Branch line terminus, ca 1950, north east

[Montague]

I have base boards ready for a double track oval depicting a through station with a branch line to a terminus. My initial focus will be on the terminus to get a modelled area as soon as possible. I will aim for something reasonable correct for ca 1950 in the north eastern part of England. It will be freelanced, but I will use NER/LNER as a guide for station colours etc.

 

The terminus will be a small, rural market town/village with sparse passenger traffic (probably to be abolished within the coming decade), coal, animal feed, on market days cattle, parcels, and a few loads per week of agricultural machinery or other special loads. Outgoing traffic will be mostly agricultural products.

 

I have yet to decide if I will signal the branch line or not. I am leaning towards One engine in steam.

 

This is a draft of the track plan.

 

I would appreciate any input before I start to lay track, especially regarding.

 

1) Is the track plan reasonable? I do not like having a switch back, but I want to use more of the base board as the branch line will make a curve down/right to the junction town, behind the operator at the terminus (if you look down on the track as you do on the track plan).

 

2) I guess the question about signalling/one engine is steam mainly depends on if more than one train will ever have to work the branch on the same time?

 

3) if I choose One engine in steam, would it still be prototypical to have signal cabin (for an operator of points etc)?

 

4) The points are numbered for reference in the track plan. Which points would typically be controlled by point rodding from the signal cabin (or ground frame?), and which would be controlled by hand levers by the point?

 

5) Do I need any catch points, for example between point #1 and #2?

Edited January 12, 2015 by Montague

[Kris]

There would need to be a catch point in the location that you have mentioned. 

 

It is possible that points 3 and 4 could be controlled from a local ground frame. Points 5 and 6 might also be controlled by a level next to the point by a shunter. This assumes that trains enter the loop and run round before shunting.

[TonyMay]

I'm not sure that the siding from point 6 is a good idea.

 

To shunt it with a loco requires clearing of siding at the toe end of 6.  in reality, this would have been done with 'oss-power, but that's difficult to arrange in scale.

 

Also, having the siding makes the electrics slightly more difficult.

 

A small signal frame might be housed in a small hut which would be operated as and when required by the railway staff.  THese are "signal huts" rather than "signal boxes". An NER signal hut might be appropriate: - http://www.signalbox.org/gallery/ne/hammerton.php

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

I'm not sure what size you have available, but it might guide your thoughts to look at some actual NER branch termini.  

 

Old Maps UK is your friend, best maps are 1:1250 but the 1:2500 are ok for general arrangements. The link will take you to the listing of plans for Wearouth, about the smallest and most conventional NER branch terminus I could find.  Select the 1921 1:2500 map, the station is just to the right.

 

Some railway publications contain trackplans, of varying quality. I'm not that familiar with NER subjects, but a quick mash up of wikipedia list of clsed lines, and looking at Old Maps uk seems to suggest that there weren't that many - compared to the GWR for example - and most of them had distinctive and somewhat odd trackplans, again compared to the conventional model railway branch terminus.  

 

Kickbacks are rare for traffic sidings, for the reasons outlined above and the lead from a goods yard will always be trapped to prevent anything straying into the path of an oncoming train.  The BoT was very insistent on that!

 

Coal drops - messy things - were unique to the NER on account of their plentiful 20T bottom door hoppers no doubt, and would be well away from other goods areas to avoid filth.

 

Not sure what cattle would be provided  for oop north, so again check a prototype for guidance.

 

Hope that helps, and show us how you get on!

Edited January 12, 2015 by Dr Gerbil-Fritters

[Montague]

There would need to be a catch point in the location that you have mentioned. 

 

It is possible that points 3 and 4 could be controlled from a local ground frame. Points 5 and 6 might also be controlled by a level next to the point by a shunter. This assumes that trains enter the loop and run round before shunting.

Excellent, thanks. So the catch (trap?) point would be 'inside' the loop, between point 1 and 2 - not by the entrance to the goods yard, between 2 and 5? 

 

I'm not sure that the siding from point 6 is a good idea.

 

To shunt it with a loco requires clearing of siding at the toe end of 6.  in reality, this would have been done with 'oss-power, but that's difficult to arrange in scale.

 

Also, having the siding makes the electrics slightly more difficult.

 

A small signal frame might be housed in a small hut which would be operated as and when required by the railway staff.  THese are "signal huts" rather than "signal boxes". An NER signal hut might be appropriate: - http://www.signalbox.org/gallery/ne/hammerton.php

I think I'll do away with the switchback then. Sorry, I don't understand "in reality, this would have been done with 'oss-power,"?

 

Great idea about the signal hut - I will definitely incorporate that one.

I'm not sure what size you have available, but it might guide your thoughts to look at some actual NER branch termini.  

 

Old Maps UK is your friend, best maps are 1:1250 but the 1:2500 are ok for general arrangements. The link will take you to the listing of plans for Wearouth, about the smallest and most conventional NER branch terminus I could find.  Select the 1921 1:2500 map, the station is just to the right.

 

Some railway publications contain trackplans, of varying quality. I'm not that familiar with NER subjects, but a quick mash up of wikipedia list of clsed lines, and looking at Old Maps uk seems to suggest that there weren't that many - compared to the GWR for example - and most of them had distinctive and somewhat odd trackplans, again compared to the conventional model railway branch terminus.  

 

Kickbacks are rare for traffic sidings, for the reasons outlined above and the lead from a goods yard will always be trapped to prevent anything straying into the path of an oncoming train.  The BoT was very insistent on that!

 

Coal drops - messy things - were unique to the NER on account of their plentiful 20T bottom door hoppers no doubt, and would be well away from other goods areas to avoid filth.

 

Not sure what cattle would be provided  for oop north, so again check a prototype for guidance.

 

Hope that helps, and show us how you get on!

Thank you very much. I will study those maps.

 

Unfortunately, I think I was a bit careless with my wording on the track plan above. Actually, the 'coal drops' should be 'coal siding' - I was thinking of having proper coal drops though in the larger through station.

 

And cattle - I blame on being non-native speaker - what I saw before me was an animal loading bank, with sheep as main passengers. Was sheep taken to a market like cattle? Or would it be plausible with sheep being sent for slaughter?

 

I will produce a new track plan where measurements are clearer.

Edited January 12, 2015 by Montague

[TonyMay]

The mark 1 Oss, used for shunting by all railway companies, had four legs, went "nay", pooed a lot and once life expired got turned into glue and "beef-burgers" by the knackers.

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

Mk1 standard 'oss (horse) shunter.  In use until the late 50s at least.

 

[Kris]

I would put the trap between one and two, as it protects the running line from anything left in the loop and the yard. 

[jon_1066]

The kickback siding is not necessarily redundant.  

 

One good reason for it would be to have coal drops well away from the rest of the station.

 

If you keep your cattle dock on the lead line for the coal again you are not going to cause too many problems since cattle wouldn't be left for extended periods of time so the siding will not be occupied most of the time.  Only when loading cattle would the coal siding be inaccessible.

[Montague]

The kickback siding is not necessarily redundant.  

 

One good reason for it would be to have coal drops well away from the rest of the station.

 

If you keep your cattle dock on the lead line for the coal again you are not going to cause too many problems since cattle wouldn't be left for extended periods of time so the siding will not be occupied most of the time.  Only when loading cattle would the coal siding be inaccessible.

Thank you Jon - that was my thinking. The siding with the animal ramp will act as kind of a mileage siding but it is long enough to under normal circumstances be clear for 3-4 coal wagons, as long as the ramp is not in use. I will make a new plan which will give correct measurements.

[Montague]

One station that could be relevant inspiration would be Masham, maybe - http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/m/masham/ .

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

I thought Masham looked familiar....

 

here's a lovely model of it in 3mm

[Fat Controller]

Not a terminus, I know, but there should be lots of inspiration here:-

https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishswissernie/sets/72157626883846203/

Sheep were carried by rail, generally from upland areas in autumn to be fattened on lower ground. In some areas, I believe double-decked wagons were used, otherwise ordinary cattle wagons. Until the 1950s, possibly later, the village in Kent where we now live had special sheep sales. Prior to WW2, one of the tracks of the (lightly-trafficed) Elham Valley railway would be used to stand empty wagons prior to loading.

[Nick Holliday]

Just a couple of nagging thoughts, although I cannot find anything to fully justify them, but....

As I have asserted many times before, coal bins next to the track are actually very rare, especially in the north.  If there were any storage bins they would be away from the tracks, to let other users access any wagons on the siding, and, in this plan, to allow road vehicles to get to the coal easily. In mitigation, you have said it's a dedicated coal siding, but I suspect that if the traffic justified this, then the NER would have installed its beloved proper coal drops.  In the absence of such levels of traffic, the dealers at the station would have unloaded directly from the wagon onto their coal carts, with any remains left when the wagon has to be sent away being dropped on the ground to be cleared the next day.

Secondly, I feel the arrangement with the crane is not right.  Firstly it is shown on the loading bank which would limit the use of the bank for other purposes, and I can't see how the load it lifts off the railway wagon can be put onto a road vehicle, as such cranes had a limited radius of operation, and would be unlikely to lift a heavy load over the intervening track.  Secondly it is reached via the goods shed, which would probably require the use of a number of reach wagons as it is unlikely the loco would be allowed in the shed, and also would require the removal of any wagons being unloaded in the shed.  This arrangement would also mean that any authorised out-of-gauge load would need a second mobile crane brought to the station to deal with it.  I feel that the slightly hackneyed approach of having a ground based crane to the right of the goods shed would be the most practical and likely answer, although I am sure that there will be hundreds of contrary examples found to show I am talking total tommy-rot.

[TonyMay]

you could make that into an L-shaped layout around two walls room with two main scenes of the station and the coal depot.

[Montague]

Just a couple of nagging thoughts, although I cannot find anything to fully justify them, but....

As I have asserted many times before, coal bins next to the track are actually very rare, especially in the north.  If there were any storage bins they would be away from the tracks, to let other users access any wagons on the siding, and, in this plan, to allow road vehicles to get to the coal easily. In mitigation, you have said it's a dedicated coal siding, but I suspect that if the traffic justified this, then the NER would have installed its beloved proper coal drops.  In the absence of such levels of traffic, the dealers at the station would have unloaded directly from the wagon onto their coal carts, with any remains left when the wagon has to be sent away being dropped on the ground to be cleared the next day.

Secondly, I feel the arrangement with the crane is not right.  Firstly it is shown on the loading bank which would limit the use of the bank for other purposes, and I can't see how the load it lifts off the railway wagon can be put onto a road vehicle, as such cranes had a limited radius of operation, and would be unlikely to lift a heavy load over the intervening track.  Secondly it is reached via the goods shed, which would probably require the use of a number of reach wagons as it is unlikely the loco would be allowed in the shed, and also would require the removal of any wagons being unloaded in the shed.  This arrangement would also mean that any authorised out-of-gauge load would need a second mobile crane brought to the station to deal with it.  I feel that the slightly hackneyed approach of having a ground based crane to the right of the goods shed would be the most practical and likely answer, although I am sure that there will be hundreds of contrary examples found to show I am talking total tommy-rot.

 

Excellent input, thank you very much.

[clachnaharry]

I think the end loading dock would more likely be on the short spur off the engine release crossover, as the ground is already built up to platform height for the goods loading dock. The separate end loading dock on the cattle road looks unlikely.

[maunsel]

A couple of options:-

 

Remove point 6, put a double slip at point 5. 

 

Shift the cattle dock to form part of the end unloading ramp.

 

Place the Provender Store somewhere around the end of the siding too.

 

A very crude amendment to your nice plan:-

 

 

 

Overall I do like your plan - simple and unfussy with all the bits a BLT really needs.

 

 

Regards

 

Eric

Edited January 13, 2015 by maunsel

[Montague]

Again, I very much appreciate your feedback. I am glad I held back and asked for guidance before starting to lay track even though my fingers were itching.

 

I have not been able to scan a new track plan, but I have attached two pictures of a possible arrangement (where the the red box is the station building, the card mockup in white the goods shed, black foam platform/loading bank and wagons/coaches placed where they could load and unload), according to my thoughts below:

 

- I do not want to 'commit' to NER territory yet - I could as well put the station in GN territory, for example - so no coal drops

- I would prefer not to have a switch back spur

- I have added a trap point by the entrance to the goods yard, but the run around loop, now disconnected from the yard, will be unprotected (looking at Masham, for example, the loop does not seem to have a trap - and by the way, the coal drops are smack in the middle of the station, just behind the platform! masham(alan_brown_collection5.1949)old4.jpg) (picture hosted at Disused Stations, I hope they don't mind me linking to it)

- I am undecided if I will make the spur with the coal wagons in the picture a dedicated coal siding with bins, or if I should follow Nicks advice, maybe making this spur another 'milage siding' 

- I will put a crane by the milage siding

- end loading will be done from the siding running parallel with the platform, where the tractor is in the picture

- I am undecided regarding cattle pens/animal loading bank - I guess I could make some arrangement on the dock

- I will either skip the provender store, or put a small one by one of the sidings

 

Looking on the three tracks between the platform and the loading bank - should I do a cross over instead? - can't see any use for such spur, though?

 

 

 

 

[south_tyne]

Interesting discussion here. Adding coal drops are something which would cement the north east location but there were NE without them or it would be easy to imagine a situation where coal was handled in a nearby depot, just off-scene for instance, so it is not a must.

 

Just out of interest, what kind of space do you envisage for the scenic section?

 

Thanks,

David

[Montague]

Interesting discussion here. Adding coal drops are something which would cement the north east location but there were NE without them or it would be easy to imagine a situation where coal was handled in a nearby depot, just off-scene for instance, so it is not a must.

 

Just out of interest, what kind of space do you envisage for the scenic section?

 

Thanks,

David

 

Hi David - I have attached a rough sketch of the layout room - I believe the room is about 12 x 14 feet. Photo positions for the pictures above are marked on the sketch (but with mixed up numbers - photo position 1 is the second picture, and vice versa) .

Edited January 19, 2015 by Montague

[south_tyne]

Hi David - I have attached a rough sketch of the layout room - I believe the room is about 12 x 14 feet. Photo positions for the pictures above are marked on the sketch (but with mixed up numbers - photo position 1 is the second picture, and vice versa) .

Thanks! That is a really nice space to work in and it sounds like a good idea to tackle the terminus at first. I really like your plan for developing it.

[The Black Hat]

Hello,

 

Nice to see the plans for this really coming together. Your right to stick with NE terriorty given you like the coal drops idea. Its also going to really help set the scene and area.

 

Theres a lot of possible action going on if you can time it to keep cattle and coal arriving when it suits. The whole scene looks very much right for a North Eastern branch, somewhere in a dale. Id reccommend checking out Richmond, Middleton-in-Teesdale and Wearhead, although yours looks somewhere between the last two. Avoid the idea of using a cross over or slip, the NE would have just stuck a point in, back to back with the next instead as that was easier and cheaper.

 

Even if you have though, its all looking very nice. And something Id be interested to see develop. Might be wise to kick off a full Layout Topic thread for it too.

 

Nice work!

[south_tyne]

Hello,

 

Nice to see the plans for this really coming together. Your right to stick with NE terriorty given you like the coal drops idea. Its also going to really help set the scene and area.

 

Theres a lot of possible action going on if you can time it to keep cattle and coal arriving when it suits. The whole scene looks very much right for a North Eastern branch, somewhere in a dale. Id reccommend checking out Richmond, Middleton-in-Teesdale and Wearhead, although yours looks somewhere between the last two. Avoid the idea of using a cross over or slip, the NE would have just stuck a point in, back to back with the next instead as that was easier and cheaper.

 

Even if you have though, its all looking very nice. And something Id be interested to see develop. Might be wise to kick off a full Layout Topic thread for it too.

 

Nice work!

Some good suggestions there for prototype inspiration - I particularly like Wearhead. One of the problems for the space-starved modeller is that NER termini were often expansive in terms of track layout, although that is not so much of an issue in this particular case.

 

Another suggestion would be to look at Barton station on the Merrybent Railway, a freight only route for much of it's life. This has always struck me as a nice simple little set up, which could be compressed.

 

A bit 'left-field' but the original termini at both Barnard Castle and Stanhope, which later became goods stations when the lines were extended, could also be worth a look.

 

Keep us updated.

 

David

[Jez12]

I'm a bit late on this topic as I see the last post was in 2015. I'm planning an NER layout of my own and (a) I would love to know how Montague's plan has developed and (b) specifically how the cattle (or sheep?) dock appears as I am struggling to find anything on-line to help me design an authentic NER model.