kevin has shared comes from).

 

I look forward to seeing developments when you get to the stage of a layout topic Kevin!

 

 

[Guest Kevin_T]

2 hours ago, Jub45565 said:

I look forward to seeing developments when you get to the stage of a layout topic Kevin!

 

 

Hi Pete, I look forward to the challenges yet to come...!