Joint Minories Layout

[SRman]

Going back to the track plans, the original idea with Minories was to have the approaches arranged in such a way as to eliminate any reverse curves.

Looking at the earlier plans on here, if the platform lines are angled away from the front of the boards, so that a departing locomotive starting at the buffers and going towards the right would also head gradually towards the front edge, then curve away diagonally towards the right-hand rear corner. This would get back to having the smooth "flow" of a train entering any platform without having to swing left then right again.

It also gets away from the idea that tracks have to be parallel to the board edges.

[bigdaveadams1]

You're right SRman! I hadn't factored the curves in on any rail because I think it's something that's best done by eye on the board itself.

[Pacific231G]

Going back to the track plans, the original idea with Minories was to have the approaches arranged in such a way as to eliminate any reverse curves.

 

Looking at the earlier plans on here, if the platform lines are angled away from the front of the boards, so that a departing locomotive starting at the buffers and going towards the right would also head gradually towards the front edge, then curve away diagonally towards the right-hand rear corner. This would get back to having the smooth "flow" of a train entering any platform without having to swing left then right again.

 

It also gets away from the idea that tracks have to be parallel to the board edges.

I agree with you about avoiding completely parallel tracks though space tends to push us towards it.

Minories didn't actually eliminate all reverse curves in fact every route included one but what it did achieve was for all but one of the six possible routes to have at least a points length between them.

It's fairly easy to connect three platforms to a double track main line in four points lengths and I've drawn that up in Anyrail as a straight line plan alongside Cyril Freezer's Minories. All the points are Peco medium.

 

In the straight line arrangement (assuming a London terminus so "up" is inbound) two routes, platform 1 to down & up to platform 2, are completely straight while the route from the up main line to platform 3 involves just the fairly gentle reverse curve into the platform. The other three possible routes involve coaches lurching over one of the two crossovers.

 

If you compare that with Cyril Freezer's operationally identical "Minories" throat you'll see that every route involves a reverse curve but only one, the route from the up mainline line to platform one, require an immediate reversal. For every other route there is at least a point's length between the two curves and that does help trains to snake rather than lurch across the inevitably shorter than prototype points.

 

In both cases platform one can take a slightly longer train than two or three because it ends with the toe of a set of points. the other two end at the frog (crossing) end of a set of points so you have to allow a few inches for clearance.

 

I've noticed that on my local branch betweeen Paddington and Greenford the train leaves the down main line at West Ealing via a crossover followed by a set of points and it's defintely a lurch!

I'll have a go at an angled version.

[Pacific231G]

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

 

My pleasure, I like playing around with trackplans.

You can arrange a curved approach with standard left and right points and if the angle between the platforms ends and the main line is sufficient you  can eliminate all reverse curves as with this example that is operationally the same as Minories. There are prototypes for this approach one of which you'll find if you put Bastille into the site search. .

[Xerces Fobe2]

You can arrange a curved approach with standard left and right points and if the angle between the platforms ends and the main line is sufficient you can eliminate all reverse curves as with this example that is operationally the same as Minories. There are prototypes for this approach.

minories curved equivalent.jpg

I would add a holding siding for an EMU in order to keep the platforms free for passenger carrying services

[SRman]

You can arrange a curved approach with standard left and right points and if the angle between the platforms ends and the main line is sufficient you  can eliminate all reverse curves as with this example that is operationally the same as Minories. There are prototypes for this approach.

minories curved equivalent.jpg

That's pretty close to how I arranged my old layout branch, except mine was mirror imaged. Thanks for posting that plan as it clarifies what I was trying to convey.

[bigdaveadams1]

You can arrange a curved approach with standard left and right points and if the angle between the platforms ends and the main line is sufficient you can eliminate all reverse curves as with this example that is operationally the same as Minories. There are prototypes for this approach.

minories curved equivalent.jpg

Cheers for that Pacific.

 

Personally I think we're asking too much to get a minories in 6ft.

 

Where as a 3 platform seaside terminus, with a loco release would be much better suited to our 6ft length!

 

Cheers

 

Dave

[Izzy]

I think that there is a lot to be said for having not only a track plan on a curve, but the whole layout. There are quite a few I have seen in recent years that have used this to advantage in that it they look more natural and less regimented. Of course it does work best with handbuilt track simply because the curvature can be made to suit that chosen for the baseboard. Two that most readily to mind are Coldfair Green and Portchullin (both strangely 4mm/P4 for some reason), but there are several in other scales/gauges whose names escape me at present built using ready made track which look equally good.

 

It doesn't need to take more room length wise, just a bit more width for storage, as the curve should be fairly gentle, but an advantage is that the inside of the curvature is ready made for the operating position, and the outside gives a more sweeping vista for those viewing, a bit like standing by the lineside and turning around to look both up and down the line.

 

Perhaps something to ponder?

 

Izzy

[bigdaveadams1]

Thanks Izzy.

 

But the purpose of the layout is that we're using up baseboards that would otherwise be thrown out. If we were starting from scratch we'd be replicating the minories and would be allowing at least an extra foot in length!

[Pacific231G]

Cheers for that Pacific.

 

Personally I think we're asking too much to get a minories in 6ft.

 

Whereas a 3 platform seaside terminus, with a loco release would be much better suited to our 6ft length!

 

Cheers

 

Dave

You may well be right though if you're using a casette based fiddle yard you can probably pinch six inches from it to extend the throat.

Faced with the same lack of length I did play around with John Charman's original Charford layout. This was based on the SR just before nationalisation and had a single platform with a bay and a short parcels siding off the run round loop. The original Charford branch was built on two 70 inch by 14inch baseboards with the station on one and the fiddle yard on the other. About six inches was lost at the left hand end for the station building and concourse but the remaining 5ft 4ins would handle a train of three coaches plus a parcels van hauled by a Bulleid light Pacific.  I've simply turned what was the loco release/run round loop into a third slightly longer platform, reversed the loco release crossover and lengthened the bay.

 

 

With the throat reduced to two points lengths this station layout should comfortably handle a four foot six long train on the longest platform so you could run a full 5BEL Pullman and even the bay would take a 4VEP quite comfortably. I've also kept the small goods yard with its a head shunt in front of the station.

On Charford the line immediately above the main was a small loco shed but I've made it a false double track (with a crossover assumed beyond the layout) or one that's been singled.

If the arrangement of tracks in the upper two platforms looks unlikely then you never knew the old Fort William station. In fact if I were using this plan I'd be tempted to make the goods headshunt into an inset quayside line and have the terminus also serving as a ferry port rather like a smaller Portsmouth Harbour (Southsea Pier?) or a mythical Ramsgate Harbour competing with Dover and Folkestone. (though mine would be  La Bastide Guillaume and the ferries would be going to the fashionable L'Ile Blanc) 

[bigdaveadams1]

You may well be right though if you're using a casette based fiddle yard you can probably pinch six inches from it to extend the throat.

Faced with the same lack of length I did play around with John Charman's original Charford layout. This was based on the SR just before nationalisation and had a single platform with a bay and a short parcels siding off the run round loop. The original Charford branch was built on two 70 inch by 14inch baseboards with the station on one and the fiddle yard on the other. About six inches was lost at the left hand end for the station building and concourse but the remaining 5ft 4ins would handle a train of three coaches plus a parcels van hauled by a Bulleid light Pacific.  I've simply turned the run round loop into a third slightly longer platform and lengthened the bay.

3 platform Charford mod.jpg

With the throat reduced to two points lengths this station layout should comfortably handle a four foot six long train on the longest platform so if you could afford one from Hornby you could operate a full 5BEL set and even the bay would take a 4VEP quite comfortably. I've also kept the small goods yard with its a head shunt in front of the station.

On Charford the line immediately above the main was a small loco shed but I've made it a false double track (with a crossover assumed beyond the layout) or one that's been singled.

If the arrangement of tracks in the upper two platforms looks unlikely then you never knew the old Fort William station. In fact if I were using this plan I'd be tempted to make the goods headshunt into an inset quayside line and have the terminus also serving as a ferry port rather like a smaller Portsmouth Harbour (Southsea Pier?) or a mythical Ramsgate Harbour (totally different from the real Ramsgate Harbour) competing with Dover and Folkestone. . 

 

Loving all the replies. It's so nice to have plenty of ideas being thrown about!

 

The only issue with the above plan is that the point for the goods yard falls on the baseboard join, but that could be worked around.

[Pacific231G]

Loving all the replies. It's so nice to have plenty of ideas being thrown about!

 

The only issue with the above plan is that the point for the goods yard falls on the baseboard join, but that could be worked around.

Where does the board break come? you mentioned a six foot long scenic section so is that on two three foot long boards? If so just lose the totally superfluous catch point (I only added it to separate the goods head shunt from the bay platform) and it should be clear. 

[bigdaveadams1]

This morning I had a thought, perhaps we should just build something simple for these baseboards. Something we can get done quickly, just to have some fun. Then when we're bored of it, we can ship it off and move on. We both used to be drivers at Blackfriars and so have always fancied replicating the BR platforms at Moorgate. But no doubt that'll turn into a classic minories with added platform length for prototypical train lengths.

[Pacific231G]

I would add a holding siding for an EMU in order to keep the platforms free for passenger carrying services

I've only done this as a direct equivalent of the original basic Cyril Freezer Minories but with a curved approach. Personally I'd add a goods yard to it but If I were designing  this as a purely passenger Southern Electric terminus  I'd be inclined to follow Flying Pig's idea and extend the short loco stabling track into one or preferably two stabling sidings behind platform one with a typically Southern concrete fence separating them from the platform and a servicing platform between them.

[bigdaveadams1]

I've only done this as a direct equivalent of the original basic Cyril Freezer Minories but with a curved approach. Personally I'd add a goods yard to it but If I were designing this as a purely passenger Southern Electric terminus I'd be inclined to follow Flying Pig's idea and extend the short loco stabling track into one or preferably two stabling sidings behind platform one with a typically Southern concrete fence separating them from the platform and a servicing platform between them.

You're not wrong there, a stabling siding or two with the walkway in between the two roads!

[bigdaveadams1]

Where does the board break come? you mentioned a six foot long scenic section so is that on two three foot long boards? If so just lose the totally superfluous catch point (I only added it to separate the goods head shunt from the bay platform) and it should be clear.

oops, just seen this. Yes it's two 3ftx2ft boards.

[Pacific231G]

oops, just seen this. Yes it's two 3ftx2ft boards.

 

In that case it's easy to move the point to clear the join. I had a bit more of a play to try to make better use of the two foot width and tried angling the station slightly and pinching the first six inches of the fiddle yard board to straighten it up. On your two foot wide board that gives room for a small goods yard and space behind the station for a forecourt, pub or other buildings. My only thought is that this now feels to me a bit more rural than urban but the scenery shouild  fix that.

 

John Charman obviously found that the same basic track plan (with just one platform and a shorter bay) worked for him as although he extended the original very portable layout into a permanent one that occupied a garden shed he kept the same Charford terminus for the whole long life of the layout. The only real changes were to extend the goods headshunt to the left of the station to serve a milk depot and to spread the goods yard onto another board that also carried the main line round a curve and allowed space for a slightly larger loco depot.