Single track passing station with branch line junction idea

[clachnaharry]

How does a train travelling from right to left gain access to the branch? Do you intend the signalling to allow "wrong road" running through the top main line platform thus allowing direct access, or does the train travel "right road" through the main line platforms, then set back into the top main line platform and gain access that way?

 

Alternatively, would it not be better to move the branch access point to the other side of the loop point. The branch access point would need a facing point lock if it is to be traversed by passenger trains joining the branch anyway.

Edited October 26, 2021 by clachnaharry

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, clachnaharry said:

How does a train travelling from right to left gain access to the branch? Do you intend the signalling to allow "wrong road" running through the top main line platform thus allowing direct access, or does the train travel "right road" through the main line platforms, then set back into the top main line platform and gain access that way?

 

Alternatively, would it not be better to move the branch access point to the other side of the loop point. The branch access point would need a facing point lock if it is to be traversed by passenger trains joining the branch anyway.

There are, as usual, numerous ways of skinning the cat.  In the real world we always started any track layout planning by considering what we wanted it to be capable of doing (and bearing in mind how much it would cost if we added anything over and above what was needed.   Thus a branch connection might or might not require a connection to allow through running -possibly only in one direction (you then havea choiv ce of which direction) or maybe both directions or no need for through running at all but a need to connect in order to exchange traffic (a shunting movement) or rolling stock etc (also a shunting movement).

 

Hence branch connections off single -or double - lines took a configuration which reflected what was required for traffic purposes at the time the layout was planned and built.  Things of course could change over the years so layouts changed to reflect that (when the money was available todo so).  So in reality there was no right or wrong way of arranging the connections, although the use of facing points would be kept to a minimum, and they would be signalled in accordance with traffic needs and the prevailing legal requirements at the time they were commissioned.

 

For example looking at the junction connections to our local branch line from the early 20th century up to today  and how the train service has canged by ut the track layout hasn't necessarily immediately reflacted such changes.-

1.  Double line branch connected to through running lines by a double junction which trailed into the Up direction but with fully signalled provision for a passenger train to reverse on what was the trailing connection in the Up through line to travel thence to either the branch or to the opposite through line.  Freight trips reversed on the Up through line at the junction in order to reach the branch or return from it to the nearest marshalling yard.   Through passenger trains operated from the branch in the Up direction and to it in the Down direction.   Junction station has a branch bay.

 

1a.   Number of passenger trains to/from the branch reversing on the Up through line drastically reduced by the late 1930s.  Facility to do so unchanged.

 

2. Early 1960s branch line reduced to single line but a double junction retained with the Down Line from the double junction joining the single branch line several hundred yards from the junction.  Facility to reverse on the Up through line at the junction remained and was still used for a minimal number of passenger trains as well as the freight trip.   No change to through passenger services to/from the branch 

 

3. Mid 1960s - freight trip discontinued as freight traffic ceased on the branch and at the junction.  No change to passenger services.

 

4. Early 1970s.  Through line double junction removed and Up through line  at the junction used for both Up & Down through passenger with a new facing crossover provided on the through lines beyond the junction station to enable through trains in both direction to use the Up through platform.  Still very occasional passenger trains from the branch reversing on the Up through line to head away in the Down direction.

 

3. 21st century saw withdrawal of through passenger trains to/from the branch but the track layout and signalling was basically unchanged.

[KingEdwardII]

Yes, change over time.

 

One case is the junction for the Heart of Wales line off the Welsh Marches line at Craven Arms.

 

The Heart of Wales line is single track, while the Welsh Marches line is double track. The junction is a simple trailing turnout on the northbound track just south of the double platform station.

 

Until 2018 or so, southbound trains heading for the Heart of Wales line had to use a facing crossover on the north side of Craven Arms station and run "wrong track" through the station to get to the junction. In 2018, the facing crossover was moved to the south side of Craven Arms station, immediately next to the junction. This removed the wrong track running through the station and the southbound trains all now stop at the platform on the southbound track.

 

How much effect this change has on operations is unclear, since the number of trains per day over the Heart of Wales line is pretty small (4 per day each way on weekdays).

 

Yours,  Mike.

[Zomboid]

I suppose the question for this model is what traffic to/ from the branch is expected? Is it a main and branch like the Torrington line at Halwill, or is it like Tipton St John's where the track layout at least didn't favour one route over the other.

[Jenks465]

On 25/10/2021 at 15:43, AndyB said:

Hi

The top right-hand corner is going to be a bit if a stretch? 

 

Baseboard depth is 32". So the corner is (I believe) 45" away if you are standing right in the corner. Plus I guess you'd be leaning downwards, making it even more of a stretch? You may end up damaging some of your scenery trying to, say, reach over to a stalled loco on the headshunt? Not to mention being able to put track and scenery down in that corner to begin with.

 

Might be worth you putting a tape measure between your armpit and fingertips to see what is practicable?

 

Best. Andy 

 

 Thanks for this. Been doing some rough mockups to see how feasible it might be and found I can reach to the brake van but not into the corner. Think any scenery in that corner will need to be completed before I put the other board in place.

[AndyB]

8 minutes ago, Jenks465 said:

 Thanks for this. Been doing some rough mockups to see how feasible it might be and found I can reach to the brake van but not into the corner. Think any scenery in that corner will need to be completed before I put the other board in place.

 

It looks like you've already purchased track components. But it may be worth putting that bay on a curve. That'd do three things.

1. Make the track easier to reach.

2. It'd look more interesting (IMHO)

3. Allow you to have a curved backscene.

[Jenks465]

9 hours ago, clachnaharry said:

How does a train travelling from right to left gain access to the branch? Do you intend the signalling to allow "wrong road" running through the top main line platform thus allowing direct access, or does the train travel "right road" through the main line platforms, then set back into the top main line platform and gain access that way?

 

Alternatively, would it not be better to move the branch access point to the other side of the loop point. The branch access point would need a facing point lock if it is to be traversed by passenger trains joining the branch anyway.

 

I was considering this myself earlier today. I think the majority of through working would be carriages being split from a longer train and being worked down the branch by a tank loco waiting at the shed. Not sure what the normal way for this to be done would be though? Running wrong road would seem the most simple.

[Jenks465]

11 minutes ago, AndyB said:

 

It looks like you've already purchased track components. But it may be worth putting that bay on a curve. That'd do three things.

1. Make the track easier to reach.

2. It'd look more interesting (IMHO)

3. Allow you to have a curved backscene.

 

No just a few bits of settrack from an old trainset layout that will find a use in a fiddle yard eventually.

Thanks for the suggestion, I think a nice gentle curve would look more interesting!

[Zomboid]

25 minutes ago, Jenks465 said:

 

I was considering this myself earlier today. I think the majority of through working would be carriages being split from a longer train and being worked down the branch by a tank loco waiting at the shed. Not sure what the normal way for this to be done would be though? Running wrong road would seem the most simple.

Have a look at some stations where such things happened (ideally on your preferred railway company's network if there were any - which I'd guess is the GW) would be my suggestion (Machynlleth perhaps?) You seem to have space for pretty much any junction arrangement you like.

[Chimer]

Re curving the bay:

 

[Harlequin]

It would be nice to keep something of the triangular platform by not curving the branch platform quite so much as the main line.

And if the end of the loop and the link could be a little more to the left then the main line platforms would align better and be of more similar length. (And allow the goods yard to be longer)

What about placing the branch engine shed in the splay between the branch and the main line? It could be, or help to be, the scenic break that hides the branch line exit.

 

[DCB]

The inability for a anti clockwise train to access the branch directly should be a bonus operating wise.

Drawing forward from the lower platform and setting back into the upper before proceeding down the branch was the modus operandi at Kemble even for through passenger trains from Swindon to the Cirencester branch

I am not aware of individual or pairs of coaches split from main line trains being hauled down the branch alone without additional branch coaches being added .   Usually they were tacked onto the branch train, 

That sort of move adds interest to a running session or frustration if you use RTR tension lock couplers.  Kadees or H/D or Peco let you reverse 20 plus wagons around 2ft radius reverse curves.

I have a sneaking suspicion you would have to signal the upper platform for bi directional running to achieve that.

If you curve the bay it compromises the station building.  I don't see any need to reach stock there, the uncoupling will be further from the wall.  I  would follow Harlequin's advice there.

[The Stationmaster]

21 hours ago, KingEdwardII said:

Yes, change over time.

 

One case is the junction for the Heart of Wales line off the Welsh Marches line at Craven Arms.

 

The Heart of Wales line is single track, while the Welsh Marches line is double track. The junction is a simple trailing turnout on the northbound track just south of the double platform station.

 

Until 2018 or so, southbound trains heading for the Heart of Wales line had to use a facing crossover on the north side of Craven Arms station and run "wrong track" through the station to get to the junction. In 2018, the facing crossover was moved to the south side of Craven Arms station, immediately next to the junction. This removed the wrong track running through the station and the southbound trains all now stop at the platform on the southbound track.

 

How much effect this change has on operations is unclear, since the number of trains per day over the Heart of Wales line is pretty small (4 per day each way on weekdays).

 

Yours,  Mike.

Moving the facing crossover would be potentially advantageous for traffic operation on the North &West route and could also remove a potential source of delay fora Down train heading for the Central Wales Line.  Far more importantly in terms of reducing delay and in improving matters for trains to/from the Central Wales Line it appears that the connection to the CWL is now worked from the signal box instead of by a ground frame so Central Wales Line trains no longer have to hang around while the Guard operates the GF to change the junction points.

[Jenks465]

22 hours ago, Zomboid said:

Have a look at some stations where such things happened (ideally on your preferred railway company's network if there were any - which I'd guess is the GW) would be my suggestion (Machynlleth perhaps?) You seem to have space for pretty much any junction arrangement you like.

 

Thanks for the suggestion, gives me somewhere to start as my knowledge of these workings isn't that great yet.

My first thought was St Erth where I believe there was a reversal into the up platform for through coaches to St Ives.

Another observation I've had is that the junction at Churston for the Brixham branch has a similar layout to the one on my plan but I've not been able to find any details on through trains yet.

[The Stationmaster]

There has been quite a discussion - with prototype photos - of through coach working to/from the Kingsbridge branch at Brent on another RMweb thread but that is from double track main line to a branch through platform which could be shunted at either end.

 

Basically the moves are usually straightforward and veryn much dependent on the direction of travel of the trains they come off or attached to.  Thus on your layout plan the transfer would be extremely simple assuming the 'main line'  to/from the transfers take place is the one nearest the branch platform. (the station would be arranged very differently if the transfers were to/from the other platform).   Thus a 'main line' train arrives in its loop and the branch engine crosses from the branch and detaches the through coach from the rear of the 'ml' train and shunts it onto the n branch train which is standing in the bay.  In the opposite direction the through coach arrives on the rear of the branch train and after the engine has run round and the 'ml' train has arrived the engine shunts the through coach from the rear of the branch train onto the 'ml' train.

[Grovenor]

Seems an odd service where the through coaches don't go back to where they came from but just continue in their original direction.

[Jenks465]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

There has been quite a discussion - with prototype photos - of through coach working to/from the Kingsbridge branch at Brent on another RMweb thread but that is from double track main line to a branch through platform which could be shunted at either end.

 

Basically the moves are usually straightforward and veryn much dependent on the direction of travel of the trains they come off or attached to.  Thus on your layout plan the transfer would be extremely simple assuming the 'main line'  to/from the transfers take place is the one nearest the branch platform. (the station would be arranged very differently if the transfers were to/from the other platform).   Thus a 'main line' train arrives in its loop and the branch engine crosses from the branch and detaches the through coach from the rear of the 'ml' train and shunts it onto the n branch train which is standing in the bay.  In the opposite direction the through coach arrives on the rear of the branch train and after the engine has run round and the 'ml' train has arrived the engine shunts the through coach from the rear of the branch train onto the 'ml' train.

Thank you, I'll have a look for the other thread. 

[The Stationmaster]

4 hours ago, Grovenor said:

Seems an odd service where the through coaches don't go back to where they came from but just continue in their original direction.

Although it did happen in the real (GWR) world on unbalanced workings.

[Jenks465]

So, after a few more very rough mock ups with the old set track and a bit of playing trains I'm very happy with the operating potential and think it might be time to start getting the track pieces together 

 

Thanks so much to everyone for their advice and suggestions.

[Satan's Goldfish]

18 hours ago, Jenks465 said:

So, after a few more very rough mock ups with the old set track and a bit of playing trains I'm very happy with the operating potential and think it might be time to start getting the track pieces together 

 

Thanks so much to everyone for their advice and suggestions.

 

Even with set track on bare boards, it looks promising! 

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Hi there.  I’ve just been doing some catch-up reading after being away and enjoyed the conversation in this thread - I do agree with @Harlequin (and others) that keeping the triangular station adds that special something to this particular design.  As one of the places I visited on holiday was the Pendon Museum, where they have a fantastic model of a triangular junction station, perhaps that’s no surprise (albeit theirs is arranged differently).  Good to see you’ve got just enough ‘reach room’ to keep it.  A couple of things that jumped out for me which I hope it’s Ok to mention at this point:

 

1.  The pictures of the baseboards look very impressive.  One mistake I’ve made in the past with unscenicked boards I’ve had  was getting into the habit of leaning on them to extend my reach: something which would have then become impossible had I progressed to the scenic stage.  Just make sure you’ll be able to reach over any scenery that may be added later (eg: the Goods Shed?).

 

2.  When plotting the exact position for the Goods Sidings, do make sure your couplings will work - some types of OO tension lock couplings don’t like trying to join up on tight curves and can become a source of frustration when shunting individual wagons.  Playing Running a test is the obvious way to check this. 

 

3.  I realise you’re just positioning things to see if it works (which it clearly does), but one thing to check is the best place for your Signal Box.  @The Stationmaster is the person to confirm this, but I’m not sure the Metcalfe kit you’ve got quite works in that position - while I can see an advantage of having it by the branch line, there’s a lot that will take place ‘out of sight’ behind the box, which would be the concern (the Metcalfe GWR box as supplied only has one small window at the rear).  I’d probably flip it across the lines and have it between the headshunt and the entrance to the loop (and goods sidings), but I could well be wrong on that point, so do check.  
 

Hope that’s Ok - all looks good, Keith.

Edited October 31, 2021 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Jenks465]

3 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Hi there.  I’ve just been doing some catch-up reading after being away and enjoyed the conversation in this thread - I do agree with @Harlequin (and others) that keeping the triangular station adds that special something to this particular design.  As one of the places I visited on holiday was the Pendon Museum, where they have a fantastic model of a triangular junction station, perhaps that’s no surprise (albeit theirs is arranged differently).  Good to see you’ve got just enough ‘reach room’ to keep it.  A couple of things that jumped out for me which I hope it’s Ok to mention at this point:

 

1.  The pictures of the baseboards look very impressive.  One mistake I’ve made in the past with unscenicked boards I’ve had  was getting into the habit of leaning on them to extend my reach: something which would have then become impossible had I progressed to the scenic stage.  Just make sure you’ll be able to reach over any scenery that may be added later (eg: the Goods Shed?).

 

2.  When plotting the exact position for the Goods Sidings, do make sure your couplings will work - some types of OO tension lock couplings don’t like trying to join up on tight curves and can become a source of frustration when shunting individual wagons.  Playing Running a test is the obvious way to check this. 

 

3.  I realise you’re just positioning things to see if it works (which it clearly does), but one thing to check is the best place for your Signal Box.  @The Stationmaster is the person to confirm this, but I’m not sure the Metcalfe kit you’ve got quite works in that position - while I can see an advantage of having it by the branch line, there’s a lot that will take place ‘out of sight’ behind the box, which would be the concern (the Metcalfe GWR box as supplied only has one small window at the rear).  I’d probably flip it across the lines and have it between the headshunt and the entrance to the loop (and goods sidings), but I could well be wrong on that point, so do check.  
 

Hope that’s Ok - all looks good, Keith.

 

Thank you for your suggestions Keith.

I think I might just curve the bay tracks very slightly so that the track nearest the corner is an inch or two closer but hopefully still keeping the nice triangle.

The plan is for the goods shed to be around the corner a bit so I don't think it'll be too much in the way but will definitely double check!

Been doing lots of "testing"  and I've found a couple of wagons that really don't like the tight reverse curves of the settrack cross over so will definitely try and keep the curves as smooth as possible in the goods yard, hopefully the wider radius of streamline points will help too.

I think you're right about the signal box positioning, found this picture of the box at St Erth 

 It's position is much further up than the one on my mock up.

[The Stationmaster]

On 31/10/2021 at 14:25, Keith Addenbrooke said:

 

 

3.  I realise you’re just positioning things to see if it works (which it clearly does), but one thing to check is the best place for your Signal Box.  @The Stationmaster is the person to confirm this, but I’m not sure the Metcalfe kit you’ve got quite works in that position - while I can see an advantage of having it by the branch line, there’s a lot that will take place ‘out of sight’ behind the box, which would be the concern (the Metcalfe GWR box as supplied only has one small window at the rear).  I’d probably flip it across the lines and have it between the headshunt and the entrance to the loop (and goods sidings), but I could well be wrong on that point, so do check.  
 

 

The problem with siting the signal box is that it needs to be in at least two different places so wherever it goes will be a compromise in one way or another.  Also because all the lines it is dealing with are single lines some consideration has to be given to safe (as possible) access for the Signalman to carry out token exchanges which means that the 'box should ideally sit somewhere between the 'main' line and the branch line (which in the real world could be mitigated by spending money on auxiliary token instruments.  In addition it would obviously be subject to complying with the standards in respect of structural clearances (from running lines etc).

 

When the WR erected a new signalbox at Dovey Jcn in the late 1950s they put it on the station platform at the junction end of the layout - the former Cambrian 'box had been at the lineside so immediately adjacent to only one of the two routes.  The 'box here could reasonably legitimately be on the station platform although it might not work too well scenically.  Otherwise provided the clearances can be achieved or at least be made to look right the position shown in the photo is probably as good as any.  The presence of only a small window at the rear isn't really a problem provided there is a good view from both ends of the 'box - there were plenty of examples of 'boxes like that around the railway and some of them probably still exist.

[DCB]

There don't seem to be many examples of junction stations with a bay platform where through coaches operated.  The norm seems to be the branch using a through platform, or accessing the branch needing a reversal via the bay or a road parallel to the bay.   Tiverton seems pretty much like the OP plan but there were no through coaches there.      There don't seem to be any logical and simple methods for attaching branch coaches to other more important branch trains at many stations as these moves were never envisaged  when the station layouts were designed and as services changed there was no money to improve matters.  There may also be through coach or coaches in one direction but not the other. Especially slip coaches.  The return being ECS.

I put a post on the prototype questions forum regarding combining Torrington and Ilfracombe portions at Barnstaple with some interesting info but thus far no definitive answer!

 

[Zomboid]

7 hours ago, DCB said:

There don't seem to be many examples of junction stations with a bay platform where through coaches operated

Sidmouth Junction seems to be an example, as there were Sidmouth and Exmouth via Budleigh Salterton carriages in the Atlantic Coast Express at times. The junction is very similar to this plan too, with there only being a trailing connection in the Down Main. Any Exeter to Sidmouth trains would have needed to shunt across (the down main platform seems to have had a full size signal in the up direction, which I would assume would have been used for starting trains onto the branch).

 

https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/srm/S3423.htm