Jump to content

Plank terminus layout, Bradford inspired


Recommended Posts

So here we are, yet another terminus on a plank to run DMUs and loco hauled passenger services.

I have room for a 1600mm scenic plank and the fiddle yard will be a separate project if more space opens up.  For now, the plank runs straight into a balloon style reversing loop, not shown.

Obviously its N gauge at that size.  I started with a basic minories effort but after a few iterations its morphed closer to a terminus I know well, Bradford Interchange, or Bradford Exchange as it was known before late 1983

Bradford's actual throat is incredibly long and narrow so there's been some judicious shortening of the approach work so I'd say "inspired by" rather than "based on".  Particularly as I have also omitted the top carriage siding where the 03 pilot resides in almost every photo of the era.

 

 

 

I've designed it so services can arrive at either P1 or P2 as services leave from P3 or P4 for some dual running interest

Diesel hauled services can be runaround on P1 or loco swapped on P2/3/4

There's enough room on P2 for a 2+5 HST formation, which will also fit in the warhead of the reversing loop

P3/4 mainly for 101/108 2-4 car sets

Some parcels traffic and the occasional scrap steel rake being run around per prototype

100% automation is the objective, including runarounds and loco swap.

The two boards making up the 1600mm will be permanently joined so ignore the wierd concept of points over the join.

 

Theres space for some additional sidings/refuelling or whatever top right, but I'm not to worried about that presently.  Similarly platform shape is rough for now and although I haven't included the catch/traps theyll be there on he runaround and siding

 

So after probably 12 iterations, I thought it would be interesting to open up the layout on here for some sharp criticism, have at it.  What have I got wrong, missed, failed to see an improvement etc?  First post on here, no need to be gentle.

 

Finally I'm aware there's another current BDI layout asking for critique but I've created a separate thread as I have a lot more pointwork planned :unsure: for the approaches.  If thats inappropriate I'm happy for a mod to move the post into the other one as a variant.

 

 

 

l1.JPG.9b0490bb5bdd9b5b64b9651fb97379e3.JPG

l2.JPG.dc5b592dd66b9300d599e0126a2f0077.JPG

l3.JPG.7ef75079ef2f1ffd3dccbb90fa4533b2.JPG

 

 

l4.JPG.ae32d345ae09a3ce50a3414a812d021a.JPG

Edited by eventide01
Edited to add trainplayer still shot
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, eventide01 said:

Bradford's actual throat is incredibly long and narrow

 

The current throat is indeed very long but the 1988 Quail map shows a somewhat simpler setup that might be an easier basis for a model.  Presumably the layout was altered at some point between then and now, possibly to give more flexibility as the 1988 version is typically austere 1960s-70s BR.  I'm not quite sure which version your plan is based on but in case it helps, I've attached a sketch of the earlier layout.

 

[Edit - corrected diagram]

 

BradfordIntchg1988-2.jpg.d1a8987b08c41643a318f5632abc2cba.jpg

 

Edited by Flying Pig
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I think that's pretty much all there in terms of connections, thank you.  I drew the whole thing up to mill lane jct off ony 1977-1985 imagery (there was a sleek rebuild in 2008 which cleaned out the steam era crossovers) and that's what forced me to start applying artistic licence.  I know I've made a lot of concessions to get my money shot which is the simultaneous arrival/departure in my last image above

 

The 1980 era layout I rustled up is below which closely resembles your map. Blue box is a 5m plank, so say 3.5m in N to get it done authentically, which is a lot.

 

l5.JPG.ffadf485581f6da811f925cd00ebed72.JPG

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, eventide01 said:

The 1980 era layout I rustled up is below which closely resembles your map. Blue box is a 5m plank, so say 3.5m in N to get it done authentically, which is a lot.

 

Well that shows how the stylisation of a Quail diagram can bamboozle the unwary!  I uploaded the attached (basically identical to your 1980 plan) dated June 2011, presumably by tracing over Google maps or similar - I can't remember now.  When I came to check it against the Quail plan today, it looked so different to me that I assumed they were actually different layouts and it's taken me some puzzling to see that they are in fact almost the same thing.  However it does seem that the Quail diagram has missed out a facing connection from the down line to platform 4 and I've corrected my sketch accordingly (new crossover marked with *).

 

I have an N gauge version that I drew at about the same time, but as you say, there's no way it's going into 1600mm without major compression.

 

 

post-6813-0-24836600-1307748308_thumb.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/07/2020 at 12:37, eventide01 said:

So here we are, yet another terminus on a plank to run DMUs and loco hauled passenger services.

I have room for a 1600mm scenic plank and the fiddle yard will be a separate project if more space opens up.  For now, the plank runs straight into a balloon style reversing loop, not shown.

Obviously its N gauge at that size.  I started with a basic minories effort but after a few iterations its morphed closer to a terminus I know well, Bradford Interchange, or Bradford Exchange as it was known before late 1983

Bradford's actual throat is incredibly long and narrow so there's been some judicious shortening of the approach work so I'd say "inspired by" rather than "based on".  Particularly as I have also omitted the top carriage siding where the 03 pilot resides in almost every photo of the era.

 

 

 

I've designed it so services can arrive at either P1 or P2 as services leave from P3 or P4 for some dual running interest

Diesel hauled services can be runaround on P1 or loco swapped on P2/3/4

There's enough room on P2 for a 2+5 HST formation, which will also fit in the warhead of the reversing loop

P3/4 mainly for 101/108 2-4 car sets

Some parcels traffic and the occasional scrap steel rake being run around per prototype

100% automation is the objective, including runarounds and loco swap.

The two boards making up the 1600mm will be permanently joined so ignore the wierd concept of points over the join.

 

Theres space for some additional sidings/refuelling or whatever top right, but I'm not to worried about that presently.  Similarly platform shape is rough for now and although I haven't included the catch/traps theyll be there on he runaround and siding

 

So after probably 12 iterations, I thought it would be interesting to open up the layout on here for some sharp criticism, have at it.  What have I got wrong, missed, failed to see an improvement etc?  First post on here, no need to be gentle.

 

Finally I'm aware there's another current BDI layout asking for critique but I've created a separate thread as I have a lot more pointwork planned :unsure: for the approaches.  If thats inappropriate I'm happy for a mod to move the post into the other one as a variant.

 

 

 

l1.JPG.9b0490bb5bdd9b5b64b9651fb97379e3.JPG

l2.JPG.dc5b592dd66b9300d599e0126a2f0077.JPG

l3.JPG.7ef75079ef2f1ffd3dccbb90fa4533b2.JPG

 

 

l4.JPG.ae32d345ae09a3ce50a3414a812d021a.JPG

 

I like it. My first thought was that the facing access to the run-round loop lacked access to the departing line so seemed a bit useless if anything accidentally arrived in it, however it does make sense if it's used to stable locomotives ready to remove coaches from arrivals in P2/3/4. That would get in the way of P1 run-rounds though, so if you add a siding off the loop alongside the buffer end of P1 (turn the release point into a release crossover) it would make a refuge if required.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

I really wouldn't recommend sawing through points!  If you want those two sizes of board I would put the 700 to the left.  It's difficult to see since I think your squares are feet bt dimensions in mm?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

By the way, haven't you got access in and out to ALL platforms - those single slips seem to do the trick?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, imt said:

By the way, haven't you got access in and out to ALL platforms - those single slips seem to do the trick?


Yes that’s the plan and though it’s a lot of point motor locating in a small space I hope it works without any serious reverse curves - the 3D representations look ok to me.  Using a pair of single slips we permit a simultaneous departure from 3/4 with an arrival at 1/2, although an arrival at 3/4 or a departure from 1/2 suspends opposite traffic.
 

And to your other post, I won’t be sawing points, I mentioned in the original post that the 900 and 700 are convenience sizes and will be permanently joined as a 1600mm or just over 5’ plank.  But your point is well taken should I ever want or have  to separate them it will be better to have them the other way round which I will do

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

A simple answer to lots of point motors - don't use them!  Try using servos - cheaper and smaller and some good electronics to control them with DC/DCC around if you wish - or you can just use simple buttons/switches. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, imt said:

A simple answer to lots of point motors - don't use them!  Try using servos - cheaper and smaller and some good electronics to control them with DC/DCC around if you wish - or you can just use simple buttons/switches. 

Its all automated with iTrain so no buttons.  I genuinely dont own a handheld cab not do I want to.  Yes servos are smaller than eg Cobalts but need a separate decoder but maybe thats a separate discussion.

 

Moving the discussion/request for help/crticism along, are there any facing/trailing point improvements I can make?  Departures look pretty ok to me, arrivals have to deal with facing points naturally.  But speeds should be low, so I'm not sure if its that big an issue....any contributors with practical experience  - real world or modelled - want to shoot the track plan down?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Just for fun, Bradford Interchange with nice long platforms all the way to Mill Lane junction in N scale in under 2.4m. 

The only compromise is down Halifax trains not having access to the topmost platforms.

This shrinkage is possible due to two single and three double slips, though the code 55 geometry leaves a small (12mm) gap to fill

I'm not sure I'd want to wire this one up but it does look like cobalts would fit between the baseboard cell webbing....

BDI.JPG

Edited by eventide01
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.