Partly Maidenhead

[Tallpaul69]

It wasn't just the high level,complicated woodwork,which someone else will build) and difficult access that was off putting!

 

Yes, I know there are a number of other terminal GW stations, but they all have problems for me:-

For instance I need to run in three time periods, 1960-2 1976-8 and 1990-2. So anywhere that closed or was drastically reduced in the late 60s-early 70s is no good!

I have to use what stock and locos I have, and I don't think they suit Birkenhead or Swansea, also I think those two closed early??

 

I am not convinced by the terminus that quickly joins a through line- yes, I know Moor St did that!

 

Anyway, thanks for the ideas, but I think my Partly Maidenhead has some mileage in it yet, so I will carry on with that for now!

 

Best regards

Paul

[Zomboid]

Swansea is still open. And you could always imagine that Millbay etc hadn't closed if you so wished, most layouts are imagined/ might have been/ variations on what really happened.

 

But if part of Maidenhead is what you want to model then no array of terminal stations is going to help...

Edited November 28, 2018 by Zomboid

[imt]

I wonder, would something like a vertical FY help?

 

Wonderful things, and a wow to watch in action BUT there is a slight problem.  You cannot reverse trains very easily (unless they are MUs of some sort with driving at both ends) - there are ways to do it but they are cumbersome.  If you have £3200 spare just have 2?

 

The best solution I have seen is one of those and a reversing loop.

['CHARD]

Wonderful things, and a wow to watch in action BUT there is a slight problem.  You cannot reverse trains very easily (unless they are MUs of some sort with driving at both ends) - there are ways to do it but they are cumbersome.  If you have £3200 spare just have 2?

 

The best solution I have seen is one of those and a reversing loop.

 

Are they not drive-through?  I assumed from the plan view that you can enter at the left hand end, and come out again at the right?

 

I'd forgotten about these, and I am extremely interested in a couple, so thanks for the reminder!!!  

 

Edited November 28, 2018 by 'CHARD

[OhOh]

Wonderful things, and a wow to watch in action BUT there is a slight problem.  You cannot reverse trains very easily (unless they are MUs of some sort with driving at both ends) - there are ways to do it but they are cumbersome.  If you have £3200 spare just have 2?

 

The best solution I have seen is one of those and a reversing loop.

Assuming there's no reason that a fixed board couldn't be placed parallel to the elevator at main baseboard level and some form of automatic uncoupling incorporated within the elevator, then a point before and after the elevating section would enable an engine to run-round in traditional fashion.

 

Alternatively, so long as there was always an empty track on the elevator, it could be used to move the loco to the other end.

 

Or loco storage sidings at either end, similar to those already in the OP's drawing but swung 90degrees, might be the easiest solution.

 

But I'm wary of distracting from the OP's more pressing need to find a suitable layout plan.

[imt]

Are they not drive-through?  I assumed from the plan view that you can enter at the left hand end, and come out again at the right?

 

 

 

Absolutely true - but lots of layouts with the configuration we are discussing (through main station with fiddle yard) want the train to go back from the Fiddle Yard in the direction it came in.  This means the engine needs to run round. OhOh's ideas are some of the suite of possibilities to fix this, but you (the operator) have to intervene - unless you have a reversing loop built in to your layout.        

[Tallpaul69]

Thanks for all the input guys however there are two things I definitely rule out:-

 

1) Vertical FYs:- Not convinced they would help!

 

2) Terminal stations:- I want to be able (when I choose) to sit and watch trains tail chase, also unless you are going to reverse every train somewhere, you need a reverse loop, which takes up a lot of space!

 

So getting back to the main topic:

 

Reversing trains in a through fiddle yard is reasonably easy provided you have sidings to hold locomotives (and for goods, brake vans),and crossovers to get trains from one direct to the other.

 

The aim is to minimise the use of the hand in the sky even in the fiddle yards, except in the case of accidents!

 

Agreed the formation might be wrong but for the goods there will be 4 times in a day in each direction, that a goods stops in Partly Maidenhead loops and drops off some wagons and picks up others. Thus the formations will periodically change.

 

A benefit of Maidenhead is that for a large part of the day it had a pilot engine supplied by Slough Shed. This allows the dropped off wagons to be moved and the next pick up of wagons positioned ready.

 

Mentioning the pilot, light engine workings were quite frequent with Slough shed providing a pilot for Taplow (which first went to Twyford, then after an hour or so back again. and engines for an early morning train from Maidenhead to Paddington, and half an hour or so later another one for the morning train from Bourne End to Paddington.

 

This is just a taste of some of the interesting movements revealed by the WTTs and the Carriage working Diagrams.

 

Best regards

Paul

['CHARD]

Absolutely true - but lots of layouts with the configuration we are discussing (through main station with fiddle yard) want the train to go back from the Fiddle Yard in the direction it came in.  This means the engine needs to run round. OhOh's ideas are some of the suite of possibilities to fix this, but you (the operator) have to intervene - unless you have a reversing loop built in to your layout.        

 

Ah yes, I wasn't fully aware that we were discussing end-to-end layouts, given the emphasis on roundies earlier in the topic.

[The Stationmaster]

It wasn't just the high level,complicated woodwork,which someone else will build) and difficult access that was off putting!

 

Yes, I know there are a number of other terminal GW stations, but they all have problems for me:-

For instance I need to run in three time periods, 1960-2 1976-8 and 1990-2. So anywhere that closed or was drastically reduced in the late 60s-early 70s is no good!

I have to use what stock and locos I have, and I don't think they suit Birkenhead or Swansea, also I think those two closed early??

 

I am not convinced by the terminus that quickly joins a through line- yes, I know Moor St did that!

 

Anyway, thanks for the ideas, but I think my Partly Maidenhead has some mileage in it yet, so I will carry on with that for now!

 

Best regards

Paul

 

Just about everywhere on the WR was reduced or considerably simplified during the mid 1960s (apart from the lines/places which were closed) and Maidenhead didn't escape that with the good depot closing in 1965 plus of course there had been quite a lot of rationalisation in the area with resignalling in 1963.

[Tallpaul69]

Ah yes, I wasn't fully aware that we were discussing end-to-end layouts, given the emphasis on roundies earlier in the topic.

There seems to be some confusion:-

 

I am discussing, and I thought you all were discussing, roundies, with trains either going round in one direction, or sometimes, to simulate going somewhere and coming back, reversing in the fiddle yard by putting a new locomotive (and brake van if goods) on the other end of the train.

Of course the original loco has to come off (unless using current era trains and simulating modern both end motive power!).

 

By reversing trains you do get twice as many trains passing a given point in the same direction before the cycle repeats.

 

As I was also explaining you can change your goods train consists by dropping wagons off and picking new ones up in the goods yard.

 

All these are ways to mask the small number of trains that can be accommodated in a fiddle yard unless you run very short trains which is only realistic for a few trains on a main line!

 

Are we all on the same lines now?(excuse the pun!!)

 

Best regards

Paul

 

 

i

[Tallpaul69]

Just about everywhere on the WR was reduced or considerably simplified during the mid 1960s (apart from the lines/places which were closed) and Maidenhead didn't escape that with the good depot closing in 1965 plus of course there had been quite a lot of rationalisation in the area with resignalling in 1963.

Mike,

Agree about the rationalisation, which is why I think it reasonable to take out some of the track, provided the essence of the operation of the location is preserved.

 

By the way, another  attraction of Maidenhead is that the Goods Shed remained, although not in railway use.

 

I will be taking liberties with signaling, to accommodate my 1970s and 1990s versions, by working on basis that the 1963 scheme took place earlier. After all, nearer London it did! This is a compromise I can live with.

So no lovely Lower Quadrant semaphores I am afraid!

I do realise that the 1963 resignaling didn't last until 1990s but I am working on the basis that unless you are an expert in the subject, one colour light signal looks much like another (bet this stirs up a hornets nest of comments!!).

Oh well back to my scale drawings!

 

 Cheers

Paul

[Zomboid]

You could look at somewhere that the mechanical signalling did survive. Moreton-in-Marsh only lost its semaphores recently. Or Banbury. Worcester still has them as far as I know.

 

You'd be taking a big liberty with keeping the goods yard into later years, but that's the case everywhere.

[Tallpaul69]

You could look at somewhere that the mechanical signalling did survive. Moreton-in-Marsh only lost its semaphores recently. Or Banbury. Worcester still has them as far as I know.

 

You'd be taking a big liberty with keeping the goods yard into later years, but that's the case everywhere.

True,

 

My plan for the yard is to have a removable cover which converts it into a car park.

 

Banbury, with its overbridge to mask the fiddle yard entrance and the engine shed to mask the other end, is on my reserve list, but is probably too big.

The cover scheme above could be applied to the engine shed area if I kept the shed removeable, but it would need a modern building to do the masking function of the engine shed.

Moreton in the Marsh is not very interesting in the later eras and Worcester is again too big and complex!

 

Princes Risborough has appeal with its three branches, two in use to some degree until recently, the third to Aylesbury still in use. The preserved use of the Chinnor line also appeals. However the change to two way use of the up platform brings problems for the more modern version! 

 

I have looked at an awful lot of locations before settling on the Slough-Maidenhead area, but someone may have an approach that I have not thought of so keep the ideas rolling. However I have to say that the only West country location that appealed was Exeter, but is again too big. Bending reality to keep open a long closed line is not too appealing.

 

One of the appeals of Maidenhead is the High Wycombe branch which is more than just a one engine in steam affair.

 

Best regards

Paul

[Joseph_Pestell]

With some simplification, I think you may be able to get something close to your original Maidenhead plan. It may need the points on the scenic part to be flexed as per Grantham.

 

A similar junction station, but more compact, is West Ealing.

 

But, and this has arisen before, I wonder if your best option is not two separate layouts.

 

On the lower level, a plain track roundy-roundy with no station. You can just about make this four track and still have scope for a small freight facility (dairy?) in one corner.

 

On the upper level (12" above the hidden sidings of the main line layout), an L shaped terminus to fiddleyard - something with an excuse for larger locos such as Henley or Windsor & Eton.

[The Stationmaster]

You could look at somewhere that the mechanical signalling did survive. Moreton-in-Marsh only lost its semaphores recently. Or Banbury. Worcester still has them as far as I know.

 

You'd be taking a big liberty with keeping the goods yard into later years, but that's the case everywhere.

 

Oddly in the area which the Maidenhead model is based on (as per plan earlier in this thread) there would have been until 1974 more semaphore signals than colour light signals because the branch and back platform loop retained semaphore signalling (and acquired a new mechanical signalbox) in the 1963 resignalling.

[Nick Gough]

Oddly in the area which the Maidenhead model is based on (as per plan earlier in this thread) there would have been until 1974 more semaphore signals than colour light signals because the branch and back platform loop retained semaphore signalling (and acquired a new mechanical signalbox) in the 1963 resignalling.

I remember this from 1973 when the GWS ran 6106 and 6998 Burton Agnes Hall top and tail up to Bourne End for the Marlow branch centenary.

[Tallpaul69]

Oddly in the area which the Maidenhead model is based on (as per plan earlier in this thread) there would have been until 1974 more semaphore signals than colour light signals because the branch and back platform loop retained semaphore signalling (and acquired a new mechanical signalbox) in the 1963 resignalling.

Thanks Mike!

 

I have yet to look in much detail at signalling, so in an attempt to not make my posts too complicated, I had just concentrated on the main thrust of the 1963 signalling scheme.

To answer your point, I will probably only need to deal with the pre 1974 and post 1974 signals for two or three signals if I only portray the west end of the platforms. So it would not be too difficult to have removable lower quadrant and colour lights at  those points.

 

So I have made a note of this in my things to do list and once the track plan is finalised I will come back to this matter!

 

Meanwhile, has anyone a signal diagram for Maidenhead in the pre or post 1963 schemes or post 1974? Things will have changed a bit when the signal boxes were concentrated to the one flat roof effort, modelling of which will be interesting!

 

Many thanks

Paul

[imt]

Type "signalling maidenhead" (without the quotes) into Google and look for an SRS PDF freely downloadable which is Maidenhead 1963 upgrade.

 

There are also some diagrams here https://www.mmpa.org.uk/gallery/gallery23/index.html

Edited December 1, 2018 by imt

[The Stationmaster]

Maidenhead 1963 resignalling

 

http://www.signallingnotices.org.uk/notices_detail.php?n_id=269#scans

 

Maidenhead 1974 resignalling

 

http://www.signallingnotices.org.uk/notices_detail.php?n_id=282#scans

[TonyMay]

I have wondered about a layout concept of "X through the ages", which would be 2 or 3 models of the same location but set in different times, illustrating changes over those times.  Maybe for example one layout set in the 1890s, another in the 1950s and finally one set in the 2010s.  The 1890s one would feature small period steam engines, a busy goods yard with wagonload freight, and semaphores galore; the one from the 1950s mostly steam and a few diesels, the goods yard still in use albeit half empty, and 1930s style signalling; the one from the 2010s garishly-vinyled boxes on wheels, no pointwork, a goods yard full of cars, and modern colour light signals.  The point would be to illustrate changes over the timeframe.

[Joseph_Pestell]

I have wondered about a layout concept of "X through the ages", which would be 2 or 3 models of the same location but set in different times, illustrating changes over those times.  Maybe for example one layout set in the 1890s, another in the 1950s and finally one set in the 2010s.  The 1890s one would feature small period steam engines, a busy goods yard with wagonload freight, and semaphores galore; the one from the 1950s mostly steam and a few diesels, the goods yard still in use albeit half empty, and 1930s style signalling; the one from the 2010s garishly-vinyled boxes on wheels, no pointwork, a goods yard full of cars, and modern colour light signals.  The point would be to illustrate changes over the timeframe.

 

I too have thought about doing this having seen just such a display in the Nuremburg museum. I think that to represent the UK scene one might want more than three scenes.

[Tallpaul69]

Changing the subject a little:-

Can anyone tell me in the 1950s/60s which of the four up and 4 down freights that stopped at Maidenhead on the Reading line delivered and or picked up coal wagons?
Or did the coal come down the branch from Wycombe on the evening train that delivered coal and picked up empties from the Branch stations?

 

Thanks
Paul

[Tallpaul69]

Hi All,

As several readers of my current thread "To DCC or not?" had read and contributed to this thread, I thought I would update it for those who have not made the link!

Currently I am awaiting estimates from a couple of builders. I have a draft plan from one of them, but cannot share it as it is at present his copyright.

His draft demonstrates that my sketch was possible.

 

Before I sent the enquiry out I had taken the station platforms out . While the station buildings remained the same until the current electrification started, the differences in station furniture over the eras made platforms a non starter.

 

I will update you further as things progress. I may also for the benefit of new readers restate my principals for the model.

 

Cheers

Paul