Theory of General Minories

[RJS1977]

On 05/06/2020 at 23:52, t-b-g said:

I really don't know what we are all messing about for. The definitive Minories has been built.

 

 

 

Having watched this video, and its sequel, the other thing that comes across is that if you have an operationally satisfying layout, it doesn't really matter that the coaches aren't flush glazed, that the locos have minimal to no detailing and are compromised to suit train set curves, the satisfaction comes from operating a layout in an interesting fashion and watching the trains shuffle in and out.

[t-b-g]

17 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

Having watched this video, and its sequel, the other thing that comes across is that if you have an operationally satisfying layout, it doesn't really matter that the coaches aren't flush glazed, that the locos have minimal to no detailing and are compromised to suit train set curves, the satisfaction comes from operating a layout in an interesting fashion and watching the trains shuffle in and out.

 

Absolutely.

 

It is something that we (and I include myself) have perhaps lost in our quest for "better" modelling. The sheer fun of "playing trains" .

 

I would really enjoy operating that layout. I just know I would!

 

In my loft, there is a big box with all the Hornby Dublo, Triang and Wrenn locos and stock that were my childhoods model railway history, along with enough Peco track to build such a layout. There is a box with Superquick buidings plus a few made from balsawood and brickpaper. If I ever reach a stage where my eyesight and hands are not up to making models any more, I know what I am going to build!

Edited June 8, 2020 by t-b-g

[Pacific231G]

32 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

 

 

However if the layout was flipped or rotated so that the main lines kink towards the front rather than the rear, a traverser would be a more practical option.

Flipped possibly works less well than the current scheme for left hand running - though I don't know if it really matters whether the final crossover before the running lines is trailing- but I think you may be onto something by rotating it.

One of the  minor problems with Minories is that, unless you use a kick back goods yard or parcels depot (or a tapered baseboard), you're left with a large  empty space at front right. Rotate the whole thing 180 degrees though, so the fiddle yard is to the left,  and that space becomes available for a nice bit of urban development (cue Coronation St. theme)  It also means that the goods depot in the original plan is now at the back so not hiding  the platforms.  When the layout was not being used a traverser could be stored in its slid back position so out of the way on the layout;s shelf.

I'm so used to seeing Minories with the fiddle yard to the right that anything else seems odd but I know plenty of layouts (including my own H0 VNS) where trains enter and leave on the left of the scene. 

[Joseph_Pestell]

2 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

Flipped possibly works less well than the current scheme for left hand running - though I don't know if it really matters whether the final crossover before the running lines is trailing- but I think you may be onto something by rotating it.

One of the  minor problems with Minories is that, unless you use a kick back goods yard or parcels depot (or a tapered baseboard), you're left with a large  empty space at front right. Rotate the whole thing 180 degrees though, so the fiddle yard is to the left,  and that space becomes available for a nice bit of urban development (cue Coronation St. theme)  It also means that the goods depot in the original plan is now at the back so not hiding  the platforms.  When the layout was not being used a traverser could be stored in its slid back position so out of the way on the layout;s shelf.

I'm so used to seeing Minories with the fiddle yard to the right that anything else seems odd but I know plenty of layouts (including my own H0 VNS) where trains enter and leave on the left of the scene. 

 

A lot to be said for having the goods depot to the rear. With a nice large building, something like the GNR warehouse at Farringdon, there is scope to use it as a further traverser to serve a "rat run" down the back of the layout.

[Pacific231G]

1 hour ago, RJS1977 said:

On 05/06/2020 at 23:52, t-b-g said:

I really don't know what we are all messing about for. The definitive Minories has been built.

 

Having watched this video, and its sequel, the other thing that comes across is that if you have an operationally satisfying layout, it doesn't really matter that the coaches aren't flush glazed, that the locos have minimal to no detailing and are compromised to suit train set curves, the satisfaction comes from operating a layout in an interesting fashion and watching the trains shuffle in and out.

Having watched this video, and its sequel, the other thing that comes across is that if you have an operationally satisfying layout, it doesn't really matter that the coaches aren't flush glazed, that the locos have minimal to no detailing and are compromised to suit train set curves, the satisfaction comes from operating a layout in an interesting fashion and watching the trains shuffle in and out.

The funny thing is that I was thinking this is what you get when you build Minories on a couple of four foot long boards using small radius Streamline points. Then I remembered another layout on RMWEB a couple of years ago.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/117470-birmingham-hope-st-br-ex-gcr-minories-style-urban-layout-1965/

Before he moved house and moved on to Stranraer, Danstercivicman's  Birmingham Hope Street was eight feet long plus fiddle yard and built with small radius Streamline points.  No disrespect to Clive Bennett but Dan's version of Minories was in a completely different league and an absolute joy to follow with a fully fledged timetable, well thought out loco stud etc. For my money it was the most inspiring layout on RMWEB since Bradfield Gloucester Square.

The Birmingham Hope St. thread is definitely worth going through again. 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Pacific231G

[t-b-g]

27 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

The funny thing is that I was thinking this is what you get when you build Minories on a couple of four foot long boards using small radius Streamline points. Then I remembered another layout on RMWEB a couple of years ago.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/117470-birmingham-hope-st-br-ex-gcr-minories-style-urban-layout-1965/

Before he moved house and moved on to Stranraer, Danstercivicman's  Birmingham Hope Street was eight feet long plus fiddle yard and built with small radius Streamline points.  No disrespect to Clive Bennett but Dan's version of Minories was in a completely different league and an absolute joy to follow with a fully fledged timetable, well thought out loco stud etc. For my money it was the most inspiring layout on RMWEB since Bradfield Gloucester Square.

The Birmingham Hope St. thread is definitely worth going through again. 

 

I had seen that but for me, running the Hornby Dublo layout with locos and stock that were around at the time the plan was created adds a little bit to the charm and atmosphere. Birmingham Hope Street is very nice but it has a sort of hybrid feel, with the 1950s layout design, some rather vintage scenic items but with highly detailed modern models working it. The combination of new and old doesn't work as well for me as the "all in period" layout. So I would still say that the Hornby Dublo version scores slightly higher in terms of capturing the spirit of the original design. Not in the quality of the locos and stock but just in terms of being what CJF would have expected to see running on a 00 Minories 60 plus years ago. 

Edited June 8, 2020 by t-b-g

[Zomboid]

Hope Street does a good job of showing that whilst the "throw over", Y points in whatever location and other such things aren't irrelevant, you can make a really good looking and fun layout using bog standard peco short points and the vanilla Minories arrangement.

[Izzy]

1 hour ago, Harlequin said:

This was my take on a double-track fiddle yard for Minories that folds up into the same volume as the folded Minories:

 

 

That's a very complete solution.

 

1 hour ago, RJS1977 said:

 

I was only thinking the other day that the alignment of the exit roads on Minories restricts options for the fiddle yard somewhat if the layout is against a wall. The back line can only be fed by one line on a traverser, and the front line by two. Any fan of tracks involving pointwork (including the Denny pattern mentioned a few pages ago) requires another kink in the front track to make room for the rear track to fan out. Realistically the only pattern of fiddle yard operation that I could see being used in these circumstances is the cassette type, which hadn't been invented when Cyril designed the layout.

 

However if the layout was flipped or rotated so that the main lines kink towards the front rather than the rear, a traverser would be a more practical option.

 

I have found cassette type fiddles to be awkward to operate, a real faff that takes up far too much time and effort. On one layout 75-80% of the operating time was absorbed with just changing them around for the simplest moves. And you need bags more room to store the not-used cassettes, far more than for multiple parallel roads in a normal fiddle. I feel now that sector or turntable types are best, the latter probably with Minories, so a sequence of moves can be repeated with the minimal effort. If populated with tank engines it wouldn't matter which way around they were. I believe they were the original concept motive power? Or EMU/DMU's.

 

It's good fun speculating isn't it?

 

Izzy

 

[DCB]

On 05/06/2020 at 23:52, t-b-g said:

I really don't know what we are all messing about for. The definitive Minories has been built.

 

 

We can all pack up and go home.

 

I think it is telling that the kick back siding only sees use for a P.Way train. As I said earlier, shunting in there is hardly convenient and I think I prefer the version without the kick back at all. I have to say that even with the LH/RH combination, those throw overs look horrible!

Very impressive. I especially like the way the coaches reflect the light and the passing trains.  The Tinplate coaches are very nearly flush glazed.  Someone was being very delicate with the controls of the 08, my original H/D one goes like a rocket, but the Wrenn one has 60:1 gears so it does a similar speed to the one in the clip flat out. 

Pity about some of the wrong line running, but that looks like a lot more fun than many of the layouts featured.  I guess the cut aways were to hide the uncoupling,  I liked the music. Canon in D. I arranged it for Brass Band to play at a wedding once and its quite a nice piece at 60BPM.  They divorced shortly after.

It looks like the layout leads to a 90 degree bend before the FY etc

The FY is always going to be a challenge, an almost impossible one with a three track approach, but there has to be some weird and wonderful solution which would work. I am wondering about a cassette system where a vertical traverser holds the cassettes, you just shove them sideways and lift them away.  It would stop me dropping them, and wouldn't need any finesse with alignment.   Think I'll sleep on it and hopefully  work out why it won't work before any else does.

Edited June 8, 2020 by DavidCBroad

[Izzy]

2 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

So I would still say that the Hornby Dublo version scores slightly higher in terms of capturing the spirit of the original design. Not in the quality of the locos and stock but just in terms of being what CJF would have expected to see running on a 00 Minories 60 plus years ago. 

As the original Minories was first done in TT I do wonder what it would look like if you were able to get enough Triang stock together today to make it viable, Jintys etc.

 

More speculation!

 

Izzy

[Nearholmer]

23 minutes ago, Izzy said:

As the original Minories was first done in TT I do wonder what it would look like if you were able to get enough Triang stock together today to make it viable, Jintys etc.

 

Build the layout, join the TCS, and make friends with the avid TT collectors .......... they've got enough suburban coaches and Jinties to run ten Minories at once.

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

All this talk of fiddle yards and cassettes... it makes me realise that I am putting off what I know needs to be done.  Build a return loop and stock loops on the lower level and raise my current Minories Major onto a new higher level.

 

I just don't like fiddle yards, they require too much operator input and break the illusion that my little trains have gone somewhere.  A return loop with a some automatics, now that would work for me.

 

Sigh.  Woodworking. 

[roythebus]

Just wondering if anyone has tried to plan Minories on templot? someone mentioned Anyrail in an earlier post.

[t-b-g]

6 minutes ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

All this talk of fiddle yards and cassettes... it makes me realise that I am putting off what I know needs to be done.  Build a return loop and stock loops on the lower level and raise my current Minories Major onto a new higher level.

 

I just don't like fiddle yards, they require too much operator input and break the illusion that my little trains have gone somewhere.  A return loop with a some automatics, now that would work for me.

 

Sigh.  Woodworking. 

 

Build another Minories at the other end. Somewhere between the two, build some carriage sidings and a loco shed. All the stock out on display all the time. 

[Zomboid]

5 minutes ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

I just don't like fiddle yards, they require too much operator input and break the illusion that my little trains have gone somewhere.  A return loop with a some automatics, now that would work for me

Completely agree.

 

On an exhibition layout I could see the point of having some "off scene", but for me personally I don't see the point on a home layout. You'd just end up messing around on the stuff that you're pretending isn't really there. Given choice (and a lot of us don't get that) I'd have a return loop arrangement of some sort, possibly with a couple of loops so I could mix up the order that things come back in, but not anything that required manual handling during a running session.

[St Enodoc]

5 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

Absolutely.

 

It is something that we (and I include myself) have perhaps lost in our quest for "better" modelling. The sheer fun of "playing trains" .

 

I would really enjoy operating that layout. I just know I would!

 

In my loft, there is a big box with all the Hornby Dublo, Triang and Wrenn locos and stock that were my childhoods model railway history, along with enough Peco track to build such a layout. There is a box with Superquick buidings plus a few made from balsawood and brickpaper. If I ever reach a stage where my eyesight and hands are not up to making models any more, I know what I am going to build!

That's dangerous talk Tony. I've a big box full of Tri-ang stuff. Not the original models that I used to own, because they were sold/scrapped/given away over the years, but replacements that I've bought more recently.

 

A Minories using Super 4 track would be a great way to show them off...

 

Edit: with a Denny fiddle yard (this thread, passim) at the other end. I'd need a spare tray or two to store all the stock...

Edited June 8, 2020 by St Enodoc

[Zomboid]

14 hours ago, t-b-g said:

It is something that we (and I include myself) have perhaps lost in our quest for "better" modelling. The sheer fun of "playing trains" .

The quest for visual fidelity above all else seems to be a consequence of relatively affordable highly detailed RTR.

 

It took me a while to work out that I personally wouldn't derive any more enjoyment from a £400 super quality locomotive if the lesser detailed £150 version (I still "need" DCC with sound, the noise is the whole point of an Alco diesel ) would look good enough to be identifiably what it is and reliably pull a train.

 

We're all different of course and that's a good thing, but I just know that I'd have a great time running Hornby railroad rolling stock into a Minories made from short radius (or even set track) points, with scenics by superquick, and scratch built buildings and ultra detailed trains wouldn't do much to improve matters. In fact if I ever do build a layout like this one stated aim would be that all buildings are proprietary cardboard kits if possible, since I also enjoy putting those together...

[t-b-g]

17 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

The quest for visual fidelity above all else seems to be a consequence of relatively affordable highly detailed RTR.

 

It took me a while to work out that I personally wouldn't derive any more enjoyment from a £400 super quality locomotive if the lesser detailed £150 version (I still "need" DCC with sound, the noise is the whole point of an Alco diesel ) would look good enough to be identifiably what it is and reliably pull a train.

 

We're all different of course and that's a good thing, but I just know that I'd have a great time running Hornby railroad rolling stock into a Minories made from short radius (or even set track) points, with scenics by superquick, and scratch built buildings and ultra detailed trains wouldn't do much to improve matters. In fact if I ever do build a layout like this one stated aim would be that all buildings are proprietary cardboard kits if possible, since I also enjoy putting those together...

 

Ken Hill and I have done something like that on the enlarged version of Narrow Road, which has 5 stations. Of the 3 new ones, 2 are full of Metcalfe and Superquick buildings. The third one is being done "properly" because we wanted it based on a real place and kits are not right pattern at all. It has allowed good progress to be made very quickly. Ken was beginning to think we had been too ambitious and being nearer 80 than 70, that he wouldn't live long enough to see the layout finished. It is purely for our own enjoyment and won't be exhibited or probably published so what does it matter if our buildings look the same as ones on other layouts? Not one jot!

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

26 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

The quest for visual fidelity above all else seems to be a consequence of relatively affordable highly detailed RTR.

 

and also the ubiquity of digital photography... just have a look at the photos that used to grace the RM of the 70s, and you can hardly tell what anything is other than 'steam' or 'diesel'

[t-b-g]

1 minute ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

 

and also the ubiquity of digital photography... just have a look at the photos that used to grace the RM of the 70s, and you can hardly tell what anything is other than 'steam' or 'diesel'

 

That is a very valid point. You now see far more in a photo of a model, often many times life size on a big screen, than you can watching it from 3ft away on a layout at home or at a show. I have heard people say that they have done certain things so that a model looks good when photographed. I am prepared to admit guilt in that respect from time to time myself!

 

Then I look at Buckingham and the level and quality of the work. In modern photos it looks a bit rough sometimes. In old photographs and when operating, it looks lovely!

[Enterprisingwestern]

15 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

Absolutely.

 

It is something that we (and I include myself) have perhaps lost in our quest for "better" modelling. The sheer fun of "playing trains" .

 

I would really enjoy operating that layout. I just know I would!

 

In my loft, there is a big box with all the Hornby Dublo, Triang and Wrenn locos and stock that were my childhoods model railway history, along with enough Peco track to build such a layout. There is a box with Superquick buidings plus a few made from balsawood and brickpaper. If I ever reach a stage where my eyesight and hands are not up to making models any more, I know what I am going to build!

 

Best get started then!!

 

Mike.

[t-b-g]

23 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

Best get started then!!

 

Mike.

 

Well my hands and eyes still work, so hopefully it will be a while before I build mine. How about you?

[Enterprisingwestern]

1 minute ago, t-b-g said:

 

Well my hands and eyes still work, so hopefully it will be a while before I build mine. How about you?

 

I'm beyond all hope, as you and Ken well know!

 

Mike.

[The Evil Bus Driver]

On 30/05/2020 at 15:14, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

I like the basic format but I wouldn't bother with "Reigate".

 

I built something very similar for a customer back in the early 90s. He had two sons and they wanted plenty of operating capacity which this sort of scheme gives. I did manage to get longer platforms at the terminus and a continuous run but at the expense of the third station that this plan has.

Looks a bit like the Brighton Main Line if it had been built by Colonel Stephens. (Now there's an interesting layout concept. I've always been fascinated by Col. Stephens lines.)

[whart57]

14 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

Build another Minories at the other end. Somewhere between the two, build some carriage sidings and a loco shed. All the stock out on display all the time. 

I have this vague recollection of someone who built a layout with two single line termini, but when operating one acted as fiddle yard for the other. That way he could have an OO GWR branch terminus as well as a German HO station. Is that the sort of thing you had in mind?