Joint Minories Layout

[bigdaveadams1]

Well as a new year approaches, so does a new project. I've realised I've not got space for a layout at my house. So my 6ft x 2ft scenic board and 5ft x1ft Fiddle yard board were destined for disposal. However one of my best mates has come to the rescue! He fancies a new project and wanted to dip his toe into the world of DCC.

 

So he'll do the scenics and I'll do the track laying and electrics.

 

Peco Code 75 will be used with third rail and cobalt point motors.

 

 

So, the layout......

It'll be based on the Sothern Region, and will run in either rail blue or Blue Grey/NSE. It will be in a built up area and based on the minories concept.

 

Rolling stock will be mainly EPBs, with VEPs and CEPs putting in an occasional appearance. There will also be very occasional parcels trains and light engine moves.

 

Anyway, any thoughts are much appreciated. The fiddle yard will be cassettes and we're hoping to have working signals as well.

 

Cheers

 

Dave

[bigdaveadams1]

Here it is with a double slip.

[bigdaveadams1]

Here I've designed it in such a way as to provide a run round. However this strikes me as a bit dull, but does allow longer platforms and would make a lovely quiet seaside type terminus.

[Wherry Lines]

I prefer the first iteration of the plan. It just seems to look 'right'.

I prefer the first iteration of the plan. It just seems to look 'right'.

[Hugh Flynn]

Hi

Which ever plan you use good luck will follow with interest.

Hugh

[bigdaveadams1]

I prefer the first one as well. It does look better and should allow for plenty of units pottering about. I had considered having the 3rd platform (bottom) as a disused one used for stabling between the peak hours.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Dave,

I'd be inclined to have a double track approach, with the junction assumed to be off-stage. Even quite small SR electrified termini were on double track due to the intensive nature of the service. Exceptions of course occur - it's your call in the end.

[bigdaveadams1]

Peter,

thanks for the advice. I definitely think you're right. Once I'm home from work I'll give your track plan a bash.

 

cheers

Dave

[hayfield]

One of my favourite features of the Minories plan is the curved track into the platforms and seeing trains snaking through the turnouts

[bigdaveadams1]

I know what you mean. I'm thinking of going back to plan A, but rather than having a branch, instead I'm going to imagine the main line was singled and that the former down (arrival) line is now kept as a stub.

I'll post a couple of plans later. Although using Peter's plan, it could flow quite nicely and have simultaneous arrivals and departures.

Cheers

[TonyMay]

The original beauty of Minories was that any platform could be used for both arrivals and departures.  If you use double track entrance, you need to ensure that you can get in and out of all of the platforms.  If you use the first design proposed on this thread with a double track entrance, trains entering the station on the left-hand track can't access the top-most platform.

[bigdaveadams1]

Hence the idea of either a branch. So as to have dedicated mainline platforms or a rationalised entrance where the other line is disused and therefore all lines are accessed from the single line.

[SRman]

I actually preferred the second plan, with the curves still in place and the double slip. If you can shift the double slip (and all pointwork to the left of it) over towards the right, you can have a little more siding and platform length to play with. You could still include the run around crossover at the left (I did the latter with my old layout based on the Minories plan).

The down side of using a double slip, in my experience, is that they are rather higher maintenance items than the rest of the trackwork.

[D9020 Nimbus]

There was also an interesting plan for a similar station by Iain Rice—it appears in his "Urban Layouts" book (Atlantic). It was based on the real layout at Caterham.

[Flying Pig]

The original beauty of Minories was that any platform could be used for both arrivals and departures.  If you use double track entrance, you need to ensure that you can get in and out of all of the platforms.  If you use the first design proposed on this thread with a double track entrance, trains entering the station on the left-hand track can't access the top-most platform.

 

Just for completeness, this is the correct arrangement of the Minories throat, allowing arrivals and departures from all platforms.  I've extended the loco spur to give a possible stabling siding, but that could be arranged as a kickback as in other versions in this thread.  If a slip were to be used, a single slip would replace the points at 'X' (see Peter Kazmierczak's post above).

 

 

 

[bigdaveadams1]

Dave,

I'd be inclined to have a double track approach, with the junction assumed to be off-stage. Even quite small SR electrified termini were on double track due to the intensive nature of the service. Exceptions of course occur - it's your call in the end.

 

Is this about right Peter? I really like it. The only issue is the positioning of the single slip and allowing room to place the point motors.

 

Cheers

 

Dave

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Looks good to me Dave.

Just remember a trap point at the exit to the siding/spur bottom right.

[bigdaveadams1]

Just for completeness, this is the correct arrangement of the Minories throat, allowing arrivals and departures from all platforms.  I've extended the loco spur to give a possible stabling siding, but that could be arranged as a kickback as in other versions in this thread.  If a slip were to be used, a single slip would replace the points at 'X' (see Peter Kazmierczak's post above).

 

BigDaveMinories.png

 

Cheers for the suggestion. I've used your idea and tweaked the history of the terminus slightly. I've turned your stabling siding into a platform and another platform into a stabling siding.

 

I was thinking about the way that the railways were rationalised in the 80s and thought that even with a 15 minute interval service, this would easily be accomodated with a single lead into the station. As such, the former Down (Arrival) line is now disused.

[bigdaveadams1]

Looks good to me Dave.

Just remember a trap point at the exit to the siding/spur bottom right.

Sorry Peter, I got carried away! I've now edited the plan to include a trap point.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Dave,

Whatever design you use, play around with it first. Use pieces of card to represent rolling stock and see if there's enough operational interest (AKA play value) in the track layout.

 

All the best,

Peter

[bigdaveadams1]

Dave,

Whatever design you use, play around with it first. Use pieces of card to represent rolling stock and see if there's enough operational interest (AKA play value) in the track layout.

 

All the best,

Peter

Cheers Peter,

 

yeah we intend to mock up all the plans on the boards with all the rolling stock and I'll come up with timetables etc to check what works. Originally it was going to be a nice quiet BLT, but my mate has always wanted something along the minories theme. We'll see how we go!

 

Dave

[Pacific231G]

Well as a new year approaches, so does a new project. I've realised I've not got space for a layout at my house. So my 6ft x 2ft scenic board and 5ft x1ft Fiddle yard board were destined for disposal. However one of my best mates has come to the rescue! He fancies a new project and wanted to dip his toe into the world of DCC.

 

So he'll do the scenics and I'll do the track laying and electrics.

 

Peco Code 75 will be used with third rail and cobalt point motors.

 

 

So, the layout......

It'll be based on the Sothern Region, and will run in either rail blue or Blue Grey/NSE. It will be in a built up area and based on the minories concept.

 

Rolling stock will be mainly EPBs, with VEPs and CEPs putting in an occasional appearance. There will also be very occasional parcels trains and light engine moves.

 

Anyway, any thoughts are much appreciated. The fiddle yard will be cassettes and we're hoping to have working signals as well.

 

Cheers

 

Dave

Hi  Dave

It looks like a very interesting and satisfying project but is there any particular reason for not having access to all three platforms from both main line tracks? I can't help thinking that a Southern terminus with three platforms in an urban area would not be likely to be single track. I also don't think the big railway would use a slip if they could do the job with simple turnouts though unlike us they've got plenty of main length length and you may need the length.

 

There was a very nice and very compact 0 scale layout on the circuit called Newford by Brian Thomas- it's now part of the larger layout Littleton. It's relevant because it was Southern Electric and seemed to capture that atmosphere rather well. Brian invited me to operate it for the day when it was at Watfod Fine Scale in 2003 and it was a very good layout. I did though find the play value operational possibilities of the basic Minories a bit limited- especially with MU stock- and if I built a version it would have to have a goods yard or something else to justify some shunting.

 

Brian doubled the dimensions for Cyril Freezer's original Minories for Newford but added a stock stabling track between platforms 1&2. and turned the loco holding road  over to van traffic. All three platforms could handle a four coach EMU set and in 0 scale that did give a main line impression of being somewhere a bit like Bognor or Littlehampton. In 7mm scale even a single "4-BEL" set made a convincing Newford Belle Pullman. (The real Brighton Belle was normally made up from  two 5-BEL sets but at offpeak times could be a single five car set)

The station was 14 ft long plus a 10 ft fiddle yard consisting simply of a set of points on each main line track to give four fiddle sidings. the throat pointwork was on a single six foot long baseboard.(which Brian said was heavy and cumbersome - you have been warned!!) and the rest of the station including the  concourse and building was on two 4ft boards. the layout was 20inches wide so double the width of the original Minories plan but handbuilt track would have saved a bit of length in the throat. 

 

Freezer's original plan was 6ft 6ins long in 00 which is a tad longer than your six foot long main board but if you're using casettes in the fiddle yard do you need the whole five feet of fiddle or could you move the right hand turnout onto that board and give yourself a bit more platform length?

I've drawn it up in XTrkCad with a single slip and all the pointwork on the six foot board but I don't know whether you would be able to get a 4 car EMU into each platform and the longest stock might be confined to platform one.

The slip will save a few inches but the downside is that two of the possible six routes between the two main line tracks and the three platforms involve an immediate reverse curve; on Cyril Freezer's original that only applied to one of the six routes. With Medium Length points you will get a lot of excessive sideways movement between coaches on immediate reverse curves and the genius of his plan was that you got a double crossover with an access point for a third platform but without the lurching of a straight in approach . It does ocur to me that if your main baseboard is two feet wide you may be able to use a curved approach from the fiddle yard and have the terminus on an angle to avoid some of that. 

[bigdaveadams1]

Brilliant reply Pacific!

 

I'm slowly digesting the information in it. Personally I'd wanted a BLT with shunting in the goods yard. However, I see the benefits of a compact EMU style terminus.

 

I'm very interested in hearing more about the curved approach you suggest. We'd decided on standard peco points because I've got 6 going spare! But I can stretch to a few curved points.

Although I'll admit that without seeing it in plan form, I'm a bit stumped as to how it'll shape up.

 

Thanks again

 

Dave

[bigdaveadams1]

I've had a quick flick through my southern region track diagrams. I've noticed that Bromley North has only 2 platforms but has a cross over and a single slip. Also Weymouth is a 3 platform terminus with a single line approach. Then there's Sheerness, single track approach with two platforms and a centre run round road. So there is scope for bending the rules when it suits!

 

I also remember when I was a driver at Blackfriars, we used to work Brighton trains every 15 minutes with only a single lead between Metropolitan Jn and Blackfriars junction. Then there was Blackfriars itself. The terminus platforms (1-3) were served by a single lead. Which was a massive bottle neck during the peak.

[bigdaveadams1]

I have a soft spot for DEMUs as well. Which leads me to my idea of a rationalised Eastbourne type seaside location. With terminating EMUs and DEMUs providing through services.