Jump to content

Turning locos at a terminus


Recommended Posts

Thanks again for the replies. As Gwiwer suggests, I was thinking of using platform 1 for parcels with passenger services using platforms' 2, 3 and 4. If that was the case would the turntable position be acceptable? However, I do understand that the position is awkward so I've moved the turntable beyond the outer curve. The blue lines, incidentally, were my guide to the dimensions of the board so sorry for misleading you. Access to the turntable road, taking asmay2002's idea, now seems to be less awkward? Is this beginning to look a better arrangement?

Moving the turntable also frees up space to include a siding to a private industry for more operational interest. How does that arrangement look? 

Answering oldddudders question, I envisage the terminus to be a secondary station in a large town catering for parcels, suburban and cross country services. There will also be regular football specials to allow locos from different regions to make an appearance.

post-3090-0-00283000-1427922269_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the replies. As Gwiwer suggests, I was thinking of using platform 1 for parcels with passenger services using platforms' 2, 3 and 4. If that was the case would the turntable position be acceptable? However, I do understand that the position is awkward so I've moved the turntable beyond the outer curve. The blue lines, incidentally, were my guide to the dimensions of the board so sorry for misleading you. Access to the turntable road, taking asmay2002's idea, now seems to be less awkward? Is this beginning to look a better arrangement?

Moving the turntable also frees up space to include a siding to a private industry for more operational interest. How does that arrangement look? 

Answering oldddudders question, I envisage the terminus to be a secondary station in a large town catering for parcels, suburban and cross country services. There will also be regular football specials to allow locos from different regions to make an appearance.

That looks better. I presume that the crossover leading to the turntable will in fact be a single slip so that locos can get there directly from the engine release road.

 

Jamie

Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks a lot better and there's nothing now to prevent you still having that parcels road on the (now empty) top face of the upper platform.

 

Going back to my earlier post you can now readily have a coaling / washout road leading off the turntable either from the 'table itself just below the "main line" connection or leading off that spur into the space between running lines and the factory headshunt.

 

Do remember to include a trap point to protect the main line from turntable runaways; this can be the point leading to the coaling road if it comes off the existing access track.

 

In your most recent track plan the diamond must be a double-slip in order for all loco movements to directly access the turntable and arriving trains to access the top platform.  You may read comments about double slips being unprototypical; for every rule there is an exception and it was not unreasonable to have a double-slip in such a location when space was restricted.  There is also plenty of help here if required for wiring and insulating such beasts on the layout.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, I understand your comments about the double slip and trap point, thanks. Secondly, I have to say that I much prefer this arrangement with the loco facilities below the main line as it gives me the opportunity to model a station building and a small townscape at the top of the plan. I have added a second line off the turntable for coaling/water as you suggested and also added a separate siding for coal wagons. How does this look? I'm also thinking of putting a runaround in the factory sidings to ease shunting. Again, input would be appreciated. Many thanks.

post-3090-0-53177900-1427966547_thumb.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know whether a run around would be justified? Most factory sidings like this were simple affairs. 

 

Also you will limit the length of train using it.

 

It will also make the layout look fairly complicated, ie to much track?

 

Still, you might find it useful, depending on what you are trying to achieve. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks good.   On research for the locoshed on Green Ayre I've been told by retired firement that the incoming coal wagons were used for the outgoing ash so the to facilities need to be in the right order. 

 

Jamie

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking good and looking workable.  I wouldn't bother with a run-round on that siding.  It's likely to be the sort of place where only a couple of wagons might be parked now and again.

Edited by Gwiwer
Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll probably shoot me, as I know how difficult it is to come to a final plan :triniti: , but I would omit the run round crossovers. You will not be able to run round your longest trains as they cut the usable platform length by two or three coach lengths and they prevent you using the central road as a siding for spare stock. The latter is a useful addition to station working as it can hold restaurant cars, parcels vans etc. 

 

Having the same problem of lack of space for a city terminus (Bradford North Western) I studied a lot of termini and found the L&Y side of Bradford Exchange to be a useful prototype.  I once did an analysis of train movements there and the great majority were non-revenue-earning - light engines or empty coaching stock. This station had neither run round crossovers nor loco servicing facilities. I concluded that the space the latter might have used up would be better developed as townscape or for goods yards, which provide far more operating potential. You can imagine the MPD being remote from the terminus (as was the case at Bradford Exchange) and add lots of light engine workings. Although this might not have been efficient from the real railway's point of view that is no matter for us - the more movements needed to run a train the better! Run-rounds were not used at Bradford Exchange: most outgoing trains were pulled by locos from previously arrived trains (if they were tank locos and didn't need to be turned). Where incoming locos needed servicing or turning they were sent out to the MPD (Low Moor) after they had been released by the departure of the train they had brought in. 

 

Thus I simplified the track layout (which is important if you are working in P4 and have to build all your turnouts!) yet increased the operating potential. *

 

I hope that isn't a too negative evaluation of your layout. On the positive side your latest plans have achieved one of Cyril Freezer's aims with Minories, namely the rejection of any crossovers with double bends - each of your crossovers has a straight coupled with a curved turnout.

 

Ian

 

* Having said all that, with my new BNW I am considering a small loco servicing depot but that is another story - a desire to model the original small loco depot at Liverpool Lime Street.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll probably shoot me, as I know how difficult it is to come to a final plan :triniti: , but I would omit the run round crossovers. You will not be able to run round your longest trains as they cut the usable platform length by two or three coach lengths and they prevent you using the central road as a siding for spare stock. The latter is a useful addition to station working as it can hold restaurant cars, parcels vans etc. 

 

Having the same problem of lack of space for a city terminus (Bradford North Western) I studied a lot of termini and found the L&Y side of Bradford Exchange to be a useful prototype.  I once did an analysis of train movements there and the great majority were non-revenue-earning - light engines or empty coaching stock. This station had neither run round crossovers nor loco servicing facilities. I concluded that the space the latter might have used up would be better developed as townscape or for goods yards, which provide far more operating potential. You can imagine the MPD being remote from the terminus (as was the case at Bradford Exchange) and add lots of light engine workings. Although this might not have been efficient from the real railway's point of view that is no matter for us - the more movements needed to run a train the better! Run-rounds were not used at Bradford Exchange: most outgoing trains were pulled by locos from previously arrived trains (if they were tank locos and didn't need to be turned). Where incoming locos needed servicing or turning they were sent out to the MPD (Low Moor) after they had been released by the departure of the train they had brought in. 

 

 

 

I'd agree with that, and in my view it's more fun to have a pilot to take the coaches out of the platform and either put them into a departure platform or take them "up the line" to the carriage sidings for servicing.

 

Might I be so bold as to disagree with Stationmaster Mike on one point? I think arrival platforms do need to be longer because you have a large loco (equivalent to one coach length) to accommodate in the platform and you don't want the last coach sticking out beyond the platform. I know it did happen but it wasn't the norm. A departure platform only needs to be as long as the coaches, it doesn't matter if the loco projects a bit. This matters a lot when we are trying to represent a 10 coach train, and the difference between three and four coaches is massive.

 

How much scenic run do you have before the FY? The longer the better as it gives you more time to see the trains moving, Anyway, good luck with this, the plan is looking good so we'll look forward to the build thread!

 

Ed

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is developing nicely.

 

The one thing I'm wondering is that given that we're in the steam age - hence the turntable- would it not be better for the factory siding behind the platforms to be an inner city railway goods depot?  In a tight city location this would probably have a loading/unloading platform behind the track and lifts to take goods to an upper warehouse level that might well overhang the outer track. This would be mostly handling van traffic and perishables rather than bulk loads like coal or stone which would probably be handled in a separate yard further out though some open wagons would have appeared. Part of it could even be a milk depot thus giving scope for tail traffic on at least one of the early morning arriving passenger trains and more work for the station pilot. Inner inner city goods warehouses were pretty common before the traffic was lost to road and a pre-grouping railway company with its own terminus in a city would likely have wanted its own facility. Such termini were often the reason for a secondary terminus in a city and a goods depot would probably offer a greater variety of traffic than a private factory while providing work for a shunting loco. This is separate from the parcels and perhaps postal traffic handled within the passenger station.

 

The presence of a releasing crossover doesn't mean that it has to be used by every train and they might be useful for short local and commuter trains that don't get serviced between runs. Longer trains would certainly not use them and would rely on a station pilot to release their loco.

 

I think you could well now have a parcels/local bay on the other side of the main "departure" platform. Assuming the points for this are on the departure track so as not to shorten your main platfom this would make it departure only for actual trains. I would though see it being more used by parcels vans but it would also be handy for restaurant cars and to let sleeping car passengers snore on for a couple of hours after arrival without tying up one of the main platforms.   

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

In my imagination, the private 'factory' would be a creamery; which would allow me to utilise daily flows of milk tanks in and out of the station area.

Or maybe a brewery, but that might need an extra siding in order to have grain and fuel 'in' with vans of the finished product 'out'.

 

I, too, would not bother about run round facilities, and just have a very busy station pilot; which would keep the interest going during periods with no arrivals or departures. The left hand end of the coal wagon siding could be used to stable the pilot when not needed for shunting movements, and if the main loco depot was somewhere a short distance up the line, there could even be a daily changeover of pilot locomotives at an appointed time, which would add further variety to the operations.

Edited by jonny777
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards of the prototype, one of the reasons for a turntable at a terminus was the presence of 'visiting' engines. To illustrate the point, both King's Cross and Euston had turntables in the station area, despite there being a MPD ('Top Shed' and Camden respectively) only a mile away with a turning facility. If the loco of an arriving train at (say) King's Cross was a Grantham loco (say - to quote a random example!), then it would only be halfway through its 'diagram' and would, in all likelihood be scheduled to haul a departing train back north again within two hours. It would therefore only require turning and watering (it would still have enough coal on board to get back home) so would probably use the station facility, thereby easing congestion at the big depot.

 

However, to continue with the example, if it was a King's Cross('home') loco, then it would be at the end of its diagram, with a run down coal load, need for ashpan to be emptied (etc) so would return to 'Top Shed' for a full 'end of turn' service there (and probably not appear again that day).

 

There were many variations to this, eg 'double home' turns where the visiting loco WOULD require to go to the MPD for coal, etc.

 

To add operational interest to your layout therefore you could imagine that there was a complete MPD a mile or two up the line and divide your loco stud into 'home' engines and 'foreigners'. Home locos would reverse back out to the fiddle yard (and reverse back down into the station subsequently some time later); other locos would use the turntable and remain in the station area.

 

I haven't studied the trackplan in detail but I would suggest a protection spur between the turntable and the slip point on the mainline might be more prototypical..

Edited by LNER4479
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

In my imagination, the private 'factory' would be a creamery; which would allow me to utilise daily flows of milk tanks in and out of the station area.

Excellent choice. The dairy facilities in cities were normally bottling plants and were often located near major stations. Examples include Marylebone, Vauxhall, Ilford and Mordern. Milk tankers were very heavy so were not necessarily very long. The Rossmore Road plant adjacent to Marylebone normally received trains of 3-4 tankers at a time.

 

This shot of 6990 arriving at Marylebone during the 1948 Exchange Trials shows a milk train in the dock on the right along with the obligatory full-brake. (Copyright Ben Brooksbank and licensed for reuse under Creative Commons Licence)

 

post-887-0-43554600-1427977339_thumb.jpg

 

post-887-0-09285800-1427977522_thumb.jpg

 

This shot in more recent times shows the dock in use as a stabling point for steam locos on specials. The Bottling Plant is the large angular building in the background.

 

GMP_Slide17626_4498_35028_Marylebone_170

Edited by Karhedron
Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards of the prototype, one of the reasons for a turntable at a terminus was the presence of 'visiting' engines. To illustrate the point, both King's Cross and Euston had turntables in the station area, despite there being a MPD ('Top Shed' and Camden respectively) only a mile away with a turning facility. If the loco of an arriving train at (say) King's Cross was a Grantham loco (say - to quote a random example!), then it would only be halfway through its 'diagram' and would, in all likelihood be scheduled to haul a departing train back north again within two hours. It would therefore only require turning and watering (it would still have enough coal on board to get back home) so would probably use the station facility, thereby easing congestion at the big depot.

 

However, to continue with the example, if it was a King's Cross('home') loco, then it would be at the end of its diagram, with a run down coal load, need for ashpan to be emptied (etc) so would return to 'Top Shed' for a full 'end of turn' service there (and probably not appear again that day).

 

There were many variations to this, eg 'double home' turns where the visiting loco WOULD require to go to the MPD for coal, etc.

 

To add operational interest to your layout therefore you could imagine that there was a complete MPD a mile or two up the line and divide your loco stud into 'home' engines and 'foreigners'. Home locos would reverse back out to the fiddle yard (and reverse back down into the station subsequently some time later); other locos would use the turntable and remain in the station area.

 

I haven't studied the trackplan in detail but I would suggest a protection spur between the turntable and the slip point on the mainline might be more prototypical..

Much the same at Paddington with Ranelagh Bridge http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/download/file.php?id=11429 but I don't think these stabling points usually had coaling facilities. They were fairly common at or very near many of the London termini where the level of traffic made it necessary to avoid as many light engine movements as possible but were they much used elsewhere where working locos a few miles to the main depot was less of a problem? One example that does come to mind is Kingswear where there was a turntable but no depot (after the small separate shed closed in 1927) and so far as I can make out no coaling facilities but I can't think of many others. 

 

Some termini such as Plymouth-Millbay did have their own small loco depots complete with a shed, ashpit and a simple coaling stage for a few locos even though there was a major depot (in that case Laira) a few miles away. The idea of dividing loco workings into those just being turned and watered locally and those making light engine movements to an off stage shed does seem useful. Where the the main shed did adjoin even a fairly important station it could often dominate the site which is great if you want to build a large loco depot but not so great if your focus is on running trains.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Much the same at Paddington with Ranelagh Bridge http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/download/file.php?id=11429 but I don't think these stabling points usually had coaling facilities.

Indeed, most companies didn't like hauling wagons of loco coal into central London just for it to be hauled out again in tenders. Locos were coaled up for the run into London where possible.
Link to post
Share on other sites

were they much used elsewhere where working locos a few miles to the main depot was less of a problem? . 

Two other examples I can immediately think of are Manchester Central - associated 'home' depot Trafford Park - and Manchester London Road (now Piccadilly) - associated home depot Longsight.

 

The latter (Manchester London Road) is an interesting example as its turntable (a full 70 footer) was removed when plats 13 & 14 were made into through platforms (and the MSJ&AR revised to terminated at Oxford Road) in 1958/9 electrification programme. With Longsight not possessing a 70 foot turntable, any Stanier Pacifics that ended up at London Road (never a regular working) thereafter had to run light and turn on the triangle south of Stockport.

 

Ooh - and of course Liverpool Lime Street had a turntable, with Edge Hill depot just up the road (see the magnificent Lime street project in the layouts thread).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

You'll probably shoot me, as I know how difficult it is to come to a final plan :triniti: , but I would omit the run round crossovers. You will not be able to run round your longest trains as they cut the usable platform length by two or three coach lengths and they prevent you using the central road as a siding for spare stock. The latter is a useful addition to station working as it can hold restaurant cars, parcels vans etc. 

 

 

 

Agree absolutely - as i said previously (before I knew how short the platforms will be) putting in those crossovers is going to make it all look awfully overcrowded and using turnover engines could add to your operating fun interest and help justify that loco siding.  In connection with the latter I would also connect the line you have labelled 'coal siding' into the second line coming off the turntable as that could add flexibility when you're receiving lots of football specials.

I'd agree with that, and in my view it's more fun to have a pilot to take the coaches out of the platform and either put them into a departure platform or take them "up the line" to the carriage sidings for servicing.

 

Might I be so bold as to disagree with Stationmaster Mike on one point? I think arrival platforms do need to be longer because you have a large loco (equivalent to one coach length) to accommodate in the platform and you don't want the last coach sticking out beyond the platform. I know it did happen but it wasn't the norm. A departure platform only needs to be as long as the coaches, it doesn't matter if the loco projects a bit. This matters a lot when we are trying to represent a 10 coach train, and the difference between three and four coaches is massive.

 

Ed

 

You're welcome to disagree Ed but I don't get the logic to be honest.  If an arriving train (i.e. coaches plus engine) is the same length as a  departing train it still needs the same length of platform or - more critically - the same distance in clear of signals because if it hasn't got that space it ties up part of the layout until it is shifted.  Yes - acceptable in the past for the back of a train to 'hang out' at the end of a platform but that was always at the expense of it blocking other moves.  Equally trains could be started with the engine standing in advance of the platform starting signal but, again, it might be at the expense of blocking the layout for other moves.  With a relatively small, but sometimes busy, terminus as is being planned here plus - as it now is - Platforms 2 & 3 readily able to block each other if a train hangs out of the platform/signal running overlong trains would soon tie everything up in a giant knot (just as I observed NR/FGW doing yesterday evening at Buggleskelly our local branch junction.  On the other hand an over length train could readliy be accommodated at Platform 1 provided the signal is up by the toe of the points.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Much the same at Paddington with Ranelagh Bridge http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/download/file.php?id=11429 but I don't think these stabling points usually had coaling facilities. They were fairly common at or very near many of the London termini where the level of traffic made it necessary to avoid as many light engine movements as possible but were they much used elsewhere where working locos a few miles to the main depot was less of a problem? One example that does come to mind is Kingswear where there was a turntable but no depot (after the small separate shed closed in 1927) and so far as I can make out no coaling facilities but I can't think of many others. 

 

Some termini such as Plymouth-Millbay did have their own small loco depots complete with a shed, ashpit and a simple coaling stage for a few locos even though there was a major depot (in that case Laira) a few miles away. The idea of dividing loco workings into those just being turned and watered locally and those making light engine movements to an off stage shed does seem useful. Where the the main shed did adjoin even a fairly important station it could often dominate the site which is great if you want to build a large loco depot but not so great if your focus is on running trains.  

Bottom shed - as it was known - at Kings Cross could coal engines but it was unusual in terms of London, and other. termini in that respect.  An ashpit would be far more useful than a coaler and in any case an inspection pit would be sensible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With Longsight not possessing a 70 foot turntable, any Stanier Pacifics that ended up at London Road (never a regular working) thereafter had to run light and turn on the triangle south of Stockport.

Which would've taken them almost to me (Davenport). Wish I could've seen that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, could I thank you for all the replies. This plan has been worrying me for ages now, but with your input I think I'm pretty close to something that's realistic with plenty of operational potential. With that in mind I've abandoned the runaround in the station - the use of a pilot to move coaching stock etc really appeals to me. Pacific231G's idea of having a bay platform, departures only, that could be used for parcels etc also struck a chord. I have amended the plan and would again appreciate your observations. Listening to your various points I have also abandoned the coal siding and, as recommended by Stationmaster, connected it to the turntable. He also mentioned that an inspection pit might be sensible - could it be included on this line? The idea of switching the private factory to a city goods depot is also a good one, but a brewery as suggested by Jonnny777 also ticks a box with me. I'll have to think about that but, whatever the decision, I don't intend to put in the runaround I mentioned in my last post.

Answering edcayton, this new layout will be housed in a recently converted loft, slightly shy of 12' x 10'. The double main line from the terminus travels down and around the loft to a fiddle yard and reverse loop (under the terminus) so there is plenty of scope to watch the trains run by, which was one of the key elements of this new project. This track has been down for a couple of months, point motors are installed and working and testing has gone well.

Reorte mentioned he lived close to the reversing triangle south of Stockport. Me too, I'm less then a minute from the site of the famous 'Khyber' Pass, which was part of the triangle. I'm sure he'll recognise the football ground on my current layout!

post-3090-0-54801300-1427995731_thumb.jpg

post-3090-0-17219300-1427995763_thumb.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it's a crackin' post Ian. The extra set of crossovers make such a difference. I'm going to open Anyrail later to see if I can make any modifications?! With regards to my plan, do you have any thoughts on the bay platform and the second entrance/exit to the turntable? Also, would an inspection pit be a sensible addition? Many thanks. Des

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.