Lower Thames Yard

[Nick Gough]

What I'm thinking of, Paul, is doing something like this:

[Tallpaul69]

1 hour ago, Nick Gough said:

As a compromise, could you stagger the middle lines as well and just have each one in place alongside its own platform?

Have you got the space for a couple of points between the two platforms?

Thanks Nick,

Yes that is a possibility!

An initial look at the timetables suggests that some slight changes to  the timetable could mean the down platform loop could be omitted and the platform put beside the down main.

 

For instance there is a train from Maidenhead via the branch that arrives at HW at 2.39pm, moving on towards Princes Risborough at 2.49. Meanwhile a Paddington to Birkenhead express passed (on the down main) at 2.42pm. 

If I run things so that the train from Maidenhead arrives at 2.45 , after the express has passed, then both trains can use one line!

 

I have to do more work on the timetables but I am hopeful of finding a solution.

 

Cheers

Paul

[Tallpaul69]

Hello, One and All,

 

Not got much done today on the modelling front, but did find time to unpack a 1962 WR London Division section A passenger WTT that arrived from the Bay yesterday.

Up to this point I had been using a 1958 version plus a part download curtesy Robert Carroll's site of a 1961 version, - but changing from Maidenhead to Thame and High Wycombe meant I needed the Paddington to Banbury pages rather than the Paddington-Reading _ Oxford pages.

I had been summoning up the energy to down load and print those pages when I saw the 1962 full book at a sensible price so pounced immediately! 

 

I have also been pondering the representing High Wycombe with less than four tracks problem:-

The simplest version is three tracks- two up and one down or two down and one up!

Nick Gough's suggestion of one down and two up changing to ftwo down and one up between the staggered platform ends has attractions but would need quite a lot of length so that I could use large radius points to avoid fast moving trains swaying too un prototypically  over the points!

The really space saving idea is of course to only have two tracks, but I don't think that would look right.

So I must settle down with the timetables and see how often trains were overtaken in the platforms.

 

Unfortunately, this will not be a precise examination  as the only freight timetables I have for High Wycombe are 1954 and 1964!

 

Maybe someone will look kindly on me soon and post a 1960, 61, or 62 Freight section A on the 'Bay?

 

Kind regards ,

 

Edited October 7, 2020 by Tallpaul69

[Nick Gough]

Another possible option is to do what BR did in the 1990s - have no through tracks, but a large gap between the platform lines.

West Wycombe station had this type of track layout for its entire life, since no through lines were ever installed there.

In this case, since you wouldn't need to fit actual tracks in the space, the gap could be just representational and not two track widths.

 

[Tallpaul69]

Good Afternoon All,

It became apparent that before I could progress the High Wycombe Track plan and settle the how many through tracks? issue, I needed to look at the WTTs. As recorded earlier I have a 1962 passenger WTT but only 1954 and 64 freight WTTs.

Fortunately yesterday evening I located and down loaded a 1960-1 issue and printed off the dozen relevant pages. I am currently going through the two and recording the conflicting movements, which so far are not too many! 

Nick Gough's suggestion of using the more modern alignment of up and down platform roads with a space in between where the through tracks were, bearing in mind that I am modelling more modern eras as well as the 60s, has attractions. 

Watch this space!

 

Meanwhile on the Thame side of things I hope we have reached a final layout. After a revised plan sent to me last night, the only issue was the Fuel Depot layout.

This morning I seized the bull by the horns and sketched a version of Thame with a dedicated head shunt for the fuel trains behind a fence at the back of the yard, rather than the previous scheme of using one of the yard sidings as the head shunt. This enabled me to move the entrance to the discharge sidings further back in the scene and allowed the discharge sidings to be straight and longer than previously.

 

I sent this off to the layout builders just before starting this post, so I will have to wait to see what they think!

 

The next job will be to get some details off to Stephen Freeman for him to quote for the signals. These will be simpler than the Maidenhead ones he quoted for, but needing two sets, Semaphores and Colour lights, with the appropriate set plugging in and out simply, makes them still a tricky proposition!

While i could get away with only semaphores in Thame as I am inclined to keep the signal box, I think HW will have to have the appropriate signals for each era, particularly if I adapt the modern track layout!

 

On the NG front I hope this weekend to dig out some of the photos I took at last year's 50 year gala, with engines all over the place. Just a memory now, unfortunately, but lets hope the railway can get back to something like its usual program next year?

 

Best regards

Paul

 

[Tallpaul69]

Here we are again!

Had a good morning today, received, checked and signed off the latest version of "Thame", so we have a track plan to go! I didn't expect it until maybe Monday.

I think they are getting fed up  with me, so have turned the last two changes corrections around quickly!

 

I have made a start on the signal diagram. I thought it would be easier to amend the official diagram rather than starting from scratch, but it is taking longer than I expected. The tricky bit is getting the disc ground signals right. I think I will run my effort past Mike (stationmaster), before I send it off to Stephen to quote against.

 

Just come back from having my annual flu jab. The town seems full of road works, so I have sent a message to Geoff, our eldest son, warning him as he may be collecting the grandchildren (and friends) from school and he could get caught out if he goes the obvious way!

 

I have started playing around with possible ways to empty full coal wagons on Thame. In Lower Thames Yard I had drawn in two sidings which disappeared off scene into the fiddle yard, so coal wagons could be "swapped", full for empty and the full ones reappear on a later coal train.

I don't have room for this on Thame, so I am thinking about removable loads with magnets underneath, and pulling them out of a wagon with another magnet on an wooden arm. It is a bit far to reach them easily to remove them by hand.

No idea if this will work, might pose the question on the Modelling Forum?

 

Take care everyone,

Best regards

Paul

 

 

 

 

[St Enodoc]

6 hours ago, Tallpaul69 said:

I have made a start on the signal diagram. I thought it would be easier to amend the official diagram rather than starting from scratch, but it is taking longer than I expected. The tricky bit is getting the disc ground signals right. I think I will run my effort past Mike (stationmaster), before I send it off to Stephen to quote against.

Post it here Paul!

[St Enodoc]

6 hours ago, Tallpaul69 said:

I don't have room for this on Thame, so I am thinking about removable loads with magnets underneath, and pulling them out of a wagon with another magnet on an wooden arm. It is a bit far to reach them easily to remove them by hand.

You won't need magnets on the loads and the stick. Just bits of steel in the loads.

[Tallpaul69]

15 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Post it here Paul!

Will do when its finished!- Probably tomorrow. 

[Nick Gough]

18 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Post it here Paul!

 

2 hours ago, Tallpaul69 said:

Will do when its finished!- Probably tomorrow. 

Can you do the same for your High Wycombe track options?

[Tallpaul69]

44 minutes ago, Nick Gough said:

 

Can you do the same for your High Wycombe track options?

Hi Nick,

Yes I will do when I have redrawn HW. Current sketch is just that, needs to be drawn to the correct size!

Watch this space?

Cheers

Paul

[Tallpaul69]

Hi Everyone,

I had hoped to post my Thame signal diagram today, but home/garden jobs conspired against me and then responses to my enquiries about oil terminals in the Prototype thread diverted me!

It was a good diversion because i was sent a link to a photo on Flickr which turned out to be a colour photo of Thame petroleum terminal taken from the Station road bridge in 1986 and answered a number of my questions including giving good detail of the road tanker filling area as well as the rail tank sidings.

Also HRMS Paul pointed me in the direction of the "Oil by Rail Tankers" book, which I have bought a copy of, so hopefully this will give me more information.

 

So the signal diagram will have to wait until tomorrow.

 

I hope you are all making similar good progress?

Regards

Paul 

[Tallpaul69]

Good Afternoon Folks,

 

Here as promised is the "Thame" signal diagram and the track plan for my layout phase 1 -Thame.

 

I must apologise for the plans being at 90 degrees, they can be larger that way round, but I understand they may not be to everyone's liking, so I will later post a set the right way round to avoid you all getting stiff necks!!

 

I have put them together as the track plan makes sense of some of the comments below on the signal diagram:-

 

 

My version of Thame is double track whereas the prototype was a passing place on single track.

Thus I have replaced the facing points at the end of the passing loop with trailing crossovers so the signaling has had to change. The layout occupies half of my 12ft x 8ft railway room with a double junction at each end which will lead to phase 2 occupying the other half of the room.

That phase will consist of 6 long fiddle yard loops with a simplified version of High Wycombe in front of the fiddle yard being hidden by High Wycombe's characteristic high wall!

I will post a plan of this phase in a few days. 

To fit a reasonable version of Thame into the available 12ft length the sidings are more behind the up platform than they were on the prototype.

I have added a Starter at the up end of the down platform to allow the late afternoon autocoach or railcar from Princes Risborough to terminate there and return to Princes Risborough via the crossover near the signal box while a 61xx hauled work mans' train from Morris Cowley is terminating in the up platform.

After the Princes Risborough train has left the 61xx will pull its train along the up track , reverse it over the crossover , uncouple, return over the cross over and run round its train via the other cross over near the road bridge.

 

I would welcome comments on the signal set up especially the number and position of the discs. 

 

Now here is the layout track plan:-

 

 

Because of the geography of the layout I will not be modeling  either fixed distance signals nor the up Advanced Starter.  These would be round curves outside the scenic area of the layout.  

Again, because of the curves I have moved the Oil Depot from beside the Oxford bound down track to be off the station yard on the up side. This has resulted in an privite siding set up which includes a long head shunt to receive the tankers which arrive on the down side of the layout and its own ground frame. 

The siding set up has been simplified eliminating the complex crossovers at the station end of the goods shed. There are still 4 sidings

 

I have now agreed this with my layout builders so apart from adjusting siding lengths, I would only want to alter it if a really glaring error came to light!

 

Hope you enjoy analysing my efforts!

Best regards

Paul 

 

[Tallpaul69]

Hello again,

Here are the two plans from the last post rotated. They have lost a little from the sides but nothing too important!

I hope you find these better to work with.

 

The signals:-

 

 

The layout plan:_

 

 

 

Best regards

Paul

[Nick Gough]

Paul,

You don't need all the discs in the goods yard. You only need one at the entry points, in the Up Main, and one for the exit, at the headshunt/catch points (above the up starting signal). Any other movements can be handsignalled by the guard/shunter. (The goods yard layout is slightly different between your signal diagram and the track layout diagram?)

 

The loading/cattle dock siding should have a catch point, near the main line, with the disc adjacent to it.

 

I know you're not modelling them but I believe the distant signals would be working ones as a double track line. I suspect Thame's distants were originally working until policy for single lines changed, in the early 20th century - the numbering of the spare levers at each end of the frame support this. 

 

Since the down starting signal is in advance of the trailing crossover, at that end of the station, you can't have a down train accepted into the station whilst a crossing movement is taking place. The down home would protect the crossover in this case.

 

By removing the trailing connection from the Down Main into the goods yard you have removed the original purpose of the 'shunt ahead' signal. However, it is still required to allow a down train locomotive to run around its train, prior to shunting operations or reversal.

 

Not important for modelling purposes, but a facing point lock would be needed for the down end of the crossover for your Up passenger movement from the down platform.

 

Hope this helps.

 

 

[Tallpaul69]

Many Thanks for the evaluation Nick,

I started with discs in the goods yard much as you suggested, but I wasn't sure what was needed due to the Private Sidings and its ground frame for the Oil Depot, so got carried away!

The differences in the goods yard between the signal diagram(which is based on the prototype's single track diagram) and the layout plan are due to moving the sidings behind the station rather than next to it!

Also I have in my layout plan the goods shed one siding further away from the main line than it was in fact. I may alter this once I have the layout and play around with the location of yard features such as the shed and coal siding.

Fair comment about the distant signals, I hadn't spotted that!

 

I agonised over removing the trailing connection from the Down Main into the goods yard because it meant I could not faithfully portray the pick up by the down pick up goods of wagons positioned  in the Goods Shed road by the up pick up goods.

However, I had to sacrifice this bit of accurate portrayal because taking it out greatly simplified the track layout and there just was not room for the Goods Shed road next to the Up Main.

 

Best regards

Paul

 

 

  

[Tallpaul69]

Afternoon All,

 

Having a break from Thame, while I work up a first pass at a plan for High Wycombe.

It is nearly there, just needs a bit of tidying up tomorrow and some notes written, before I post it here!

 

I have had to stick with the goods yard on the south side rather than beside the platforms as I want to minimise the duck under for access to the layout.  A benefit of this is that I might be able to fit in a set of my "in full, out empty" coal sidings behind the goods shed

I might have to reduce the number of Marylebone locals due to space considerations. Also by 1962 there should be some class 116s starting to show and I don't fancy trying to cut and shut or kit build these.

 

I still have to find those NG photos from last year, but I have fallen over some good shots of Witney Goods Shed Extension in GWJ 87, although , of course, they are not vital now!

 

As always, never a dull moment!

 

Cheers

Paul

[Tallpaul69]

So today for all you watchers, I have the first rough plan for phase 2 of my Thame and High Wycombe Layout:-

 

This comprises a set of six storage loops which are taken from my aborted "Lower Thames Yard" layout, with a hand drawn initial version of "High Wycombe" in front of it. To explain the area available for this phase I have outlined the "Thame" boards below, and in their correct position relative to this phase 2. 

I would draw your attention to the notes I have added below the plan:-

 

 

Notes:-

1) The door to the room, shown top Left is hinged at it's bottom end on the plan and opens outwards.

 

2) Drawing this out with 4 through tracks in the station has confirmed my suspicion that they take up too much room, resulting in the operating well only being two feet across, although quite long, and the far tracks in the fiddle yard being three feet from the operating well! 

 

3) I am now working on the WTT for the layout, to decide how best to configure the through tracks. My favoured solution is to condense the through tracks into one up/down track, somewhat as @NickGough suggested a few days ago, but with two extra points connecting his separated up and down part through tracks to make a continuous through track.

 

4) Another fact shown by my drawing is that I need a clear gap at the bottom left and bottom right of High Wycombe to allow a sensible scenic break between High Wycombe and Thame. I thinking about belts of trees or rows of houses or a combination of the two!

 

5) This means that the Goods Shed area needs redrawing. Other aspects of that area which I need to change include moving the short siding on the right marked (X), the purpose of which is a holding siding for the yard shunter (which worked 24 hours/day(!) and its toad for use on its trip runs to the North Yard.

 

6) Another feature of the goods sidings I want to improve is the coal siding. On "Lower Thames Yard" I had a coal siding which ran behind some houses and through to the fiddle yard. This allowed me to deliver full coal wagons at the scenic end of the siding, later use a shunter to pull them through to a siding in the fiddle yard and replace them with empty coal wagons from another fiddle yard siding. Then the empty wagons could be realistically drawn out of the scenic end of the siding!

 

While I don't now have enough room for this I am toying with shortening the coal siding (above the Goods Shed), linking it through two point to two sidings:- one for full, one for empty wagons.

Wagons are drawn out of those siding and taken away through a hidden siding inside the buildings between the coal siding and the main lines, which this siding joins. (sounds complicated, but is quite simple, as you will see when I draw it!)

 

Ant thoughts on the above would be welcome.

Best regards

Paul

[Nick Gough]

Paul, have you considered modelling the Up platform and building in low relief to reduce the width a bit? You could have just the building's front wall butted up against the backscene, with a reduced width to the platform, and use the retaining wall to help disguise this.

 

How about a couple of tunnels as scenic breaks? The one on the right could be Whitehouse Farm tunnel (a couple of miles before Beaconsfield in reality). The one on the left - Saunderton - although the real one is single bore, Up line only.

[Nick Gough]

I don't suppose you've got enough room to consider a multi-level layout where you have your storage loops above or below the scenic area?

[Tallpaul69]

Good Afternoon All,

Picking up on Nick's suggestions:-

Low relief for the up platforms, particularly the platform buildings is a good idea. I am not sure how the buildings joined up to the wall in reality.

 

Regarding the scenic breaks, my current thinking is that the road bridge at the North end of the down platform would be one, and the buildings beside the line at the south end of the yard would be the break at the other end. 

Yes, tunnels are a good idea, but I don't really want o box in the quite complex junctions at the meeting of the High Wycombe and Thame boards, so I think I'll see how this track work runs in practice before deciding.

 

My previous plan did have  a low level yard, and if you look at the High Wycombe fiddle yard  which started out life on the Lower Thames Yard plan), the track at the top was originally a single track up/down incline that ran all the way round the room dropping to a yard underneath the main fiddle yard. 

However, the complications of this , was, i think, one factor in the layout builders decision that Lower Thames Yard could not be built in the current virus threat. This is understandable, because, in our constructions at home, we can in most instances stop for however long we need to. In a commercial environment, a large layout partly built might prevent other more easily completed work being started! 

 

I have finished my first go at a plan for modelling the Marylebone to High Wycombe etc. suburban service, which will help in seeing what works in the way of reduced running tracks through my High Wycombe, but more of that in my next posting. 

 

In other on going jobs, I have located my OOC Locomotive workings which turn out to be Winter 1958, which is handy as I have the London District Winter 1958 WTT!

The loco workings amount to 113 sheets, so quite a lot of reading there!

 

I have also found and transferred to my laptop some of my NGR photos from last autumns Gala, so I will post them in a day or two.  

 

Best regards

Paul

[Nick Gough]

52 minutes ago, Tallpaul69 said:

I have finished my first go at a plan for modelling the Marylebone to High Wycombe etc. suburban service, which will help in seeing what works in the way of reduced running tracks through my High Wycombe, but more of that in my next posting. 

 

I well remember these trains from the mid-1960s onwards. The Neasden to Northolt Junction section of the GCR line ran alongside our local recreation ground, next to the entrance to South Harrow tunnel. 

https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/MoT_Sudbury1944.pdf

 

By this time all the passenger trains were green DMUs (gradually becoming blue). Mostly with High Wycombe destination blinds but the occasional Aylesbury (via Princes Risborough) one.

Up until 1966 we had one late afternoon steam working, from Marylebone - a Down parcels train, worked by a black 5. I think it ran through to Nottingham but this finished when the line beyond Ashendon Junction closed.

 

The only other local steam workings we had, at that time, were the LT panniers, on the the Piccadilly line, the other side of the recreation ground, and behind my house nearby. Of course these were mostly at night apart from a light engine, at about 7pm each Tuesday, from Rayners Lane junction towards Lillie Bridge.

[Nick Gough]

I meant to post these before:

[Nick Gough]

A few more of the Up side:

 

These photos were taken in 2006 and, not long before, the main building on the down side had suffered severe fire damage. It was repaired and I should have some more, later photos, when I can track them down.

[Tallpaul69]

4 minutes ago, Nick Gough said:

These photos were taken in 2006 and, not long before, the main building on the down side had suffered severe fire damage. It was repaired and I should have some more, later photos, when I can track them down.

Many thanks Nick,

These photos are very useful. I think my up platform buildings could be low relief, but narrowing the platform too much could make the awning a bit tricky! We will see?

 

Am I  right that in your photos there is a new 2nd bay platform beside the original one?

 

Cheers

Paul