Branch Line - Wrong Line Working

[Joseph_Pestell]

1 hour ago, Alan Kettlewell said:

 

Yes space is a bit tight and I'm adapting this plan from the previous layout I once owned which was also 3ft wide - but I've put an extra through track in to provide a more busy scene!  I'm currently trying to squeeze in a run around loop for the bay - it's proving difficult because the bay ends up too short with the extra turnouts taking up space.  If I can, I would prefer to fit in a bay platform as I quite like that feature - so I'll keep trying.

 

I struggle to find station layout plans so a pointer to a good site would be of help.  Many thanks.

 

Cheers ... Alan

 

 

 

I think that the answer here is to have the bay but departure only, shunting across from the Down Platform line. Many examples of this across the UK rail network.

 

Apart from OS maps, either the NLS site or old-maps.co.uk, GW stations are well covered by a series of OPC books. Many had platform loops and could have had branches with bays. E.g. Shrivenham.

[Alan Kettlewell]

Well, thanks again for all the valuable input.  For interest, here's the first draft, warts and all.  O gauge is a squeeze...

 

Some notes:

At this time it's only a feasibility study to see what O gauge might fit in my shed - shed interior dimensions 31.5ft x 13.5ft.

Period: late 1950s early 60s, probably somewhere in the midlands maybe ex LMS or LNER - LNER more likely as there's more stock available

In the main station is a centre road to be signalled for bi-directional running (through goods or non stopping passenger trains) 

I decided to fit in the third line for the branch traffic - it was the easiest option after all.

I couldn't find space for a run around in the bay platform so branch trains will need to run around in the main station.

OR I can run push pulls on the branch line. 

The red markers on the plan indicate a single slip.

The loco and goods yard areas are not developed yet.

The branch line descends to a wharf area about 6 inches lower.  From there it continues round under the right hand end and round into a branch terminus.  The idea would give a nice long run for the branch trains.  Very likely that part would be a future development. 

My layouts have to be roundy roundies - sorry shunters I'm not keen on end to end or shunting.

It would be computer controlled with RR&Co Train Controller and I'd seek to automate shunting activities where possible (that could be fun!) 

There'd be a river somewhere - haven't decided on that yet.

I may leave the storage loops open and make them part of the scenery rather than hiding them away - open to opinion on that.

The shed doorway is off to the left where a lift up flap would be situated - I don't do duck unders these days. 

Finally - It might neve happen!

 

Cheers … Alan

 

[Compound2632]

An operational question: assuming it's not a "motor train" (in LMS-speak), would the up branch train actually be likely to run into the bay, trapping the engine? Wouldn't a more likely sequence be to arrive at the up platform, run round, then cross to the down and set back into the bay, to simmer gently awaiting departure? This would avoid a facing connection into the bay, so the only facing points in the layout would be at the (double) junction. From a model point of view, more interesting operation anyway.

 

I'm not sure you'd want the access to the loco etc. to be by setting back from the bay - especially if that's occupied for lengthy periods by the branch train.

[Alan Kettlewell]

15 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

An operational question: assuming it's not a "motor train" (in LMS-speak), would the up branch train actually be likely to run into the bay, trapping the engine? Wouldn't a more likely sequence be to arrive at the up platform, run round, then cross to the down and set back into the bay, to simmer gently awaiting departure? This would avoid a facing connection into the bay, so the only facing points in the layout would be at the (double) junction. From a model point of view, more interesting operation anyway.

 

I'm not sure you'd want the access to the loco etc. to be by setting back from the bay - especially if that's occupied for lengthy periods by the branch train.

 

Hello,

 

Yes that makes sense and as you say, more interesting to operate, thank you. 

Many thanks for all the contributions, I've learned a fair bit more about prototypical track layout, and a lot more about Tempot!   

 

I've made further amendments as per the screenshot below.

 

There are now no facing points on main lines except into platforms.

The plan now facilitates up branch trains arriving at the up platform via a crossover.

A trailing single slip is provided to allow down goods to set back into the goods yard.

The station throat pointwork is now not so spread out, ie more condensed near the station.

A single slip is provided at the entrance to the bay platform to allow access to the loco yard and head shunt. 

 

So, has this finally become a prototypical layout?  Cheers … Alan

 

 

 

Edited March 29, 2019 by Alan Kettlewell

[Joseph_Pestell]

To be honest, I rather hope this does not happen. I want to see the current HO layout completed and running for a while.

 

But if you do go for this, I think it would be rather better to model just half the junction station rather than have tightly curved platforms visible which is very "train set".

[Alan Kettlewell]

1 minute ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

To be honest, I rather hope this does not happen. I want to see the current HO layout completed and running for a while.

 

But if you do go for this, I think it would be rather better to model just half the junction station rather than have tightly curved platforms visible which is very "train set".

 

Hi,

 

It very well might not happen.  I agree, modelling half the station would look better, but then it would become an end to end - not my cup of tea I'm afraid.  I need a bigger shed, or escape out into the garden ...hmmm...

 

I've become a bit unenthused with my current HO layout as there are some errors I've made which has made some parts of the massive scenery become difficult to reach (how many times have I been down that road?)    Also it's a very ambitious project and every job seems so massive leading me to think I'll never get anywhere with it - I've also been down that road before - I never learn.  A problem now is the usual maintenance issue with big layouts - one can't get on because the work done earlier requires constant maintenance.  

 

However, this is by no means a done deal.  I'm back at the start when the shed was first built, as the original plan was to build an O gauge layout in it but I couldn't come up with a plan that fits my needs and fits in the shed.  Always a compromise eh?  Now where did I put that mojo?

 

Cheers … Alan

 

 

[Joseph_Pestell]

8 minutes ago, Alan Kettlewell said:

 

Hi,

 

It very well might not happen.  I agree, modelling half the station would look better, but then it would become an end to end - not my cup of tea I'm afraid.  I need a bigger shed, or escape out into the garden ...hmmm...

 

I've become a bit unenthused with my current HO layout as there are some errors I've made which has made some parts of the massive scenery become difficult to reach (how many times have I been down that road?)    Also it's a very ambitious project and every job seems so massive leading me to think I'll never get anywhere with it - I've also been down that road before - I never learn.  A problem now is the usual maintenance issue with big layouts - one can't get on because the work done earlier requires constant maintenance.  

 

However, this is by no means a done deal.  I'm back at the start when the shed was first built, as the original plan was to build an O gauge layout in it but I couldn't come up with a plan that fits my needs and fits in the shed.  Always a compromise eh?  Now where did I put that mojo?

 

Cheers … Alan

 

 

 

No, it would not become an end to end. The trackplan would still be the same but the curves at the right hand end would not be scenic. They would be hidden below a station building on a road overbridge (e.g. Bolton).

 

Having the return curves out in the garden is definitely worth exploring if you have the space. It frees up a lot of room indoors for the station, goods yard, branch line etc.

 

Not sure what era you are looking at but the GW/GC Jt could be worth a look. Looped platforms and, in BR days, both LNE and LMS loco types as well as the omnipresent (in O) GW.

Edited March 29, 2019 by Joseph_Pestell
Add

[Alan Kettlewell]

Ah yes, see what you mean and have in fact built a similar layout (OO) where one end of the station is visible - the other end running into storage loops off scene.  I may tinker with that and see how a set of storage loops round one end might work, one negative aspect of that is that curved points take up a lot more space than straight ones.

 

I've often thought of extending into the garden, But the garden is only 40 yards long ...lol.  More work eg hard labour to do though and issues around weather especially up here in the north.  But worthy of thought nevertheless.  In the photo, shot into the bright morning sunlight,  you can make out the roof of my railway shed reflecting the sunlight, just beyond the trees.  I regret taking that picture now as it's revealed how much work I have to do out there! 

 

 

Cheers … Alan

 

 

   

[Alan Kettlewell]

A quick tinker with the plan and a measure up outside the shed shows that, with a little civil engineering, running loops outside would indeed work.  Although I'd lose sight of trains running whilst on the outside loops (which is what floats my boat), as Joseph said, the station would look much better without the tight curves.  There would also be more space inside the shed for other features - or maybe a proper workbench against that wall.

 

There's about 6.5ft of space available at that end of the shed before the garden wall, so I may need to 'flatten' the loops a bit, or start the curves inside the shed.  Eminently workable though.

 

Anyway, this is now becoming a little inappropriate for this particular section of the forum but thanks again for all your contributions.

 

Cheers … Alan

 

 

[DCB]

Getting there. 

The goods sidings  are really awkward to shunt, the train would have to have the wagons sorted so the ones at the front were for this station. Not very likely so both main lines would need to be occupied by shunting moves.  The connection should be a trailing connection so any wagons in the train can access the sidings. That head shunt is effectively useless unless it continues beyond the platform to form a lie bye if the existing facing connection is retained.. 

The centre road between platforms is a waste of space, literally. They were generally sidings, somewhere the station pilot/ Banker could lurk, thinking Torquay/ Torre here, A bi directional centre road was just about unheard of as the signalling would be horribly complicated.      Cheltenham Lansdown LMS had doubke track, a couple of trailing  crossovers and a bay and terminated half a dozen trains per day and originated a similar number while serving 100 or so main line services as well.   The loco and a few coaches lurked in the bay and picked up through coaches from the main platform and started from the main platform. Arrivals used the main platform and terminated in carriage sidings beyond the station.

[Alan Kettlewell]

Hi,

 

The goods yard is actually accessed  from a trailing connection.  What you are seeing, if you're looking at the latest screenshot, is a quickly cobbled together adaptation of the earlier curved plan, done just to see how straightening out the station and running loops outside the shed would work.  The goods yard connection is trailing from a goods line loop through the station, I omitted to put back in the headshunt so apologies if this lead you to think you are looking at a headshunt leading off under the town scene.   You'll see it how it was in the earlier screenshots.

 

I take the point about a bi-directional centre line - all I can say is, in my lack of knowledge about prototypical layouts,  it seemed a good idea at the time.  Now that the plan has been straightened out it will be easy to change this as I'd need to do some smart thinking about how I arrange the hidden end of the station under the town scene.

 

Thanks for your comments.

 

Cheers... Alan

 

[The Stationmaster]

23 hours ago, Alan Kettlewell said:

Hi,

 

The goods yard is actually accessed  from a trailing connection.  What you are seeing, if you're looking at the latest screenshot, is a quickly cobbled together adaptation of the earlier curved plan, done just to see how straightening out the station and running loops outside the shed would work.  The goods yard connection is trailing from a goods line loop through the station, I omitted to put back in the headshunt so apologies if this lead you to think you are looking at a headshunt leading off under the town scene.   You'll see it how it was in the earlier screenshots.

 

I take the point about a bi-directional centre line - all I can say is, in my lack of knowledge about prototypical layouts,  it seemed a good idea at the time.  Now that the plan has been straightened out it will be easy to change this as I'd need to do some smart thinking about how I arrange the hidden end of the station under the town scene.

 

Thanks for your comments.

 

Cheers... Alan

 

The GWR was very fond of centre lines at medium sized stations but they were basically sidings with a trailing connection into the relevant running line at each end.  I think they j have now all gone with Reading's siding being the last to go.

[Tankerman]

Quote

The formation that you show looks just like Truro. It would be worth you looking at the movements there to get an idea. 

 

On the subject of Truro, I knew it well having done most of my spotting there from the age of 10, without my parents knowledge until I was 12, they thought I was at Penryn, the local station.

 

The method of operation before the 1971 alterations is not obvious from the track plan. Platform 2 was the down main and Platform 4 the up main. Trains for Falmouth departed from either Platform 1, the bay, or from platform 3. The trains from Falmouth arrived at Platform 3, which also dealt with both  the arrival and departure of the trains to Newquay via Chacewater.

 

The method of operation was as follows. When a Falmouth or Newquay train arrived at Platform 3 the locomotive would uncouple and run forward until it cleared the double junction to the up and down goods lines. Then it would reverse over the trailing crossover to Platform 2, go along the down main until it cleared the exit from the bay, Platform 1, then reverse over the trailing crossover to Platform 3 and couple up to the carriages it had brought in. 

 

If it was a Falmouth train what happened next depended on whether or not a Newquay train was expected. If no Newquay train, the up milk train or the up Postal were due, the Falmouth train departed from Platform 3. However if any of these were arriving before the departure of the Falmouth train it went forward over the crossover to the down main and moved forward until the last carriage cleared the exit from Platform 1 and reversed into Platform ! to clear the down main before the next down train.

 

Apologies if this has been a bit wordy, I think reading this while looking at the signal diagrams of the Truro boxes on the SRS site will make it more understandable.

 

 

[Alan Kettlewell]

Hello again,

 

Prototypical Operation  

 

I've continued to develop this plan having taken on board the advice offered - thanks again to those who contributed.  I appreciate this is about a model so arguably it's in the wrong forum, but I am seeking advice about prototypical operation.  If I was to proceed with this project I would want it to operate prototypically and be signalled correctly.

 

Below is my latest plan which is designed in Templot and for better visibility of the track layout I've removed the sleepers and timbering.  I've overlaid it with buildings, platforms, baseboard edges and other bits and bobs using PowerPoint.

 

The following features and changes to earlier plans are incorporated:

1.  It's O gauge (OMF) and the internal space available is 31.5 x 13.5ft.  

2.  To avoid the station being on unrealistically sharp curves, I've extended the right hand end return loops to run outside of the shed. 

3.  The previous arrangement was too narrow to form a good enough station for my liking.  My maximum reach is 3ft so to allow access from both sides I've joggled the baseboards away from the wall.  This allows a good space now for the station area and facilities and I've been able to increase that width to 4.5ft.  Much better methinks.

4.  Branch Line.  To save a little space, I decided to have the branch trains occupy main lines for a short distance.  I've made a double junction with the main line using a diamond crossing on the curve which avoids wrong line working by the branch trains.   Like at Truro except more compressed.  (Assume the junction about a mile way).

5.  As per suggestions and information about Truro, the up branch train will arrive at platform 3.  The loco will run round via the trailing crossover and then draw the train forward crossing over to the downline and then setting back into the bay.  Hence the bay platform will be for departures only.  

6.  Up goods trains would usually use platform 4, a short stub along the factory line has been provided to hold detached brake vans or a station pilot, or both.

7.  A further line is provided adjacent to the bay line for holding brake vans and temporary holding of goods during shunting in the goods yard.

8.  The branch line descends to a terminus station - this is yet to be developed as I haven't thought about that much just yet as I wanted to focus on getting the main station right at this stage.

9.  A small wharf is to be incorporated at the opposite end to the branch terminus.  The branch station could very well be used by wharf employees.

 

That's about enough words I reckon, the rest should be clear from the pictures.  If I do this it may well be my ultimate layout so I'd like to get it right hence the reason I'm asking for advice from you experts on here about prototypical operation - I'm not an expert and shamefully admit I've never built a layout for proper operations in all my 40 odd years of modelling! 

 

Thanks in advance - be gentle with me …

 

The full thing:

 

Station area layout:

            

Close up of the branch junction:

 

Apologies that last picture is a bit blurred - or is it just my eyes?  Too much screen time..

 

Cheers … Alan

 

Edited April 3, 2019 by Alan Kettlewell