Theory of General Minories

[Pacific231G]

13 hours ago, Jeremy C said:

Not quite "any pair", unless you have bidirectional running, but this used to be unusual in Britain. Wherever the outgoing train needs to cross the path of the incoming train, the incoming train needs to arrive before the outgoing train leaves. As you have discovered at Ealing Broadway, if the signaller decides to do it the other way round, there tends to be a lot more waiting. Bastille, with its cycling through the platforms, cleverly arranged it so that this conflict only happened once per cycle, affecting only one train in five.

 

Minories is more restrictive than that, since you can only have a simultaneous arrival with a departure from platform 1. Personally, I think this is fine, but you can add two points to get a simultaneous arrival at platform 3 and departure from platform 2. You'll never be able to get a simultaneous departure with an arrival at platform 1, nor a simultaneous arrival with a departure from platform 3.

 

Hi Jeremy

I wrote "any pair" but not "in any order". Clearly, the departure must always be from the platform of the pair closer to the outbound line but any two platform roads can form that pair. Using them in the right order is about scheduling rather than trackplanning

 

Glitches apart, Bastille's timetable and platform occupancy had no conflicts as the first of the five inbound trains was scheduled to arrive after the first outbound in the sequence had departed and in fact also after the locomotive that had brought it in had also departed. Bastille had been fitted with releasing traversers similar to those at Birmingham Moor Street but, studying the operating pattern, I suspect that, once the timetable had been rationalised, they weren't much used- possibly just while the five platforms were being "loaded" before the first sequence of the evening rush (which over two hours was far more intense than the three hour morning heures d'affluence )  There were other measures to speed the turnover of trains and locos such as fitting water cranes at the concourse/buffer end of each platform so that a loco could take on water while waiting to be released (by the departure of the train it had brought in) and using semi-automatic mechanical signlling on the line beyond the terminis. They also "flighted" the five departures in each sequence so that, rather than having all-stations and semi-fast trains, the first deparures in each sequence would run non- stop  some way down the line and then become stoppers while the final trains would serve the closer stations. This had the advantage, in a termins with a very cramped concourse, that commuters would always know fwhich platform "their" train would depart from whatever time they reached the station. The real reason for all this was increase the rush-hour capacity of the line by about 20% without spending any real money apart from some tweaking of the track plan to get the inbound/outbound "pairing" for every platform as this "before and after" schematic from 1930 shows along with my version reflecting the slightly simplified track plan in the station's final years.

 

 

For anyone who wants to study this operation in more detail I've posted below the actual evening rush hour graphique which includes the platform occupancy chart for Bastille  and, very interestingly for each departure the train that its loco had previously brought in (HP stands for Haut le Pied - light engine)

Sadly, few enthusiasts paid much attention to Bastille-which retained steam and mechanical signalling until it closed at the end of 1969- until its final two or three years. By then, the turnover loco operation with 131TB Prairie tanks had been replaced by push-pull working using 141TB Mikado tanks and I've not found any film of the "ballet" that operating it loco hauled during  rush hours must have involved. By then competition from the Métro and trams for its closer destinations had also reduced the number of commuters using the Ligne de Vincennes which was the only line that in the end Bastille served (The Southend Line from Fenchurch St. was probably the closest to it in London but was not quite so simple) 

For all but the most intensively worked termini, the platform "pairing" across every platform probably wasn't required but, put yourself in the position of a traffic engineer faced with a busy commuter terminus named Minories with a trackplan to fit its very cramped location designed by a predecessor called Cyril J Freezer and you are now required to find a way to increase its rush-hour flow capacity without any enlargement and within the same cramped site. I think you might start by adding  two points and a short linke between the inbound "up" line and platform three. 

 

Despite it's five platforms and small sub-shed, Bastille, with its incredibly small size and short approach  has always struck me as being very close in nature to a real Minories and both are exercises in getting a quart into a pint pot. 

 

Edited December 23, 2022 by Pacific231G

[RJS1977]

Interesting that Bastille's evening peak was shorter than the morning peak.

 

I remember reading that on the Southern Region in the UK, it was the evening peak that was the longer, less intense, one as people either stayed on later in their offices (until they'd got their work done) or went for a drink with colleagues before heading home. Consequently fewer multiple units were needed in the evening peak than the morning peak.

 

(At one time the last unit to leave Selhurst Park depot in the morning peak left five minutes before the first one came back in. As there were fewer units in service in the evening peak, this meant that there were only five minutes in each day when the full complement of units were in use!)

[melmoth]

Doesn't that just illustrate the difference between the Gallic and the Anglo-Saxon attitude to work/life balance?

[Pacific231G]

On 23/12/2022 at 12:48, melmoth said:

Doesn't that just illustrate the difference between the Gallic and the Anglo-Saxon attitude to work/life balance?

I'm not sure about that. In the 1920s France had an apalling work/life balance with most ordinary workers only getting Sundays off.  Commuters included a larger number of professionals who would have had Saturday- or at least Saturday afternoons off- as well. Mostworkers never had a holiday either and compulsory paid holidays didn't come in until 1936- following a general strike - creating a massive demand for extra summer trains.

(https://www.magnumphotos.com/arts-culture/society-arts-culture/en-vacances-the-first-paid-french-holidays/ for images of this.)

There were a number of Jours de Fête when railways tended to run a Sunday timetable but it's interesting that Bastille actually ran more trains on Saturdays and Sundays than during the week but spread more evenly as a lot of Parisians used the line to go out into the countryside or to the dance cafés- the Guinguettes  on the banks of the Marne.

I think the reason for the longer but less intense morning rush hour was that workers tended to start far earlier than professionals but the end of the working day was more focussed.

Edited December 26, 2022 by Pacific231G

[Lacathedrale]

Thank you for the interesting picture of Maybank at Platform Level - the layout has always held a big attraction for me and I believe I've read everything (contemporaneously) written about it. 

[Curlew]

More 'Majories' than Minories, but well worth a look at

 

BBM1930s: Anhalter Bahnhof Update 12/2022 - YouTube

[meatloaf]

So in the end i went with a take on a minories layout.

 

Ive kept the 3 platforms and added some points to give a run around in platforms 1 and 2. Typical train size is likely to be a 2 or 3 Mk1 BG parcel coaches and couple of mk1s or mk1 suburbans - not sure which would be better.

 

DMUs will also feature. Loco hauled trains will be hauled by class 20, 24, 25,, maybe a 37 and 47.

 

Managed to fit in a siding for the station pilot - currently the orange 08.

 

Also managed to fit a siding with a goods shed to introduce some goods traffic.

 

Fiddle yard is 4 track.

 

Total length of the layout inc fiddleyard is 9ft.

[33C]

8 hours ago, Curlew said:

More 'Majories' than Minories, but well worth a look at

 

BBM1930s: Anhalter Bahnhof Update 12/2022 - YouTube

Love the overall roof, got that Liverpool street feel. 

[Welly]

Yet another French prototype almost akin to Minories - Nice (Chemin de Fer Provence) station approach. I can't remember if this was mentioned in this thread earlier?

 

https://youtu.be/mntH5eiiv-c?t=7316

 

 

[Dragonfly]

Very Nice

[tom s]

Something I've been planning, Minories trackplan with Moorgate's scenics.
Plan was rotated 180 degrees as this both fits the viewing perspective for most photographs of Moorgate, and works better with the space I have for the layout.

Swapping around which two tracks border the island platform allows a few extra inches to be added to it, as on this plan the shortest platform can begin before the the station points have even ended.

Having the locomotive spur at the front should also allow slightly better viewing of the engine sitting between duties too!
 

[t-b-g]

3 minutes ago, tom s said:

Something I've been planning, Minories trackplan with Moorgate's scenics.
Plan was rotated 180 degrees as this both fits the viewing perspective for most photographs of Moorgate, and works better with the space I have for the layout.

Swapping around which two tracks border the island platform allows a few extra inches to be added to it, as on this plan the shortest platform can begin before the the station points have even ended.

Having the locomotive spur at the front should also allow slightly better viewing of the engine sitting between duties too!
 

 

I like that treatment a lot!

[RobinofLoxley]

What is your plan for the fiddleyard/off scene? Over in 2.5mm scale there is a recent Minories plan proposal but it is dominated by its fiddle yard.

[tom s]

16 minutes ago, RobinofLoxley said:

What is your plan for the fiddleyard/off scene? Over in 2.5mm scale there is a recent Minories plan proposal but it is dominated by its fiddle yard.

Probably a 8" x 2ft board that can bolt into the side and supports some cassettes. It seems light/space efficient and wanting to run close coupled or fixed sets of stock (like quad-arts, scratchbuilding/printing allowing) will probably best to minimise having to take them off the rails during and after running, or to swap them around to view the other side.

[RobinofLoxley]

Im asking because the thing about the original proposal was to depict a busy urban terminus with rapid turnaround of traffic. Your plan with the loco spur is good because the loco can follow a train out, easily park in the spur and couple up onto the next train; especially straightforward for diesel haulage. Its whether the yard can do the same.

[Nearholmer]

I’ve often thought that, since Minories is a fiddle yard with scenery, the best fiddle yard for it might be another of the same.

 

More seriously, I think this is one of its down-sides, that it tends to result in pretty much the same space again being used for fiddling about.

[Compound2632]

1 minute ago, Nearholmer said:

More seriously, I think this is one of its down-sides, that it tends to result in pretty much the same space again being used for fiddling about.

 

That's where the return loop scores, if one has room for it. Ideally a double return loop with a double junction as a scenic feature, then much of the loop itself can be part of the modelled railway. 

 

Might work best in 7.25" gauge, with a double track main line round the estate.

[tom s]

41 minutes ago, RobinofLoxley said:

Im asking because the thing about the original proposal was to depict a busy urban terminus with rapid turnaround of traffic. Your plan with the loco spur is good because the loco can follow a train out, easily park in the spur and couple up onto the next train; especially straightforward for diesel haulage. Its whether the yard can do the same.

Yeah one of the beautiful things about the original plan is how the locomotive can go from the spur to any platform without running 'wrong road'.
I guess using some L shaped steel (that I'm sure has a name) and some contactors I could do a cassette-traverser where each cassette moves forward one space each time a train enters the layout, and when the front one receives a train it gets pulled out, reversed, then placed to the back of the queue. Worth thinking about for some speedrunning sessions!

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

That's where the return loop scores, if one has room for it. Ideally a double return loop with a double junction as a scenic feature, then much of the loop itself can be part of the modelled railway. 

 

Might work best in 7.25" gauge, with a double track main line round the estate.

 

Absolutely.  It results in considerably more room being used than the station unless you use very tight curves and have almost no off-scene storage (and even then it will be wider and less wieldy).  It's pretty much inevitable that if you have a compact layout where the modelled facility is not a great deal bigger than a train length, then the offscene storage will need to be almost as big.  I see no need to view that as a drawback - the terminus to fiddle yard pattern is popular because it is compact and well suited to portability and single person operation.

 

The idea of having another station as the fiddle yard was explored in depth earlier in this thread, though the plans have possibly been lost.  Perhaps @Harlequin and others could kindly repost?

[Compound2632]

2 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

It's pretty much inevitable that if you have a compact layout where the modelled facility is not a great deal bigger than a train length, then the offscene storage will need to be almost as big. 

 

@TheLaird's Bradfield Gloucester Square dealt with this by having carriage sidings in front of the fiddle yard. This added to the operational interest, as the Youtube videos demonstrate, though one might have to think carefully how to maintain easy access to the fiddle yard for fiddling.

[t-b-g]

If you have (for 4mm scale), an 8ft scenic section with a 4ft throat and a 4ft platform, then your train length is around 4ft and your fiddle yard need not be any longer than that. In 2mm, by my advanced maths, that makes a 4ft scenic section and a 2ft fiddle yard.

 

To me, a one third fiddle yard and two thirds scenic section is a decent balance. For exhibitions, you can always put some sort of display board up, or some scenic work along the front. Adding a few carriage sidings worked very well on Bradfield Gloucester Square but would involve a total redesign of the track and scenic work and would also fundamentally change the way the layout works, to the point where it isn't really Minories any more in my view..  

 

In most situations where a fine scale (non train set/set track) curve is required, a return loop is going to occupy much more space than the scenic section, and any layout that has more fiddle yard than scenic section always seems to be a poor use of space to me.

 

A traverser with 4,5 or 6 tracks is plenty and if it can be turned around to avoid stock handling, even better.

 

I have used cassettes but I am not a fan. They seem to create lots of work in the fiddle yard and sliding a traverser across to the next road is a lot less hassle.

[Compound2632]

3 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

In most situations where a fine scale (non train set/set track) curve is required, a return loop is going to occupy much more space than the scenic section, and any layout that has more fiddle yard than scenic section always seems to be a poor use of space to me.

 

I did outline the circumstances under which I thought it would work best!

[t-b-g]

Just now, Compound2632 said:

 

I did outline the circumstances under which I thought it would work best!

 

Indeed you did.

 

I am not sure it is a good idea for a 2mm finescale layout though. as you go down to smaller scales, the circumference gets too small to be useful for storing trains and the 2mm finescale world doesn't really go for small radius curves so I think the proportions just wouldn't work very well.

 

I like the idea of the 7 1/4" version though! That I would like to see.

[Pacific231G]

On 18/02/2023 at 11:51, Welly said:

Yet another French prototype almost akin to Minories - Nice (Chemin de Fer Provence) station approach. I can't remember if this was mentioned in this thread earlier?

 

https://youtu.be/mntH5eiiv-c?t=7316

 

 

Well, except that Nice CP is the terminus of a single track line whereas the whole point of Minories was to be a cunning way of joining three platforms to both sides of a double track main line with a minimum of S reversals.

 

The old Nice -Sud terminus at Nice was rather magnificent as it was a small scale version of the classic embarcadere design  with what was originally a separate arrivals and a departure platform on each side of a train shed with a pair of roads between them,  

John Ragia November 1989 (CC by SA3.0)

I got to use it during a winter rail tour of France in the mid 1970s arriving from Grenoble via Digne  and, for a metre gauge terminus, it was strikingly grand (the Sud France used to have a network of metre gauge lines behind the Côte d'Azur rather than the present single line to Digne)

After years as a derelict shell following a local scandal, the station building and train shed has now been restored as the centre-piece of a modern development but the CP terminus has been relegated to a less well-connected area further up the line where the loco sheds used to be. It all reminded me a bit of the sad fate of the original Fort William terminus (except that was replaced by a by-pass)

[St Enodoc]

2 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

Well, except that Nice CP is the terminus of a single track line whereas the whole point of Minories was to be a cunning way of joining three platforms to both sides of a double track main line with a minimum of S reversals.

 

The old Nice -Sud terminus at Nice was rather magnificent as it was a small scale version of the classic embarcadere design  with what was originally a separate arrivals and a departure platform on each side of a train shed with a pair of roads between them,  

John Ragia November 1989 (CC by SA3.0)

I got to use it during a winter rail tour of France in the mid 1970s arriving from Grenoble via Digne  and, for a metre gauge terminus, it was strikingly grand (the Sud France used to have a network of metre gauge lines behind the Côte d'Azur rather than the present single line to Digne)

After years as a derelict shell following a local scandal, the station building and train shed has now been restored as the centre-piece of a modern development but the CP terminus has been relegated to a less well-connected area further up the line where the loco sheds used to be. It all reminded me a bit of the sad fate of the original Fort William terminus (except that was replaced by a by-pass)

Bath Green Park?