Reviving an old classic

[ejstubbs]

One idea that I've been playing around with the past week or so is a layout based on Bredon by Alan Wood and Kevin Bettison.  I was first made aware of this layout by the Peco track plans book, where the plan is based wholly around the use of setrack.  After laying it out in Anyrail I decided that it didn't quite work for me, especially with so many curved points.  I much preferred the look of the original, going from the photo in the book.

 

Digging about online I found some more photos of the original layout, and eventually I found here a track plan posted by Alan Wood himself, along with large, colour versions of the B&W photos I'd already found.  That looked much more like it, especially with that little complex of points just beyond the tunnel mouth (which I thought was a little reminiscent of CJF's use of ordinary points to make the sinuous throat of the original Minories).

 

So I've had a go at laying that out in Anyrail, and I think it's much more to my taste:

 

 

Based on Alan's diagram, and from the fact that the colour photo he posted is entitled "branch sidings", it seems to me that the idea was that Bredon was meant to represent a single platform station on a single track main line, with a passing loop, plus a bay platform for a single track branch line which is the main source of traffic for the goods yard.  The colour coding on my plan is supposed to clarify that, and incidentally it matches the colours in the diagram Alan posted.  I like this idea, but I do have a couple of misgivings/questions:

 

1) The branch and main lines run as parallel curves off in to the tunnel, ie the branch line doesn't clearly 'branch' off the main line.  I feel that this makes the nature of the layout a little un-obvious.  Now, I realise that this will have been partly due to space constraints which I could adjust if I wanted to, but are there any real places - especially rural locations - where the main and branch lines run, or ran, alongside each other for a significant distance, and even together through a tunnel?

 

2) What's the purpose of the second loop in the station?  I think the spur at the bottom left is a good feature, but the extra line parallel to the through platform and the first loop seems rather unnecessary.  It can't be used as an extra passing loop.  I was thinking of dispensing with it and putting a second through platform in there.  The downsides to that might be that, firstly, it would make the station look rather large, somewhat undermining the slightly twee appeal of the original.  Secondly, it would seem to suggest that the two platform lines would mainly be operated directionally, whereas leaving it as a single through platform with a passing loop gives a bit more freedom over which way traffic can run on either track.

 

I'm still tweaking and teasing my track plan - it's already expanded to a full 8ft x 4ft - but I'd be interested in any helpful insights or suggestions that folks feel like offering and which might help me to add the final polish.

[edcayton]

At Truro the Falmouth branch bay feeds on to the down main, and branch trains run through the tunnel on the main line before taking the junction at Penwithers.

 

Ed

[Kris]

The line to Torbay runs parallel to the main line for quite some distance before branching off. Okay not a single track branch but the principle is there.  

[chaz]

The junction for the Hertford and Luton branches on the GNR was Hatfield, but both branches ran to Welwyn Garden City before peeling away, one to the east and one to the west. I often wondered whether the stretch between Hatfield and WGC was unique - the four track ECML with a single track branch line either side, both worked bi-directionally. Incidentally there was no connection between the Luton line and the main line at WGC and it had its own platform face, now used by terminating services from Kings X. Not too relevant to your question maybe but interesting I hope.

[ejstubbs]

Thanks for those examples, it helps to know that real junction stations didn't always have the branch immediately veering away from the main line.

 

I am still thinking of introducing a little extra separation between the two curves at the RH end of the layout.  It might create a bit of a space problem trying to accommodate two tunnel entrances but I though I could address that by using a girder plate road overbridge with a central pier between the tracks to form the scenic break, instead of a tunnel (which can be a bit of a cliche anyway).  That idea was sparked by the discussion here.

 

As for the second loop, to my mind it doesn't add much either to the look or to the operational interest of the layout and I'll probably take it out.  I'm still undecided about whether to have a second platform in its place, or just leave myself a bit of scenic room at the front edge of the layout - a fence or hedge with a hint of green fields and gambolling lambs, or something like that (what was I saying about cliches?)

[edcayton]

The junction for the Hertford and Luton branches on the GNR was Hatfield, but both branches ran to Welwyn Garden City before peeling away, one to the east and one to the west. I often wondered whether the stretch between Hatfield and WGC was unique - the four track ECML with a single track branch line either side, both worked bi-directionally. Incidentally there was no connection between the Luton line and the main line at WGC and it had its own platform face, now used by terminating services from Kings X. Not too relevant to your question maybe but interesting I hope.

 

In my time (60's on) there were crossovers between the down slow and Luton lines. Slow trains had to go into the Luton platform so that faster ones such as the Buffet could access the station-remember no platforms on the fast lines.  Sorry for going OT, your point about the lines running from Hatfield remains. Remember that these lines existed before Welwyn Garden City or its station were even dreamed of.

 

Ed

[Nimbus]

In my time (60's on) there were crossovers between the down slow and Luton lines. Slow trains had to go into the Luton platform so that faster ones such as the Buffet could access the station-remember no platforms on the fast lines.  Sorry for going OT, your point about the lines running from Hatfield remains. Remember that these lines existed before Welwyn Garden City or its station were even dreamed of.

 

Ed

That would have been after the collapse of Wrestler's Bridge carrying the Great North Road over the line at Hatfield, just north of the divergence of the St Albans branch, in 1966. A temporary structure was rigged to carry some utility services, with its footings built on the trackbed of the two branches. This was later upgraded to a footbridge. The road was never re-instated.

 

The Nim.

[Chimer]

Might the extra loop allow a clockwise goods train loco to run round its train without blocking the main (if the point configuration was changed a bit) or leave some wagons on that side to be shunted by the next anti-clockwise goods?  Doesn't seem very likely, but the best I can do .......

[Flying Pig]

Some suggestions: make the blue line the main line; make the other a mineral branch of some sort (no passenger service except perhaps a workers train) with the extra loop at the front working as an exchange siding.  Delete the bay platform.  Reconsider the inner sidings: the "twigs off a stem" style isn't convincing as most yards were more coppice than pollard.  I think I'd make it one or two sidings max to keep things uncluttered.

 

A short straight inserted at the rail joint immediately below where red abuts blue on your diagram will introduce a bit of separation between the two branches, with luck enough for them to disappear through different arches.

[DCB]

If you want separation between main and branch why not have a stone bridge on the "main" line and a steel girder span clearly added later on the "Branch"

 

I think the third "loop" is virtually useless, and the lack of a run round on the "Branch" would prove frustrating as would the goods sidings accessed from the branch, I guess as a scenic test track its ok but you can get a whole lot more railway than this into 8 x 4

[edcayton]

Yes, I think that what made Bredon was the quality of the modelling and the photography in the original RM article, rather than the operational potential. However, it did look excellent "in the flesh" when it was at Pecorama-is it still there?

 

Ed

[PatB]

Yes, I think that what made Bredon was the quality of the modelling and the photography in the original RM article, rather than the operational potential. However, it did look excellent "in the flesh" when it was at Pecorama-is it still there?

 

Ed

 

Don't think so (though I'm happy to be corrected). I remember seeing it when I was there in '76 but I have no recollection of it on my somewhat belated return visit in 2010.

[ejstubbs]

Bredon is no longer at Pecorama.  See the thread that I linked in my OP for an update from Alan Wood around this time last year on what's happened to it.

[Stubby47]

May the 3rd loop could be used for shunting in the yard - a bit remote perhaps, needing much shuffling about, but wagons could be left there which would not affect the platform or main passing loop.

Maybe an industry siding added lower right would also justify the loop.

[Kris]

The 3rd loop works better if the outer loop is the branch, at which point the loops can become exchange sidings.

[ejstubbs]

A short straight inserted at the rail joint immediately below where red abuts blue on your diagram will introduce a bit of separation between the two branches, with luck enough for them to disappear through different arches.

 

Yep, I've been considering that and I think it would work as you suggest.

 

If you want separation between main and branch why not have a stone bridge on the "main" line and a steel girder span clearly added later on the "Branch"

 

That's a good idea, thanks.

 

I guess as a scenic test track its ok but you can get a whole lot more railway than this into 8 x 4

 

I'm not necessarily looking for a whole lot of railway, I'm more after something with a bit of room for scenic work.

 

I do like Kris' exchange siding idea, I'll give that some more thought.