Minories with reversing loop/continuous run

[TomJ]

The more I read and think about it the more I fancy an cramped urban terminus based on Minories, using my 50s/60s WR stock. I’ve been thinking about the fiddle yard and would prefer to avoid handling stock wherever possible

 

So in N gauge this was my first thought

A simple reversing loop with some turn back sidings for units or auto trains. But this takes up a lot of non scenic space, which got me thinking about alternatives, including a continuous run. This of course allows me to run different stock, including freight. Juggling the furniture around in my box bedroom I can squeeze either 8ft x 3ft or 9ft x 2ft 6. Both have been mocked up with templates and left over track pieces, just don’t have access to track planning software right now

 

This was my first idea - based on the premise of Birmingham Moor Street, 8x3, a small terminus for local trains alongside the mainlines. Should keep all curved to second radius, and wider on the visible sections. A reversing loop allows trains to return to the terminus without running round

 

 

However I wasn’t sure how prototypical this was, aside from Moor Street, so in 9 x 2,6 this was the alternative, putting the station above the layout. Gradients work out at 1in50 and I ‘think’ most of my locos will cope with this

 

Not sure which of these two will look best. Both will be set in an city location, so can disguise exits etc with bridges, tunnels and retaining walls. Both should allow through trains on the continuous run of loco + 8, and trains of loco + 5 in the station

 

Thoughts please?

 

Thanks

[H2O]

I think the various Peco plans books had a variety of layout designs for terminus with reversing loop and continuous run, mostly multi-level if memory serves me right. IIRC sizes (OO) ranged from a squeeze at 6x4 to 10x5 ish so your space should be ample. CJ Freezer got it mostly right for the balance of operability, practicality and seem 'prototypical' for the steam / diesel era so I don't think you will go far wrong with basing your layout on one of those designs.

[ITG]

The lower design is very similar to my soon-to-be-started layout, albeit you won’t be as tight for space as I will, as I am in 00 in 11’6” x 6’6”. My terminus is not based on the Minories template, and will, to many, seem over busy but I want it to feel that way. Mine is just a single track to the station, and I’m still toying with making the circular track just single as well. But the basic premise of being able to enjoy trains circling, ability to reverse whole trains and multiple shunting operations all appeals, and is where it seems there is similarity in our intentions. I too am aiming for a 1:50 gradient but it needs to virtually circle the whole room to attain the necessary clearance. I plan to have the upper level 150mm (virtually 6”) board above the lower. My upper board will be framed with 1” aluminium tubing framework so as to try to find the right balance between strength and low profile, because the incline has to start below the upper station board.

 

one key difference is that I plan to have my fiddle yard on the opposite wall to the station, so it isn’t actually obstructed by the upper board, although maybe you have access all round. My layout is basically 2’ wide boards surrounding a central well. I’ve called it a fiddle yard, but as I don’t plan on doing much fiddling, it’s per phase more of a staging yard to hold trains off scene.

My reverse loop will span and bisect the Operating well, on a removable girder bridge, so as to allow easier access whilst building the layout.

[melmoth]

So:

 

8' x 3' or 9' x 2'6"

Double track continuous run, plus reverse loop and fiddle yard

Branch line to terminus

Minimum 12" radius curves

1:50 incline if needed

5/8 coach trains as appropriate

Minimum handling of stock

 

I think you might need to compromise slightly somewhere. For a start, a 63' coach in N = 126mm = 5 inches. So a train length of 40" excluding locomotive, which probably means a minimum clearable length for a fiddle yard road of 45" to be comfortable. You need (to be on the safe side) 14" at each end of the board for the continuous run assuming double track and second radius curves on the inside. You also need to allow for three sets of point work off the continuous run: the junction to the branch, the return loop, and the fiddle yard.

 

If the return loop only needs to be single track, you could start it on a curve, but the end would need to be on a straight unless you want to build a curved crossover. The crossover at the end of the return loop would take 10" (or thereabouts) out of the inner straight of the continuous run.

 

With a basic fiddle yard of one track either side of the continuous run, you might need to allow 8" (again, rough estimate) for each point and approach, unless you can begin/end on a curve -or use a traverser. I am rather assuming that the fiddle yard would occupy one long side of the board. 

 

I make that about 8' 3" overall before putting in the junction to the branch, which again I'll assume is double track. Therefore, I reckon 9' x 2'6" gives you better options than 9' x 3'.  However, this is all pretty much off the top of my head without double-checking any figures and I may have missed something obvious. One thing I do think would work would be to site the terminus above the fiddle yard for ease of operation, as well as arguably best use of space.

Edited May 25, 2020 by melmoth
1st edit: Afterthought added in bold type. 2nd edit: Radius figures corrected

[Joseph_Pestell]

A good few years ago, I designed something very similar with a terminus at the higher level leading to a continuous run at the lower level with fiddleyard. I don't remember the exact dimensions but it was certainly close to what you are doing. So I think you will find that it works fine.

 

If the continuous run is not essential to you, there is an interesting alternative based on Southport or Brighton where you have a terminal station split in two and trains can either run end-to-end between the two parts of the station or terminus to fiddleyard (2 fiddleyards behind the backscene). It makes it more interesting to have one platform accessible from both routes which needs to be equipped with change of polarity as it creates a return loop. 

[t-b-g]

The late Sid Stubbs built his Northchurch layout to a similar design as the last plan but the terminus was along the edge, above where the fiddle yard is drawn and it was a mirror image in that the buffers were at the RH side. It seems to work well as a concept, my only concern would be if you can reach the parts you need to be able to get to for comfortable easy operating.

[Zomboid]

I like the Moor St idea best myself. I think Holborn Viaduct was similar in that the adjacent lines through to Farringdon didn't have platforms, though I don't think they were passenger lines either. (Would I be right in thinking that both tunnels were called Snow Hill, too?). Having a suburban terminus adjacent to some through lines without platforms seems entirely plausible to me. Whether those are the fast lines to somewhere beyond or freight lines, either would be credible enough for me.

 

It's also not unlike Weymouth, though the quay branch wasn't heavily trafficked...

[melmoth]

Here's a quick sketch in Anyrail to see how it might fit. 8'x3' might work better for this, despite what I first thought. Even allowing for the width saved by using Streamline points, it's hard to fit the branch outside the continuous run in 9'x2'6". If the branch goes inside the continuous run, it will foul the return loop. Even outside, the incline looks like it might need to be a bit tougher than 1:50 - it needs to climb at least an inch, plus the depth of the baseboard to get over the continuous run.

 

Fiddle yard thought: you could also put a line either side of the return loop.

[TomJ]

Thanks for everyone’s comments. I should have added a few more details. I was looking at using 2 and 3 radius curves for the continuous run and so allowing for the setrack curved points to make a cross over. The ‘fiddle yard’ is just a couple of loops off the main track to store an extra train or two and I don’t plan for any handling of stock there at all. And the return loop is single track. - so using the curved cross over. 
My thinking regarding operation was that trains would leave the terminus, do as many laps round as I want before returning. Whilst shunting in the terminus I could run one of the trains stored in the fiddle yard round and round. The whole thing is DCC.

 

happy to compromise to 6 or 7 coaches so if using the terminus over fiddle yard plan I can put the curved outside and get a bit more length for the gradients. 
 

Thanks again 

[Joseph_Pestell]

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

I like the Moor St idea best myself. I think Holborn Viaduct was similar in that the adjacent lines through to Farringdon didn't have platforms, though I don't think they were passenger lines either. (Would I be right in thinking that both tunnels were called Snow Hill, too?). Having a suburban terminus adjacent to some through lines without platforms seems entirely plausible to me. Whether those are the fast lines to somewhere beyond or freight lines, either would be credible enough for me.

 

It's also not unlike Weymouth, though the quay branch wasn't heavily trafficked...

 

Holborn Viaduct had low level platforms with a seperate station entrance on Snow Hill. Passenger service ceased more than one hundred years ago, 1916.

[TomJ]

I was inspired by this great N gauge layout - and planned to stretch it a bit

 

 

 

In a space of just 4x2ft he’s made a very impressive layout and it got me thinking about something similar

[melmoth]

Hi @TomJ , despite double checking and correcting myself (wrongly), I still managed to get the radii on the continuous run wrong - I used 3rd & 4th radius curves. Using 2nd & 3rd radius, with curved Setrack points for crossovers makes it fit ok into 9' x 2'6".

[Siberian Snooper]

You could possibly add another siding or two on the return loop, if you need a bit more storeage.

 

 

[TomJ]

That’s a good idea - could use it for auto trains or DMUs that don’t need to run round. Or to hold another train then swap them round 

 

looking at the plan above I wonder if the reversing line could actually come off the fiddle yard loop - so giving one longer loop?

 

thanks again everyone 

[melmoth]

A final go at this, should be mostly self-explanatory. At point X, the branch will be almost 2 inches above the continuous run assuming it climbs at 1:50 from the junction.

[TomJ]

That is simply amazing. Thank you so much. I was sure it would fit somehow but couldn’t work it all out. I like the fact that it’s no longer straight track at the front, and 3rd/4th radius curves in the visible areas

[Zomboid]

You've got the space to have the diagonal line double track if you want, which might be preferable if it's taking main line trains.

 

I don't think the crossover then facing point arrangement is especially steam era, even if the line is singled then I'd expect to see a double junction into a single line in most cases.

[melmoth]

Cheers @TomJ , much appreciated. I haven't checked (and my guesswork has been a bit ropey so far), but you've probably got space for 8 coach trains in the terminus as well.

 

@Zomboid I agree about the crossover. With a bit more fine tuning it could be replaced with a chord (from anti-clockwise main line to return loop) and a diamond crossing (return loop to clockwise), which would give the same result.   This would also allow wider radius curves where the visible curved crossing currently is. Again, yes, you could have the return loop as double track, also with a bit of alteration. One thing that would need though, as things stand, is a crossing in the hidden area to access the storage sidings, which I wouldn't necessarily be keen on.

[TomJ]

I wasn’t sure about the junction for the reversing loop either. I did wonder that if trains only ran on way round it (from the anti clockwise) circuit then it could still serve its purpose of turning trains but avoid the need for that crossover. No idea how prototypical that might be?

[Zomboid]

I'd maybe single the loop inside the hidden area to keep stuff as simple as possible in there, but still showing double track in the scenic bit.

[melmoth]

43 minutes ago, TomJ said:

I wasn’t sure about the junction for the reversing loop either. I did wonder that if trains only ran on way round it (from the anti clockwise) circuit then it could still serve its purpose of turning trains but avoid the need for that crossover. No idea how prototypical that might be?

 

If you keep crossovers at both ends, you can run either way over the return loop depending on which end you come off the anticlockwise run. Which could be a good reason to double track the loop either in full or part.

[Zomboid]

I'd do one of these two arrangements. Probably the lower one, but I don't know if slips are available in N or if they're reliable.

 

It's not a crossover coming out of the left hand tunnel mouth, that's shoddy drawing. Just two parallel tracks at that point.

Obviously ignore the number of sidings etc, it's just diagrammatic.

Edited May 26, 2020 by Zomboid

[melmoth]

Personally, I'd probably go for the first of those and keep the crossover on the hidden curve. The only change I'd make would be to run any additional hidden sidings off the first one, rather than having a ladder of points on the running line.

 

There are slips available in N from Peco; they seem to be reliable enough in my limited experience of them. I'd be more concerned about using up space in the second diagram as a result of moving the crossover off the curve - but I've not tried it out.

[Chris116]

You could reduce the climb on the branch if you made the mainline go down from the junction and then climb back through the fiddle yard. I know that makes the woodwork more difficult but I think one or two CJ Freezer plans used the idea.

[Pacific231G]

It might be worth having a look at the 14ft x 6ft (in 00) layout that's no 24L in my first edition of Plans for larger layouts. It's  saucepan shaped layout with the terminus forming the handle so plenty of depth but operable from right in front of the terminus. It was used pretty well straight out of the book by two Railways of the Month, "Stephenton", in April 1959 and 'Borchester' in August 1963

https://archive.org/details/RailwayModellerAugust1963/page/n11/mode/2up

With that success I could never understand why Freezer dropped the plan in the second edition as it was one of his minor classics. Stephenton followed the plan pretty exactly apart giving the scenery a more urban feel and it looked terrific with some very intereresting railway scenes with trains in smoky cuttings and emerging from tunnels. It looks like a busy double track main line though it is actually a single track terminus to reverse loop and continuous run. It would be fairly easy to adapt it to make the terminus genuinely double track though I had to look twice to realise that it wasn't.  If you want to see Stephenton I can easily scan and PM it but can't post it here as it's still copyright.