Theory of General Minories

[Lacathedrale]

 

@t-b-g I'm essentially agreed with you on all counts, re: the ugliness of the scissor FY. I figured it was worth the experimentation, though.

 

While I want to get started quickly, I don't need to get finished quickly. I think if I get wrapped up in hand laying track, as much as I enjoy it, I'm not going to be able to achieve escape velocity, but maybe with British Finescale there's an answer? His range is limited to B7's at the moment, so I had a go to see whether just plain, straight EM B7's would fit on two 4'6" boards, and they do - just!

 

 

The curve is a plain 3' radius curve, I've not quite figured out how to do transitions the way I can easily in xTrkCAD yet. The throat board exits perpendicular to its board edge, so it can connect up directly against the traverser for 'exhibition' mode - so that's nice!

 

Speaking of getting started - I'm so pleased that in 4mm there appear to be some meaningful pre-group options available off the shelf. It seems most lines have a couple of locos and coaches to get you going from Hornby/Dapol/Bachmann. The fact that any futher stock would need to be kit built, is the only reason why I'm even entertaining the idea of EM at this point.

Edited November 30, 2021 by Lacathedrale

[St Enodoc]

15 hours ago, t-b-g said:

Has anybody ever modelled Liverpool Central?

@Michael Edge nearly did once.

[t-b-g]

8 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

 

@t-b-g I'm essentially agreed with you on all counts, re: the ugliness of the scissor FY. I figured it was worth the experimentation, though.

 

While I want to get started quickly, I don't need to get finished quickly. I think if I get wrapped up in hand laying track, as much as I enjoy it, I'm not going to be able to achieve escape velocity, but maybe with British Finescale there's an answer? His range is limited to B7's at the moment, so I had a go to see whether just plain, straight EM B7's would fit on two 4'6" boards, and they do - just!

 

 

The curve is a plain 3' radius curve, I've not quite figured out how to do transitions the way I can easily in xTrkCAD yet. The throat board exits perpendicular to its board edge, so it can connect up directly against the traverser for 'exhibition' mode - so that's nice!

 

Speaking of getting started - I'm so pleased that in 4mm there appear to be some meaningful pre-group options available off the shelf. It seems most lines have a couple of locos and coaches to get you going from Hornby/Dapol/Bachmann. The fact that any futher stock would need to be kit built, is the only reason why I'm even entertaining the idea of EM at this point.

 

Mansfield was done with B7 points, all homemade. Apart from a Y I added for the loading dock and regretted. You wouldn't need that with your design. The whole station throat is on a 4ft board with a couple of inches to spare. If you can eliminate any plain track between the points, which is possible in Minories, you could get a 4 point length station throat down to 4ft, giving yourself a bigger radius curve or a longer platform.

 

Another option to save time would be the EMGS ready to lay points. They are B6 and look really good. They are not really pre-grouping, having 8ft 6ins sleepers but that doesn't really show up when nicely painted and blasted. I would guess that the British Finescale ones are similar.

[Lacathedrale]

Yes, if all goes to plan then there may well be ballast over the sleepers anyway! I do enjoy and am able to hand track, so maybe I could join the EMGS and sort myself out some supplies (for the third? time in 4mm/ft) before I commit. I seem to remember being fairly underwhelmed when I joined last time. I think my inclusion of a dock and relying on B7's is what's stretching the throat boards to 4'6"?

 

I've superimposed some standard board sizes (1350mm x 400mm scenic, 900mm corners boards, and a 1200mm  x 400mm traverser) and all fits with space to spare. I know it's a vanity, but if I have to build another baseboard from scratch I think I'll lose it, so Grainge and Hodder can supply these pre-cut and ready for use.

 

I've also just discovered templot's diagram mode, which is a little easier on the eyes than the Night scheme I normally use to draw.

 

 

You may notice I have curved the up main turnout at the exit of the throat. This has the effect of easing all curves to 4'8" radius. While it does preclude appending the traverser directly onto the station boards for a straight setup across one wall of the garage, I think it's a no brainer?

 

Of course, one of the tenets was a layout which is potentially exhibitable, so I measured up my VW Golf's boot and I have space to spare: 1400mm from the back of the passenger seat to the rear of the boot, 1000mm width and at least 400mm height - so the two scenic boards stored ontop of each other would fit well, the traverser and stock boxes alongside. Whether it would be better  take along the 45 degree corners too, or instead figure out a small 'joggle' board to straighten out the tracks and offset the traverser to the correct facing and direction I think is probably a question for later.

 

 

 

 

 

[Nearholmer]

It depends how you arrange “viewing side” at Minories, because an L is quite good for exhibitions, if the FY leg can be oriented away from the viewers, it gives you a nice big “playpen” from which to operate the layout. 
 

Could the curve be ‘reversible’, to allow the FY to “go up the page”, so to speak, when at a show?

 

 

 

 

Edited November 30, 2021 by Nearholmer

[t-b-g]

1 hour ago, Lacathedrale said:

Yes, if all goes to plan then there may well be ballast over the sleepers anyway! I do enjoy and am able to hand track, so maybe I could join the EMGS and sort myself out some supplies (for the third? time in 4mm/ft) before I commit. I seem to remember being fairly underwhelmed when I joined last time. I think my inclusion of a dock and relying on B7's is what's stretching the throat boards to 4'6"?

 

I've superimposed some standard board sizes (1350mm x 400mm scenic, 900mm corners boards, and a 1200mm  x 400mm traverser) and all fits with space to spare. I know it's a vanity, but if I have to build another baseboard from scratch I think I'll lose it, so Grainge and Hodder can supply these pre-cut and ready for use.

 

I've also just discovered templot's diagram mode, which is a little easier on the eyes than the Night scheme I normally use to draw.

 

 

You may notice I have curved the up main turnout at the exit of the throat. This has the effect of easing all curves to 4'8" radius. While it does preclude appending the traverser directly onto the station boards for a straight setup across one wall of the garage, I think it's a no brainer?

 

Of course, one of the tenets was a layout which is potentially exhibitable, so I measured up my VW Golf's boot and I have space to spare: 1400mm from the back of the passenger seat to the rear of the boot, 1000mm width and at least 400mm height - so the two scenic boards stored ontop of each other would fit well, the traverser and stock boxes alongside. Whether it would be better  take along the 45 degree corners too, or instead figure out a small 'joggle' board to straighten out the tracks and offset the traverser to the correct facing and direction I think is probably a question for later.

 

 

 

 

 

 

That looks very smooth now. Where did you find the diagram mode in Templot? It isn't something I have spotted but it looks rather nice. (edit to add that I have just had a look around and found it!)

Edited November 30, 2021 by t-b-g
To add content

[Lacathedrale]

@t-b-g it's here:

 

@Nearholmer The traverser can be flipped end on end (since it's fully symmetrical) and traverse 'outward' from the curve. Mounting a low screen on the back (in home orientation) would become a gentle view block in exhibition orientation. To function effeectively it would need a short 'joggle' baseboard inserted to align the ends of the boards (not the track) so that the traverser can then be used properly - but painted in a matt black like the FY would not be onerous.

 

Standard and Joggle inserted:

 

Maybe some seasoned exhibitors can chime in on this one - it's not clear to me on the impact of operating from the front or rear, solo or as a pair/trio is - but I am working under the assumption that you want your traverser moving away from the public, rather than into them!

 

 

 

[t-b-g]

59 minutes ago, Lacathedrale said:

@t-b-g it's here:

 

@Nearholmer The traverser can be flipped end on end (since it's fully symmetrical) and traverse 'outward' from the curve. Mounting a low screen on the back (in home orientation) would become a gentle view block in exhibition orientation. To function effeectively it would need a short 'joggle' baseboard inserted to align the ends of the boards (not the track) so that the traverser can then be used properly - but painted in a matt black like the FY would not be onerous.

 

Standard and Joggle inserted:

 

Maybe some seasoned exhibitors can chime in on this one - it's not clear to me on the impact of operating from the front or rear, solo or as a pair/trio is - but I am working under the assumption that you want your traverser moving away from the public, rather than into them!

 

 

 

 

It is the sort of layout I would operate at a show as a pair. It makes it a one car, two operator arrangement which I found was my favourite in terms of logistics. You can either operate together, with swapping round as one operator would be having an easier time on the fiddle yard but to allow for breaks/meals it could be operated solo. In solo mode, operating from inside the L is much easier as you don't have to go very far to reach the traverser.

 

 

[Nearholmer]

If it’s more than a one-day event, you’ll probably want a “relief” operator too. A good option for that is to find a mate who plans to visit the show anyway, then sign them up as an operator. They then get free entry, and often a cuppa and a sandwich, in exchange for two or three one-hour operating sessions, but don’t have to be present for set-up and break-down, and don’t charge travelling costs. Benefit in kind both ways.

[Zomboid]

Don't really know where to put this, it's not Minories but it's in the spirit...

 

There's a possibility that I might find myself with a fairly small shed in the not too distant. Just your standard 8x6 (it doesn't exist yet, the old one is falling apart and the contents are likely to end up in the garage, leaving me with the foundations for an 8x6 shed to find a use for, but that's all by the by).

 

So, way up this thread I've talked about this fictional LSWR route from London to Oxford, which would leave the Windsor line just after Datchet, where the Riverside line turns west, forms a triangle and the line goes on to Oxford via Henley and then a big up & down to Benson, and approaches Oxford from the south (I've worked out way more detail than that, but that's for another time, maybe I'll do a thread/ blog post...). It terminates near St Clements/ Magdalen bridge  near to where the first, unbuilt GWR station was originally proposed.

 

So, can I fit "Oxford (St Clements)" into an 8x6 shed? Turns out that I can:

 

Shown with a 4' long Denny Cassette thingy (I'd actually build at least 2 to increase capacity), it has 3 platforms, one with a run-round so the slow trains to Henley/ Windsor don't need shunt release, and a carriage siding. I've put a turntable in, but actually I imagine a proper shed would be just down the line at Cowley (where LSWR's main freight yard for Oxford is), so it's hard to justify in reality, though it would reduce loco handling requirements. I think in 4' there'd be a decent chance of a 2-6-0 or 4-4-0, 3 carriages and a 4 wheeled van. 4 coaches might even fit, but I'd be fine with 3. I think it would just about work in the platforms as well with the train and station pilot if not a second train engine able to fit inside the signal/ pointwork.

 

I'd be doing this some time in the 30s, so pre-Bulleid rolling stock, but things like the Schools and N class would be seen in addition to whatever ex LSWR could be sourced.

 

Anyway, chances of this happening in reality are slim, but I was surprised I could get anywhere near in such a piddly shed.

Edited November 30, 2021 by Zomboid

[RJS1977]

5 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

It depends how you arrange “viewing side” at Minories, because an L is quite good for exhibitions, if the FY leg can be oriented away from the viewers, it gives you a nice big “playpen” from which to operate the layout. 
 

Could the curve be ‘reversible’, to allow the FY to “go up the page”, so to speak, when at a show?

 

 

 

 

 

As a show manager, I would have said that an L is not a good shape for exhibitions. 'Up the page' is workable in that it can fit in a corner of the hall, 'down the page' much less so owing to the amount of space taken up. Indeed a 'U' shape can often be preferable to an L shape.

[t-b-g]

13 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

As a show manager, I would have said that an L is not a good shape for exhibitions. 'Up the page' is workable in that it can fit in a corner of the hall, 'down the page' much less so owing to the amount of space taken up. Indeed a 'U' shape can often be preferable to an L shape.

 

That surprises me a bit. I always thought that an L allowed the layout to either form the corner of a centre block or a sticking out island or to go along one side of a centre block with the fiddle yard going towards the centre. I can see the difficulty with putting them along a wall but other than that, they seem to work well in many spaces. I have exhibited 6 or 7 different L shaped layouts of various sizes and not had anybody ever suggest that they were difficult to fit in.

 

Still, I have never set out the floor plan for a show, so I bow to your greater experience in such things. 

[Compound2632]

2 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

Still, I have never set out the floor plan for a show, so I bow to your greater experience in such things. 

 

@RJS1977 has quite a small hall.

[RJS1977]

11 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

That surprises me a bit. I always thought that an L allowed the layout to either form the corner of a centre block or a sticking out island or to go along one side of a centre block with the fiddle yard going towards the centre. I can see the difficulty with putting them along a wall but other than that, they seem to work well in many spaces. I have exhibited 6 or 7 different L shaped layouts of various sizes and not had anybody ever suggest that they were difficult to fit in.

 

Still, I have never set out the floor plan for a show, so I bow to your greater experience in such things. 

 

It depends very much on the size of both the layout and the hall.  (I think I may have also misinterpreted the OP's grid as being 1' squares rather than 6" squares). The centre block at my show is approx 12' across so an inside L layout could be accommodated there if its shorter side was no more than 12' long. Anything longer than that would be too large. Obviously if you have Hall 5 of the NEC to play with, there may not be quite the same constraints.

[Lacathedrale]

@RJS1977 short of 6", they're about 125mm each. The layout would be approx 12' x 8'.

 

@Zomboid that's a lovely plan and setting. An N, Schools, T9, Beattie Well Tank, etc. would all look stunning.  I've got a huge gap in my knowledge about most non-London, non-South East terminii that I really don't know how to fill, so I always default back to those well trodden paths and the ineveitable conclusion that by the SR Olive period, anywhere I'd want to model was electrified.  I do think that a breath of fresh air might be required - GCR? LNWR? Something I'm not quite so intimately familiar with.

Edited November 30, 2021 by Lacathedrale

[Zomboid]

28 minutes ago, Lacathedrale said:

by the SR Olive period, anywhere I'd want to model was electrified.

Though quite a lot of it actually wasn't. I think in the 1930s they'd done a lot of the Suburban, Brighton, Reading and Portsmouth lines. But Kent outside the (then non existent) M25 didn't get much until the 1950s, and there was nothing at all West of the Portsmouth/ Alton line until steam finished in 1967...

 

I suspect that if it existed my Oxford line would have been electrified around the same time as Portsmouth and Reading were, but I'll hang on to steam for the sake of having locos...

Edited November 30, 2021 by Zomboid

[Nearholmer]

Have a look at the London and East Sussex services that radiated from Tunbridge Wells (West), if you want to see a lot of steamy stuff from the 1930s, and indeed into the 1950s, when the service was even busier.

 

The West, reinvented as a terminus terminus, instead of a through terminus, would keep any operator more than busy.

 

Or, the busy-bee services on the Reading Line until it was electrified. M7s coming out of your ears. Reading itself would, as I have said multiple times, would make a cracking model if set in the early 30s, with the nice mix of ex-SECR and ex-LSWR services.

 

And, there were more.

 

I actually think mixed steam and electric services make for an interesting scene. It’s not as if the SR-built units were uninteresting things to look at.

 

One big issue for the 20s and early 30s is shortage of photos. The well known photographers of pre-WW1 seem to have slowed or ceased their output, and  the next generation were either photographing expresses from the line side, or obscure branches and light railways; nobody seemed to have film to spare for secondary services, or goods trains.

 

 

Edited November 30, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Zomboid]

12 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Reading itself would, as I have said multiple times, would make a cracking model if set in the early 30s, with the nice mix of ex-SECR and ex-LSWR services

I've not heard of anyone building it, which is a suprise. It would make for a fantastic model, either pre or post electrification as you say with the mix of trains and relatively compact size.

 

The Waterloo to Reading line doesn't really have much romance to it though, which might go some way to explaining it. Nobody is going to feel nostalgic about the holiday they had in Bracknell.

Edited December 1, 2021 by Zomboid

[Lacathedrale]

Checking out Tonbridge Wells (West) on Wikipedia has made me feel rather maudlin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunbridge_Wells_West_railway_station

 

 

[Nearholmer]

Tunbridge Wells West was indeed rather a forlorn place in its latter years - very atmospheric.

 

The booking hall was in green and cream woodwork, wooden floor, gas-lit, and always deserted, to the very end, even the service notices were chalked on blackboards. I've got some slide photos I took there on a dark and foggy winter evening in the late 70s, and it looks like its a preserved railway, set-dressed for filming "The Case of the Vanishing Porter" or some such.

 

Now, its a faintly bonkers wild-west themed diner. Last time we visited my mother, I took the children in for (a seriously junk food) lunch.m

 

This is one of the more sane parts, I think the very booking hall I mention.

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2021 by Nearholmer

[RobinofLoxley]

Cultural misappropriation all over the place. But beautful tiles.

[Nearholmer]

37 minutes ago, RobinofLoxley said:

Cultural misappropriation all over the place.

 

There's so much of it, in so many directions, including ofc ourse appropriating high Victorian British railway culture among the lesser sins, that it is simply bonkers.

 

37 minutes ago, RobinofLoxley said:

But beautful tiles.

 

Which, I'm 99% certain are laid over, or replace, the stern wooden boards that it had when it was a booking hall. Modern tiles.

 

The positive feature is that the enormous and very decorative building is now weatherproof, and cared-for, whereas it was truly beyond dear old BR to look after it. They'd already knocked down the building on the island platform, which I can remember having a coal fire in the waiting room during winter in the early-70s, despite there being absolutely nobody, ever waiting.

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2021 by Nearholmer

[RobinofLoxley]

I was puzzled why you would bother to fit waiting room tiles in a wild west themed environment when the floorboards would have been more appropriate. A bit like my A4 hauled pullman excursion through the West Midlands

[Pacific231G]

7 hours ago, Zomboid said:

I've not heard of anyone building it, which is a suprise. It would make for a fantastic model, either pre or post electrification as you say with the mix of trains and relatively compact size.

 

The Waterloo to Reading line doesn't really have much romance to it though, which might go some way to explaining it. Nobody is going to feel nostalgic about the holiday they had in Bracknell.

I went via Reading (Southern)  a couple of times on school railway society shed bashing trips from Oxford and alway thought the compact terminus a thoroughly delightful station. Maybe it just made a change from God's Wonderful but I was very sad when it was replaced by platform 4A at Reading. Less delightful was the thumper we travelled from there to I think Guildford though ISTR that we used an electric train  from there to get to Waterloo to travel on the still steam hauled Bournemouth Belle. I assume the teacher who led the group didn't fancy wrangling a bunch of schoolboys between London terminals.  

[Pacific231G]

23 hours ago, Zomboid said:

 

 

So, way up this thread I've talked about this fictional LSWR route from London to Oxford, which would leave the Windsor line just after Datchet, where the Riverside line turns west, forms a triangle and the line goes on to Oxford via Henley and then a big up & down to Benson, and approaches Oxford from the south (I've worked out way more detail than that, but that's for another time, maybe I'll do a thread/ blog post...). It terminates near St Clements/ Magdalen bridge  near to where the first, unbuilt GWR station was originally proposed.

 

 

Having been dragged up in Oxford (town not gown)  I was intrigued by the idea of the GWR's terminus having almost been close to where I went to school (rather than near Folly Bridge where it was built) so delved a bit further.

Liz Woolley has posted a very interesting article, complete with original maps, on her award winning South Oxford history site. 

https://southoxfordhistory.org.uk/interesting-aspects-of-grandpont-and-south-oxford-s-history/the-coming-of-the-railway-to-oxford

You'd also, as Brunel did, probably have had trouble with the good residents of Iffley which was why his terminus eneded up in Grandpont.

Further up the thread I think we also discussed the Metroplitan Railway's plan to build a terminus in St. Clements, a couple of hundred yards north of yours (between St. Clements Street and the river Cherwell) ,  for their proposed extension of the Brill branch from Quainton Road. Presumably, by connecting Oxford with Baker Street, they had something a bit grander than a bucolic former tramway in mind.