Edwinstowe... ex-'Broomridding Wood'

[gingerangles]

So... having decided that I do not possess the knowledge required to create a from scratch layout and confidently be able to recreate a reasonable facsimile of the real thing I have decided to base my layout on a real place.  That way at least I have a guide line of what things should have been like upon which I can frame the inevitable compromises in size/content.

 

So, a few (a lot of) coffees later, a bit (a lot) of internet browsing and the addition of some local railway history books to the library and I settled on a location.  Straight of the bat my priorities were something through-station to scratch my roundy-round itch and with added goods-handling interest.   Oh and local... to hopefully add a little interest for the family.  The end result has been Edwinstowe.

 

To me this looked like a great location - quite a large facility given its location (in anticipation of large numbers of tourists originally), that existed into the era 4/5 that I'm after, but in a relatively compact layout... 3/4 platforms, goods shed, SB & Cattle loading bay.

 

 

The bridges at either end of the area of interest nicely framing what I hoped I'd be able to squeeze into the area I have available.

 

I also managed to find the signalling layout which got me very excited... (spun upside down so as to match the layout layout)

 

 

I set about trying to see how it would fit.  Luckily I'm OK on CAD and have access to the program so have overlaid the image of the map onto my available area in real life 'scale' - i.e. the size of my loft.  I've then drawn my proposed track plan in OO Gauge size on utilising Peco Large radius points and maintaining 'good' transitions, tangents etc as I see it.

 

I'm hoping you can tell what is going on here and hoping further that folks could let me know if I'm 'on the right track' with it 😁

Proposed track layout shown in red, platform and buildings in green, the grey are guides I've used, the orange the base board(s) and yellow the loft outline.  All superimposed on the OS underneath. 

I've obviously exaggerated the curve of the main lines compared to that of the real lines to help me get round at each end.  And mirrored this with the platforms.  The mainlines will continue round all the way and form a loop - those being the central 2 that run between platforms.

I've squeezed in the turnouts where I can. I've just realised I haven't joined the top right 'bay' line back to the UP main - but this will work without issue I think.  There is also the lower siding to finish.

I'll probably change the RHS rail over road bridge to a road over rail and move it in to create a scenic break and leave the LHS open and scenic eventually going round to the board on the other side of the loft.

 

 

I'd love to get feedback on the layout or suggestions as to problems I might face - I've had some great guidance about prepping for low areas of relief during baseboard construction so got that... are there any obvious issues with my track plan?  Something that wont work?  Having followed the prototype layout more or less I am hoping not.

 

Any comments gratefully received thanks 😁

 

 

MR Layout-Model Rev A.pdf

[AndyB]

Hi gingerangles 

Thanks for sharing your plan.

 

I think with roundy roundy layouts one of the delights is to have a parade of trains. But to keep it from being monotonous you need a fiddle yard with quite a capacity. 

 

Any thoughts on how to fit a FY in with plenty of capacity?

I'm thinking a traverser might help here?

Cheers. Andy

[gingerangles]

1 hour ago, AndyB said:

Hi gingerangles 

Thanks for sharing your plan.

 

I think with roundy roundy layouts one of the delights is to have a parade of trains. But to keep it from being monotonous you need a fiddle yard with quite a capacity. 

 

Any thoughts on how to fit a FY in with plenty of capacity?

I'm thinking a traverser might help here?

Cheers. Andy

 

Hi @AndyB

 

Thanks for the reply.  If you look at the orange boxes... there is one top and one bottom that will be connected eventually at each end to form an open rectangle of baseboards.  The plan will be to have something on the other side and/or some sort of fiddle yard... could perhaps be scenic sidings and a shed maybe?  or possibly a non-scenic fiddle - most likely in the short term I think.

[t-b-g]

2 hours ago, gingerangles said:

So... having decided that I do not possess the knowledge required to create a from scratch layout and confidently be able to recreate a reasonable facsimile of the real thing I have decided to base my layout on a real place.  That way at least I have a guide line of what things should have been like upon which I can frame the inevitable compromises in size/content.

 

So, a few (a lot of) coffees later, a bit (a lot) of internet browsing and the addition of some local railway history books to the library and I settled on a location.  Straight of the bat my priorities were something through-station to scratch my roundy-round itch and with added goods-handling interest.   Oh and local... to hopefully add a little interest for the family.  The end result has been Edwinstowe.

 

To me this looked like a great location - quite a large facility given its location (in anticipation of large numbers of tourists originally), that existed into the era 4/5 that I'm after, but in a relatively compact layout... 3/4 platforms, goods shed, SB & Cattle loading bay.

 

 

The bridges at either end of the area of interest nicely framing what I hoped I'd be able to squeeze into the area I have available.

 

I also managed to find the signalling layout which got me very excited... (spun upside down so as to match the layout layout)

 

 

I set about trying to see how it would fit.  Luckily I'm OK on CAD and have access to the program so have overlaid the image of the map onto my available area in real life 'scale' - i.e. the size of my loft.  I've then drawn my proposed track plan in OO Gauge size on utilising Peco Large radius points and maintaining 'good' transitions, tangents etc as I see it.

 

I'm hoping you can tell what is going on here and hoping further that folks could let me know if I'm 'on the right track' with it 😁

Proposed track layout shown in red, platform and buildings in green, the grey are guides I've used, the orange the base board(s) and yellow the loft outline.  All superimposed on the OS underneath. 

I've obviously exaggerated the curve of the main lines compared to that of the real lines to help me get round at each end.  And mirrored this with the platforms.  The mainlines will continue round all the way and form a loop - those being the central 2 that run between platforms.

I've squeezed in the turnouts where I can. I've just realised I haven't joined the top right 'bay' line back to the UP main - but this will work without issue I think.  There is also the lower siding to finish.

I'll probably change the RHS rail over road bridge to a road over rail and move it in to create a scenic break and leave the LHS open and scenic eventually going round to the board on the other side of the loft.

 

 

I'd love to get feedback on the layout or suggestions as to problems I might face - I've had some great guidance about prepping for low areas of relief during baseboard construction so got that... are there any obvious issues with my track plan?  Something that wont work?  Having followed the prototype layout more or less I am hoping not.

 

Any comments gratefully received thanks 😁

 

 

MR Layout-Model Rev A.pdf 284.42 kB · 5 downloads

 

It is a station I have looked at once or twice myself but I just don't have the room to do it justice.

 

You have altered one bit of the plan, which has a knock on effect for the signalling. The lower platform, marked  "back platform" on the diagram, could not be accessed directly by a train arriving from the right hand end. The access was via a single slip so trains could not run directly into the back platform. Quite a few trains terminated at Edwinstowe back in the day, so it would have been useful to run round and shunt into the back platform to keep the main lines clear. What period will your layout be? In later days, the passenger traffic was quite dull and uninteresting but in pre-grouping times, you had a mix of Midland and LDECR or after 1907 GCR services and there was much more going on.

[AndyB]

Thanks @gingerangles. Forgive me but I'm not sure what scale you're using on your CAD drawing.

 

I'm reading "loft layout" suggesting it might be quite long and a FY with fans of points would fit in. 

 

But you might want to do a quick track plan of a FY and see how many storage lines you can get vs how long they are. Think about how many coaches you're trains are going to have. Might be 7 or 8 plus a tender loco; potentially taking up several feet + points and avoiding snagging trains in adjacent sidings. 

 

All the best. Andy

[gingerangles]

50 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

It is a station I have looked at once or twice myself but I just don't have the room to do it justice.

 

You have altered one bit of the plan, which has a knock on effect for the signalling. The lower platform, marked  "back platform" on the diagram, could not be accessed directly by a train arriving from the right hand end. The access was via a single slip so trains could not run directly into the back platform. Quite a few trains terminated at Edwinstowe back in the day, so it would have been useful to run round and shunt into the back platform to keep the main lines clear. What period will your layout be? In later days, the passenger traffic was quite dull and uninteresting but in pre-grouping times, you had a mix of Midland and LDECR or after 1907 GCR services and there was much more going on.

 

Hi @t-b-g

 

Thanks for the comment.  I'm not sure I'm with you though.  I thought I'd replicated the track layout as per the signalling diagram?  Just in case it was the incomplete drafting I've 'finished' it here:

 

 

Have I misunderstood the diagram and are the points identified as 9 and 11 setup so as to not actually allow traffic from the 'Down line' into the Back Platform?  I'm I understanding that right?

 

I had planned to go BR days in terms of era but I must admit I am tempted to go earlier.  I am torn to be honest. - It's been a monumental effort to decide where to model 😂

 

I'm not sure if the track plan changed at all say 1900-1950... The signalling diagram is dated 1913.  I did notice the end on bay on the LHS of the lower platform did eventually disappear at some stage.

[gingerangles]

13 minutes ago, AndyB said:

Thanks @gingerangles. Forgive me but I'm not sure what scale you're using on your CAD drawing.

 

I'm reading "loft layout" suggesting it might be quite long and a FY with fans of points would fit in. 

 

But you might want to do a quick track plan of a FY and see how many storage lines you can get vs how long they are. Think about how many coaches you're trains are going to have. Might be 7 or 8 plus a tender loco; potentially taking up several feet + points and avoiding snagging trains in adjacent sidings. 

 

All the best. Andy

 

The CAD is drawn in real scale mm.  1 mm in the loft = 1 mm in the plan.  The whole width is about 5.4 m left to right.  Lines are drawn at 16mm gauge, 10mm offset from platform edges and 50 mm apart centre to centre.  The points are based on a peco streamline long turnout... my thinking there was this is the worst case space wise.

 

I'd have loads of FY room if I dedicated the other side to it entirely, hopefully this fives some idea... (potential FY sidings at the bottom):

 

[gingerangles]

Have I misunderstood this @t-b-g...  are these in fact double and single slips?...

 

I'd be lying if I said I understood this diagram in terms of the signals so could do with doing a bit of research I guess.  Do the same numbered symbols act in unison or lock out?

 

[stivesnick]

Hi 

 

I managed to find another (hand drawn) signal box diagram.

 

 

Hope this helps

 

Nick 

[gingerangles]

2 hours ago, stivesnick said:

Hi 

 

I managed to find another (hand drawn) signal box diagram.

 

 

Hope this helps

 

Nick 

That's brill, thank you @stivesnick this does add a little clarity re those points/slips 👍

[t-b-g]

4 hours ago, gingerangles said:

Have I misunderstood this @t-b-g...  are these in fact double and single slips?...

 

I'd be lying if I said I understood this diagram in terms of the signals so could do with doing a bit of research I guess.  Do the same numbered symbols act in unison or lock out?

 

 

2 hours ago, stivesnick said:

Hi 

 

I managed to find another (hand drawn) signal box diagram.

 

 

Hope this helps

 

Nick 

 

Those clarify it nicely. There is no signal for coming off the main line directly into the back platform, which you would need if there was any use of a direct access. I am attaching a snap of a building I am working on that is based on the one at Edwinstowe. As my model is a fictional terminus, the two bays of the refreshment room have been omitted. The building was a bit too long as it was. There is a nice drawing of the building and some photos online, if you search for the website of the Edwinstowe Historical Society and look under Local History, then under Transport.

 

[gingerangles]

21 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

 

Those clarify it nicely. There is no signal for coming off the main line directly into the back platform, which you would need if there was any use of a direct access. I am attaching a snap of a building I am working on that is based on the one at Edwinstowe. As my model is a fictional terminus, the two bays of the refreshment room have been omitted. The building was a bit too long as it was. There is a nice drawing of the building and some photos online, if you search for the website of the Edwinstowe Historical Society and look under Local History, then under Transport.

 

 

Thanks for the input!  I guess that it would make sense to have that access to the back platform... wonder why it wasn't installed.  To be fair the correct arrangement will actually give me a little more room I think.

 

That building looks great!  You can definitely see the resemblance.   What scale are you modelling in there?

Yeah I've seen the plans and have also downloaded the lamp schematic ready for making those 👍 

[gingerangles]

Right... taking a closer look at the Western end... I think I may also have '34' & '36' wrong as well...  I had put this in as a simple cross over but I think it may actually be a single slip to allow a route from the down either onto the up or into the 'Dock' sidings and doesn't allow passage from the up line into the dock?

[t-b-g]

50 minutes ago, gingerangles said:

 

Thanks for the input!  I guess that it would make sense to have that access to the back platform... wonder why it wasn't installed.  To be fair the correct arrangement will actually give me a little more room I think.

 

That building looks great!  You can definitely see the resemblance.   What scale are you modelling in there?

Yeah I've seen the plans and have also downloaded the lamp schematic ready for making those 👍 

 

My model is 4mm scale. The layout is being built to a rather unusual gauge, using the original 18mm EM gauge, instead of the modern 18.2mm.

 

I am not 100% sure how the back platform was used but there were services that used to terminate at Edwinstowe. So the trains would have to arrive in the main platform. To clear the main lines, my guess would be that the stock would then be shunted to the back platform, where it could depart from for its return journey. So if the stock was there for a while, the main lines were kept clear.

[t-b-g]

2 minutes ago, gingerangles said:

Right... taking a closer look at the Western end... I think I may also have '34' & '36' wrong as well...  I had put this in as a simple cross over but I think it may actually be a single slip to allow a route from the down either onto the up or into the 'Dock' sidings and doesn't allow passage from the up line into the dock?

 

That end had a single slip too. I didn't mention it as it looked as though you had drawn it as a slip at that end. Edwinstowe is a good example of railway practice from that period of avoiding facing points whenever possible. The extra signalling and need for facing point locks plus the fact that they were regarded as less than ideal by the railway inspectors of the day meant that they were not used unless unavoidable by most companies.

[gingerangles]

Thanks @t-b-g that's been immensely helpful.  No, I'd missed that that was a single slip!

 

EM eh... very nice - assume you are building all your own stock and locos then?  What area / era are you modelling?

[t-b-g]

1 minute ago, gingerangles said:

Thanks @t-b-g that's been immensely helpful.  No, I'd missed that that was a single slip!

 

EM eh... very nice - assume you are building all your own stock and locos then?  What area / era are you modelling?

 

My layout is a fictional terminus based on the Sheffield District Railway. In real life, they had a goods station at Attercliffe in Sheffield and they had started to build a passenger station nearby when they obtained running powers into Sheffield Midland. In return, the Midland was given running powers onto the LDECR. My period is just after 1907, when the GCR took over the LDECR, allowing me GCR, LDECR and MR liveries. The idea is that the passenger station was built before the running powers were agreed and lack of capacity at Sheffield Midland led to both companies using my station instead of Sheffield Midland. I am mainly a GCR/LDECR fan but I recently acquired a quantity of lovely MR stock, so the joint running became attractive. The MR used to run to Edwinstowe using their running powers, which ended there, hence the terminating trains. Pretty much everything is kit or scratchbuilt.

 

The only building finished so far is the signal box, based on features from several LDECR boxes. I attach snaps of one of my MR trains plus the signal box.

[t-b-g]

I will also post a shot of the pointwork. It shows the improved appearance of EM quite well.

[gingerangles]

Loving that, looks great.  It was the appearance of the track that made me ask about scale.  It really does look good.  I've got my finger hovering over the button on a cart full of the peco bullhead wondering if it's worth the expense.

 

Love the signal box, I'll be needing something very similar 😂... is that the colour the thing would have been for its entire life span or is that a GCR thing?

[gingerangles]

Here is the track plan redrawn with the 3 slips now included and lines tweaked to suit...  

 

 

I may well yet flip the whole thing upside down, I'm a North-up kinda guy but the signallers view was facing south hence the signal plan is the other way round and that is playing on my mind lol

[PMP]

10 hours ago, gingerangles said:

Loving that, looks great.  It was the appearance of the track that made me ask about scale.  It really does look good.  I've got my finger hovering over the button on a cart full of the peco bullhead wondering if it's worth the expense.

 

Yes is the simple answer to your question regarding the Peco Bullhead. See above for the appearance. It will join with the streamline cd75 if you want to save a bit of money ‘off scene’. It matches exactly the streamline geometry, so any detailed planning you’ve done isn’t affected. It’s robust and reliable, and is fitted with Unifrog V crossings. If building a OO layout using RTL track I wouldn’t use anything else.

 

[gingerangles]

1 hour ago, PMP said:

Yes is the simple answer to your question regarding the Peco Bullhead. See above for the appearance. It will join with the streamline cd75 if you want to save a bit of money ‘off scene’. It matches exactly the streamline geometry, so any detailed planning you’ve done isn’t affected. It’s robust and reliable, and is fitted with Unifrog V crossings. If building a OO layout using RTL track I wouldn’t use anything else.

 

 

That's it then... decision made... off to rails of sheffield I go 🤣

[Nick Holliday]

17 hours ago, t-b-g said:

Edwinstowe is a good example of railway practice from that period of avoiding facing points whenever possible. The extra signalling and need for facing point locks plus the fact that they were regarded as less than ideal by the railway inspectors of the day meant that they were not used unless unavoidable by most companies.

I am not a signalling expert, but it is fascinating to see how they managed a fairly complex station layout using, as far as I can see, only one facing point lock - Lever 25 I think. However, this parsimony did reduce the potential flexibility, as the only way a passenger train can leave the Back Platform is on the Down line, for which signal 4 controlled its departure.  Although the pointwork at the east end (Lincoln) end does allow trains to depart from the back platform in the Up direction, there are no signals or facing point locks that would allow loaded passenger trains to do so. It is also interesting that all the pointwork in the goods yard was under the control of the signal box, but that may be LD&ECR practice.

I assume that the Midland services from Mansfield terminated in the Up platform, and then, once empty, would pull ahead and then reverse over the crossover into the back platform, the loco then running around the train, to be ready to depart on the Down line.

[gingerangles]

6 hours ago, Nick Holliday said:

I am not a signalling expert, but it is fascinating to see how they managed a fairly complex station layout using, as far as I can see, only one facing point lock - Lever 25 I think. However, this parsimony did reduce the potential flexibility, as the only way a passenger train can leave the Back Platform is on the Down line, for which signal 4 controlled its departure.  Although the pointwork at the east end (Lincoln) end does allow trains to depart from the back platform in the Up direction, there are no signals or facing point locks that would allow loaded passenger trains to do so. It is also interesting that all the pointwork in the goods yard was under the control of the signal box, but that may be LD&ECR practice.

I assume that the Midland services from Mansfield terminated in the Up platform, and then, once empty, would pull ahead and then reverse over the crossover into the back platform, the loco then running around the train, to be ready to depart on the Down line.

 

Thanks for the insight @Nick Holliday... exactly the input i need i think. I have no idea how these things actually ran in reality hence picking something real to model.

[gingerangles]

Successful trip to Rails of Sheffield 😃

 

Load of bullhead track and points, NCE Power cab, dcc rolling Road and a few other bits. Very happy chappy.

 

DoG is a fav and the only dcc loco I own at the mo.