Double track terminus shunt moves.

[RJS1977]

13 hours ago, Harlequin said:

I would keep the turntable but use a slightly smaller one if possible.

 

It's a space saver when set against the length of the pointwork, the length needed to bring the different approach angles together and the spur beyond the pointwork that would be required to replace the turntable.

 

 

Yes, I only used one that big because it was the only one in Anyrail.

[Flying Pig]

The SRS have a signal plan of Ramsgate Harbour dated 1914:

 

https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/sre/T1117.htm

 

Note that there's no runround on the bay and it isn't connected to the turntable, copying which would simplify a bit and save you some length.  The kickback carriage sidings would probably need to be omitted - they remind me of Bradfield Gloucester Square and the whole plan is practically a prototype piano line.  Just a simple fan of goods sidings on the Up side.

[DCB]

2 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

 

Yes, I only used one that big because it was the only one in Anyrail.

And the only ones readily available

[Dunalastair]

12 hours ago, DCB said:

And the only ones readily available

 

Sadly seems to be true for RTR (an apparent gap in the market), but Recreation21 prints a 168mm turntable. 42' or the answer to life, the universe and everything ... provided you only want to run smaller tank engines.

 

 

https://www.shapeways.com/product/JN2EAV4MA/t-165-small-turntable-168d-100-wood-1a?key=3356a4467f1c418dcaf49373f3ebd96f

 

Or for a kit try e.g.  https://greenwoodmodelrailwayproducts.co.uk/shop/turntables/oo-turntable/#:~:text=Sizes available 70%2C 65%2C 60,Built with Full Indexing Motor. or http://londonroadmodels.com/various_pages/arch_kits.php

 

See also https://www.rmweb.co.uk/forums/topic/149320-42-ft-pre-grouping-turntable-details/

 

Edited December 20, 2023 by Dunalastair

[RobinofLoxley]

There might be an alternative way of drawing up the track plan so as to comply more nearly with the comments relating to signalling it with more prototypical operating.

 

Thanks to @Flying Pig for the real Ramsgate, I was thinking along those lines although as it stands there wouldn't be the space left for platform roads within what I presume to be an absolute limit of 8'.

 

What the proposal had though was a bit of extra width on the boards and this feature could be used more fully still, providing that clutter was acceptable.

[pH]

Is the service intense enough for the station to rate a full-time station pilot? If so, I think some of  the problems and complexity go away.

 

(Based on personal observation of Gourock over many years - 4 platforms, carriage sidings, goods yard and engine turning, watering and ash-raking facilities.)

Edited December 20, 2023 by pH

[DCB]

Very few full size stations were busy enough for full time station pilots in pre Gronk days.    Ramsgate Harbour was very well designed as a terminus for a moderately long  main line, but the re design missed the key design features.

All shunting can be performed by train locos, no shunter is necessary due to the centre road between platform  roads  and the carriage sidings bening adjacent to the station  with access from down main and down bay platforms,so an arrival could back it's stock directly into the sidings.
Apart from a very small number of conurbations with intensive suburban services and multiple termini ( probably just London)  most main line termini had, have, an unbalanced  service for passengers  with two three or more  morning departures  before any arrivals and several evening arrivals after the last departure.   sort of Up Up Up.Down,Up,Down , Up Down UP, Down,Down Down.  The first departures needing stock from carriage sidings and the last arrivals also to clear stock to carriage sidings ,  with a batch of departures  clustered at Morning peak and corresponding arrivals during the evening..   Some of the initial departures can be from the down main or down bay platforms, they don't need to be kept clear, no trains are coming along unexpectedly which haven't  been arranged in advance .    Platforms can be available  for anything from a few minutes to well over an hour before departure. At busy times a relief train may be provided and the two departures can e at very short headways, the distance and running time between signal boxes being the limiting factor.
It's only when  you start operating to a time or sequence table that the interesting moves make any sense and  only when operating that photos start to look "Right" and not posed.   I can't post the Signalbox diagram due to copyright but my rejigged track plan is based on it.  Especially the carriage sidings bottom right

[RJS1977]

On 19/12/2023 at 23:35, Flying Pig said:

The SRS have a signal plan of Ramsgate Harbour dated 1914:

 

https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/sre/T1117.htm

 

Note that there's no runround on the bay and it isn't connected to the turntable, copying which would simplify a bit and save you some length.  The kickback carriage sidings would probably need to be omitted - they remind me of Bradfield Gloucester Square and the whole plan is practically a prototype piano line.  Just a simple fan of goods sidings on the Up side.

 

My plan is very much an "inspired by Ramsgate" rather than a slavish copy.

 

I added the runaround to the bay to increase capacity in the station, and connected it to the turntable because it happened to be there - although it also means goods locos can be turned easily.

[RJS1977]

5 hours ago, pH said:

Is the service intense enough for the station to rate a full-time station pilot? If so, I think some of  the problems and complexity go away.

 

(Based on personal observation of Gourock over many years - 4 platforms, carriage sidings, goods yard and engine turning, watering and ash-raking facilities.)

 

Unfortunately I think station pilot moves are out owing to the adjacent "handover" section. Once a train has departed the terminus, it will wait in the "handover" section until the operator at the other end is ready to receive it, preventing any pilot moves from entering that section (and if the section was empty, an ECS move into the section could be mistaken by the other operator as a train being sent to them.

[Michael Hodgson]

On 19/12/2023 at 13:35, Dunalastair said:

 

Of course, it did not always go to plan at Ramsgate Harbour - though you cannot blame the turntable.

 

 

 

 

 

The young copper there has just told them.  "You can't park that on the pavement mate."

[Chimer]

8 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

 

Unfortunately I think station pilot moves are out owing to the adjacent "handover" section. Once a train has departed the terminus, it will wait in the "handover" section until the operator at the other end is ready to receive it, preventing any pilot moves from entering that section (and if the section was empty, an ECS move into the section could be mistaken by the other operator as a train being sent to them.

 

You seem to be strangely worried by the prospect of "mistakes" on handover - are your operators banned from talking to one another?  Also, it seems entirely prototypical that if a departing train is stopped waiting for its next operator (let's call that "held at the advanced starter"), shunt moves would be blocked for the duration.  Just thinking aloud ....

[The Stationmaster]

12 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

 

Unfortunately I think station pilot moves are out owing to the adjacent "handover" section. Once a train has departed the terminus, it will wait in the "handover" section until the operator at the other end is ready to receive it, preventing any pilot moves from entering that section (and if the section was empty, an ECS move into the section could be mistaken by the other operator as a train being sent to them.

That seems an odd idea.  Surely a train wouldn'r depart until it could be accepted on the other part of the layout?  As you have explained if it does depart and wait it blocks the departing line.  So why bother to do that (possibly to clear a platform but you do have three)?

 

It sounds to me as if the method of handover between the two parts of the final layout might need some more thought.

[The Johnster]

14 hours ago, Chimer said:

are your operators banned from talking to one another?

 

Not a bad idea on some exhibition layouts I've seen...

 

Advised operating procedure for fy-terminus layouts; moves between operators are route-set, cleared, and driven by the recieving operator.  So, a train ready to depart the station is driven out by the fy operator, and an arrival is driven off the fy and into the station or wherever it is routed by the station operator.  This allows shunting to be carried on with on whichever road is not being used to drive a train travelling between the locations, inbound road while a train is being driven out by the fy man, or outbound road while a station operator is bringing one in from the fy, provided of course that no conflicting moves are involved.

 

Check out operating simultaneous prototypical moves on 'Borchester' to get an idea of what can be done, though bear in mind that some training and a good number of bodies are needed to operate that layout! 

Edited December 21, 2023 by The Johnster

[DCB]

20 hours ago, Chimer said:

 

You seem to be strangely worried by the prospect of "mistakes" on handover - are your operators banned from talking to one another?  

You could communicate by block bells, or hand bells, if you wanted the first exhibition invitation to be your last, or maybe lights representing the bell code which I have planned for "Ugleigh" to communicate between operator in the shed and the one outside so as not to annoy the neighbours excessively..