Nether Madder and Green Soudley Rly

[Annie]

Anything that covers storage loops, - even if it's a partial covering, - and involves a duck under as well is going to create a situation where a swear jar will be full to overflowing by the end of an operating session.  I model in a digital format these days and even there where modelling space is potentially limitless I have to bear in mind ease of access when it comes to return loops since it is all too easy to make a covered or hidden return loop that is absolutely a nightmare to try and operate.

These days I tend to go for loops that are hidden in plain sight by use of scenic items to break up lines of sight so that the loops are not so easy to see, but remain accessible.

 

As to the number of storage roads I used six on an end to end layout that I built and each road was assigned a particular type of traffic or destination and only used for that purpose.  The main goods road also had a fan of sidings connected to it to hold various set piece goods trains so that an arriving train could be readily swapped out for another one by means of a little basic shunting.

As to the length of storage roads I think it's always better to put in the longest ones you can practically get to fit rather than try to push them back to a minimum you might find to be much too short once you try to operate the layout.  

[Nearholmer]

12 hours ago, Martin S-C said:

Here is a version with the main line singled. I must confess I don't like it at all

 

I agree with you.

 

For some reason, it has that "if I was going there, I wouldn't start here" feeling about it, partly I think because so many plain single-single track junctions are stretching things a bit on a passenger railway. Even on single-track railways, junctions are usually arranged with a short section of double-track, to allow trains to pass, otherwise they create snarl-ups.

[Regularity]

Not much traffic here so no passing loop, but the BoT’s preference for junctions being double track meant 5 turnouts and a diamond in place of one, and ensured that every train encountered facing points, rather than only half of them...

 

(There wasn’t much track behind the camera, either.)

 

[chris p bacon]

25 minutes ago, Regularity said:

Not much traffic here

 

Where is that location ?

[Talltim]

Going back a bit, Anyrail can be set to show the sleepers. The Track setting, however, does actually mark the position of the rails, not the outsides of the sleepers

Edited December 14, 2020 by Talltim

[Martin S-C]

13 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Hi Martin,

 

If you bridge the entrance door then I suggest the bridge should not attempt to be scenic, should be just one level and only the main lines should journey over it. That makes life much simpler!

Following on from that, since the storage area will also be more or less non-scenic it makes sense to position that to one side or the other of the entrance bridge so that the remainder of the room can be unbroken scenic area. (It might be worth investigating having the storage to the right of the door so that the scenic panorama presented to the visitor on entrance spans the entire length of the room...?)

Then your main line, single or double, can circumnavigate the room in a meandering fashion, without exploring it's limits too far.

A through station on the mainline would be more efficient spatially than a terminus and would avoid both the need for a mainline junction feeding it and the need for the mainline to pass by the station artificially. It could include all the same elements of a terminus, allowing trains to run through at speed (period speed!) as well as allowing trains to terminate and reverse if required.

If the through station incorporated the branch line junction, exactly as you have it in your major station now, then there would be no need for any junctions in the countryside except for possibly the colliery, which could be off the main line, off the branch, or maybe terminating the branch.

You might think that this all sounds a bit anodyne but maybe the simpler bare bones would make it easier to flesh out the character and interest? (Your stations always seem to be naturally characterful to me, BTW.)

 

If the branch line remained outside the main line along its entire length then you wouldn't have any problem with the main line or storage loops being covered - but it would, on the face of it, be a bit boring again.

 

All good points. My main issue with your suggestions is I do really want a terminus station rather than a through one. I like your subsequent post with the storage in a corner and the BLT at the angle. I'll go back to a blank sheet and continue to doodle.

[Talltim]

1 hour ago, chris p bacon said:

 

Where is that location ?

Cockley Brake Junction

https://sulgrave.org/2018/04/slow-middling-and-jolty-also-known-as-the-stratford-upon-avon-and-midland-junction-railway/

That photo appears to be a composite of the original track and the current greenery

Edited December 14, 2020 by Talltim

[Schooner]

More because I was bored over lunch than a genuine suggestion, but the below is what I understood by 'single track' when it first was mentioned:

 

 

A very rough sketch only, as will be apparent, but I just wanted to see if what I had in mind would work. Perhaps it'll be of some use, perhaps not, but thought I'd share.

 

For information, set-track R4 radius for top of return loop, medium points (and long curved), outline-only for suggested ommissions.

 

Yes, I know it's not really 'single-track', but... 

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by Schooner
Medium points are, in theory, >R4. Who knew! Savage radius into lower loop junction could be eased >R4 I'm sure

[Martin S-C]

3 hours ago, Talltim said:

Cockley Brake Junction

 

That photo appears to be a composite of the original track and the current greenery

I was thinking there was something odd about it, it looked photoshopp-ey but I couldn't work it out. I think the track is from a b/w photo and has been digitally coloured. Nice formation though.

[Martin S-C]

2 hours ago, Schooner said:

More because I was bored over lunch than a genuine suggestion, but the below is what I understood by 'single track' when it first was mentioned:

 

 

A very rough sketch only, as will be apparent, but I just wanted to see if what I had in mind would work. Perhaps it'll be of some use, perhaps not, but thought I'd share.

 

For information, set-track R4 radius for top of return loop, medium points (and long curved), outline-only for suggested ommissions.

 

Yes, I know it's not really 'single-track', but... 

 

Interesting. The issue I see is that there is no continuous run that doesn't need points changing every circuit and I just want to sit back from time to time with a cuppa and watch trains circulate and I think, due to the simple geometry of how railway tracks are constructed that a double track circuit is the only way to achieve this with an out-and back option from/to the terminus.

Or ... did I miss something massively basic?

[Schooner]

35 minutes ago, Martin S-C said:

...no continuous run...

I think this works, but Monday-brain is running rampant so it's entirely possible that I have missed something:

 

 

'Out' = dashed

'Back' = dotted

 

I think all points can remain set as shown to allow two trains to operate on the circuit, passing on the double-track section to give the impression of 'up and down lines'. In reality each train is just chasing the other around the figure of 8 formed by the Southern junction diamond crossing. Sorry or the presentation of this too, doing what I can with what I've got!

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by Schooner
PS. This really was just a thought, please do feel free to discard without further concern!

[Martin S-C]

Aha, I see it now. Well with 2 trains circulating across a diamond crossover that might be fun

I understand now that the "west" diamond crossover is only used to reverse direction and that action would require the other train to stop but it could be realistically be held at one of the junctions.

Hmmm... *rubs chin thoughtfully* I shall have a bit more fiddling about in AnyRail tomorrow.

[Martin S-C]

Which gets us this. For the time being I am going to avoid the across-door lifting section.
 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8fzhno4hoyqghpf/NewPlan_Five.jpg

[Regularity]

I might be missing something, but unless you add the two turnouts and short link in blue, what purpose does the crossover circled in red serve?

[Schooner]

Return colliery traffic (having just gone through the exact same process myself).

Edited December 14, 2020 by Schooner
Which isn't to say that the improved junction is not...well...an improvement!

[AdamsRadial]

If the crossover were a single slip it would achieve what the blue additions do.

[Martin S-C]

44 minutes ago, Schooner said:

Return colliery traffic (having just gone through the exact same process myself).

I am sorry I don't follow you. Are you able to explain more?
 

8 minutes ago, AdamsRadial said:

If the crossover were a single slip it would achieve what the blue additions do.

Which crossover, the left or right one? I am not sure what you mean by the blue additions. The blue box is the area reserved for the high level (+4") branch terminus. I just haven't drawn it in yet.

[Regularity]

6 minutes ago, Martin S-C said:

I am sorry I don't follow you. Are you able to explain more?
 

Which crossover, the left or right one? I am not sure what you mean by the blue additions. The blue box is the area reserved for the high level (+4") branch terminus. I just haven't drawn it in yet.

my additions to the plan I downloaded and scribbled on.

 

Snapshot attached.

52 minutes ago, Schooner said:

Return colliery traffic (having just gone through the exact same process myself).

 

Yes, of course - which is obvious now you point it out.

So that crossover stays!

 

16 minutes ago, AdamsRadial said:

If the crossover were a single slip it would achieve what the blue additions do.

True, but would be very restrictive on speed and more likely very close to a station, whereas the outside arrangement is more typical of “open line”.

[Schooner]

We seem to be operating in a chief-rich environment - sorry Martin! I'll respond and then button up for a bit

 

See dotted route for what I meant: the route taken by traffic returning from the colliery back to the storage yard. The red-circled crossover (in Regularity's earlier post) allows this traffic to regain the 'correct' left-hand road.

 

The single slip referred to by Adams, I believe, is also drawn in below:

 

 

Pros and cons, as with everything, so will call it a night!

 

Cheers and gone

Edited December 14, 2020 by Schooner
Spelling!

[Martin S-C]

Sorry I wasn't being difficult, honest! I see exactly what you mean now.

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, Martin S-C said:

Which gets us this. For the time being I am going to avoid the across-door lifting section.
 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8fzhno4hoyqghpf/NewPlan_Five.jpg

Looks good. If Operator 4's controls were duplicated the branch terminus could be operated from the doorway if you were short-handed or nobody felt like crawling underneath.

[lezz01]

If you use an outside single slip it will be fine Martin. I have a template but it's for EM so won't be much good but C&L do one in 00 and it will look fabulous.

Regards Lez.

[Martin S-C]

Exposing my low nerd ranking here I assume an outside single slip is one where the track avoiding the crossing passes fully outside the frogs of the two crossing tracks.

*has just googled and learned something*

[Martin S-C]

I agree with what people were saying in that it does now look decidedly more rural. Below is another update using a single slip graphic and shifting that crossing westwards a tad to ease the left hand divergent curve. I have made the observer/guest viewing well smaller now and there now seems to be a good deal more baseboard exposed that is trackless. CJF would have fits if he could see the abuse we are heaping on his concepts.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rr2yjf1d5xihtlh/NewPlan_FiveB.jpg

Edited December 14, 2020 by Martin S-C

[Regularity]

22 minutes ago, Martin S-C said:

Exposing my low nerd ranking here I assume an outside single slip is one where the track avoiding the crossing passes fully outside the frogs of the two crossing tracks.

*has just googled and learned something*

Yes, that us an outside slip, not, as Ian Rice would have you believe, a semi-outside. That’s a much rarer beast with one set of switches outside the diamond, and one inside, incorporating a total of 3 common crossings (“vees”) and still the two obtuse crossings (“ks”).

At a running junction, rather than in station limits, it would be more usual to gave 4 turnouts and a diamond.

 

The GWR seemed quite fond of outside slips. The GER just fond of slip points.