Platform and track distances

[Chilly]

The layout is designed and just need help with spacing.

 

What is the minimum gap between 2 tracks to put an island platform in, say a standard sized one not too wide? 

 

If different what is the suggested minimum gap between a back wall (shelf layout) and track for a station and platform to comfortably sit, this presumably will depend on the station depth but again lets say standard station depth (if one exists).

 

Thanks Chilly 

[Harlequin]

Island platform: Minimum 48mm but you can go smaller if you get special dispensation from the BoT.

From platform edge to OO track centre: ~20mm. 21mm is safer and you'll need to have even more spacing where the platforms curve.

 

Single sided platform: Minimum 24mm between the platform edge and any wall or fence.

 

Edited June 9, 2020 by Harlequin

[Chilly]

Thanks Phil.

 

Fortunately all straight platforms but useful information.

 

Chilly

Edited June 9, 2020 by Chilly

[Izzy]

Just in case they are of any help here are the basic structure gauge standards I drew up decades ago. I think they are still mainly current although bridges might be a bit higher for OHLE now.

 

 

 

They are of course the minimum they can/should be and can always be more.

 

Izzy

Edited June 9, 2020 by Izzy

[Chilly]

Thanks Izzy, excellent.

[DCB]

The 3ft platform height is the maximum not minimum.  12mm in OO.    Having platforms too high causes all sorts of clearance problems. as many coaches bulge out above platform height, but watch it, some OO RTR locos are 40mm wide, Hornby 9F etc and GW Halls are their widest 9ft/ 45mm at exactly 3ft above rail level.  As a quick check buffer centre line height is a tad under 14mm, so if the platform is as high as the buffers it's too high.

[Chilly]

Thanks David for the input, at some stage in the future a 9F with a single chimney will find its way on the layout as NYMR have one.

[DCB]

NYMR, my favourite preserved line. Hope they have the gala in September.  Their platforms are a lot lower than 3ft.  I found a pic I took of a Mk1 at Pickering in 2019,

[Chilly]

Yes the NYMR is a great line and a hour drive from me, all the steam loco's and carriages I have are based on what are resident there.

 

The TV program about it that ran for 3 seasons on Channel 5 also gave interesting insights into its workings.

 

https://www.channel5.com/show/the-yorkshire-steam-railway-all-aboard/

 

Thanks for the photo of the platform it will help me on my layout.

 

Chilly

Edited June 10, 2020 by Chilly

[Compound2632]

On 09/06/2020 at 19:44, Izzy said:

Just in case they are of any help here are the basic structure gauge standards I drew up decades ago. I think they are still mainly current although bridges might be a bit higher for OHLE now.

 

 

 

They are of course the minimum they can/should be and can always be more.

 

Izzy

 

Note that this gives 19 mm for track centre to platform edge, which works well enough on the straight. If the platform is on a curve, or near enough the end of a curve for the throw-over to come into play, then the traditional method of marking out is with a sharp pencil held against the centre of your longest coach (for platform on the inside of the curve) or at the extremity of the vehicle with the greatest throw-over (for platform on the outside of the curve). If you are a steam-era modeller, this is likely to be the bogie end a locomotive with a leading or trailing bogie, e.g. a 4-6-0 or 2-6-4T. 

 

Platform heights increased over the years. If you're modelling the modern scene, they'll mostly have been brought up to the 3 ft above rail level standard (officially 915 mm) but it's not so long ago that low platforms were still around. In the early 90s, I used to catch the train to Oxford at Culham - it was quite a climb up into the coach! It can hardly have been 2 ft above rail level. That platform is still there but now fenced off, with passengers using a new platform further along.

[Poor Old Bruce]

The platforms at Loughborough Central, Great Central Railway, and at Cheddleton, Churnet Valley Railway, are both significantly lower than 3ft ARL and both railways provide steps to assist passengers joining or leaving the trains. Both of those platforms would have been 'to specification' when built.

 

 

Many station platforms were built lower than 3ft ARL and some, e.g. Wilnecote just south of Tamworth, stayed that way until fairly recent times (well, within the last 50 years anyway). The platform on my own layout was built to be below buffer beam height so that any overthrow didn't create any problem with fouling.

[melmerby]

On 09/06/2020 at 20:01, DavidCBroad said:

The 3ft platform height is the maximum not minimum.  12mm in OO.    Having platforms too high causes all sorts of clearance problems. as many coaches bulge out above platform height, but watch it, some OO RTR locos are 40mm wide, Hornby 9F etc and GW Halls are their widest 9ft/ 45mm at exactly 3ft above rail level.  As a quick check buffer centre line height is a tad under 14mm, so if the platform is as high as the buffers it's too high.

Which is of course the new RTR standard scale of 5mm/ft

[JST]

I am in the process of building a GWR BLT and have set the platforms as per Harlequin's advice.  Very pleased with the outcome - even with the cross over run around ( Peco medium radius) in the platform a Grange class buffer beam barely brushes the platform edge. The platform is 18 mm high which works out about right.

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, JST said:

I am in the process of building a GWR BLT and have set the platforms as per Harlequin's advice.  Very pleased with the outcome - even with the cross over run around ( Peco medium radius) in the platform a Grange class buffer beam barely brushes the platform edge. The platform is 18 mm high which works out about right.

 

That height is measured from the formation datum, I presume - what is there between the baseboard and the code 75 track?

 

I think you could still have set the platform edge 19 mm from track centre and modelled the recess to clear the engine overthrow as was done in sometimes on the prototype.

[Poor Old Bruce]

The height of Code 75 track is near enough 4mm.

 

At the other extreme of platform heights, that at the Royal Deeside Railway is way above 3ft ARL:

 

 

It's at about coach doorstep height.

[JST]

15 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

That height is measured from the formation datum, I presume - what is there between the baseboard and the code 75 track?

 

I think you could still have set the platform edge 19 mm from track centre and modelled the recess to clear the engine overthrow as was done in sometimes on the prototype.

 

The 18mm is from the baseboard up and the track is code 100. I thought about the recess but I was cutting the platform from pine board and my carpentry skills being what they are I was not sure about getting the recess in the right place! However, I am happy with it as it is. I think that in another thread somewhere, someone posted a picture of Banbury where a great chunk had been cut out of the platform by way of a recess.

[Compound2632]

On 15/06/2020 at 08:47, Poor Old Bruce said:

The height of Code 75 track is near enough 4mm.

 

Which is why I was wondering if @JST had cork or similar underlay, otherwise the platform is at scale 3'6" above rail level.

[JST]

31 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Which is why I was wondering if @JST had cork or similar underlay, otherwise the platform is at scale 3'6" above rail level.

 

I don't use cork underlay - the track is flat on the baseboard. I find underlay deadens the sound too much for my taste. I guess the 16mm chipboard I use for baseboards soaks up some sound anyway.

[DCB]

On 15/06/2020 at 09:40, JST said:

 

The 18mm is from the baseboard up and the track is code 100. I thought about the recess but I was cutting the platform from pine board and my carpentry skills being what they are I was not sure about getting the recess in the right place! However, I am happy with it as it is. I think that in another thread somewhere, someone posted a picture of Banbury where a great chunk had been cut out of the platform by way of a recess.

As code 100 is also very near 4mm high the 18 mm platforms are 14mm / 3ft 6" above rail level quite a lot too high.  The coach sides on MK1s  bulge out to 9ft 3".  There shouldn't be any significant sideways  gap between the coach and a straight platform but you should have to step up into it.  My platforms are too high and it irritates the hell out of me, it would be a huge amount of work to fix at my stage of the game. Even today a huge number of platforms on BR are well below 3ft.  I would go for either 15mm thick platforms or pack the track bed up by 3mm which ever is easier at this stage of the game aiming for 11mm/ 2ft 9" or 11.5mm platform height.

Pic taken 10 years ago or so shows platforms too high at 14mm / 3ft 6". We should have used thin card not 3mm hardboard for the platform surface. 

The Dock is fine at 14mm  3ft6" as its not a passenger platform . Can't raise the track as the station is on a lifting section.  Looks a bit different now with the back siding taken out and some more scenery but the  Up local still waits in the Down platform for the Up Semi fast to pass through most running session.

 

Edited June 17, 2020 by DavidCBroad

[Reorte]

On the lower platforms on heritage lines I guess most were built to whatever the standards the original companies adopted. Over time many platforms have been raised to current standards where possible, although not all; my local station has had one platform raised a few years back (presumably to current standards) but the other hasn't been (although there's a ramped up section - a feature I've seen on a few platforms in recent-ish years but not on a layout). So very much a time and place question.

[Poor Old Bruce]

On 16/06/2020 at 15:17, DavidCBroad said:

As code 100 is also very near 4mm high

 

The Peco Code 100 I have just measured is actually 4.6mm high.

[The Stationmaster]

The height of track is in many respects irrelevant except in totalling the height of a platform from the baseboard top.  The 3ft etc dimension is measured from the rail head (height above rail level - arl).   The 3ft figure dates back to 1902, prior to that  (1892 edition of the Requirements" the minimum height was 'not less than 2ft 6") by 1950 the minimum figure had been increased to 2ft 9".  But it should be noted that these figures applied to new work or substantial rebuilding/alteration schemes.  Also by 1950 it was permissible for the height arl to be greater than 3ft with the agreement of the Railway Inspectorate.

 

Thus older platforms could quite legitimately be no more than 2ft 6" above rail level if they were set at the minimum acceptable height.  And of course plenty of low platforms existed for many years well into the 1960s and some even later.

 

The current standards are 915mm above rail level +0mm/-15mm except for platforms where defined legacy rolling stock will operate where the permissible variations are +0mm/-25mm.    So the former 3ft figure has been increased by a hardly noticeable 0.024 of an inch but the earlier 2ft 9" minimum has now become = 2ft 11".  In many respects modern construction station platforms are not an ideal guide to those of the steam/early diesel age.  The past 12" overhang required for the distance between the edge of the platform coping stone and the platform wall is now 300mm but is  increased to 400mm on lines where freight trains and 3rd rail electric trains operate - so basically very little changed from the old standard (which first appeared in the 1902 edition of the Requirements. 

[Compound2632]

5 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

The height of track is in many respects irrelevant except in totalling the height of a platform from the baseboard top.  

 

That was the point of my question which started the height-of-track discussion - poster had given the height of his platform as 18 mm above baseboard top; my concern was that unless there was some underlay, the height above rail level would be too great, which turned out to be the case.

 

5 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

The past 12" overhang required for the distance between the edge of the platform coping stone and the platform wall is now 300mm but is  increased to 400mm on lines where freight trains and 3rd rail electric trains operate - so basically very little changed from the old standard (which first appeared in the 1902 edition of the Requirements. 

 

There were - I suppose must still be - a great many places where the platform edge is flush with the platform wall, that being the normal construction in the earlies. When did the 12" overhang become a requirement for new works? Even where 19th century platforms have some overhang, I don't think it ever got to be quite that much.

[The Stationmaster]

24 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

That was the point of my question which started the height-of-track discussion - poster had given the height of his platform as 18 mm above baseboard top; my concern was that unless there was some underlay, the height above rail level would be too great, which turned out to be the case.

 

 

There were - I suppose must still be - a great many places where the platform edge is flush with the platform wall, that being the normal construction in the earlies. When did the 12" overhang become a requirement for new works? Even where 19th century platforms have some overhang, I don't think it ever got to be quite that much.

It first appeared in the requirements in 1902 as I said above) but might well have been brought in at any tin me between the 1892 edition and the 1902 revision.   Because corbelling was very much the way of constructing brick platform sidewalls the 12" wasn't so obvious as it would be above several courses of corbelled brickwork.  The distance applied in respect of the coping stone outer edge in relation to the platform structure face at track level.

 

It was very easy to find older non-compliant pklatforms in past years because many predated the 1902 change and some of those no doubt still exist.

[Multigauge]

From memory South Croydon platform 4 is incredibly low. 

Not national rail, but I seem to remember some of the London Underground platforms on the surface sections heading out on the Piccadilly being all over the shop; some of them you used to fall in to the train and climb out.