Modified Minories opinions/sanity check

[Suddaby]

Hi Tim,

 

I would make sure that the gradient you need to drop from the station to the lower level works for the stock you have. Not only have you got a fairly steep gradient, it's also on a fairly tight curve. Try doing some mock ups before you commit just to make sure. If necessary, could you continue the line down outside the station for a bit longer, and dive under further along, nearer (aka under)the terminus buffers? Thus getting a longer run to cover the height difference, and therefore easier gradients.

John E originally planned a 2 level fiddle yard for Leeds City North, but abandoned it when he found that not much (particularly steam locos) would be able to go up the grade.

 

Nice project by the way! Following with interest, and good to see the way it has developed.

 

Kevin.

[Coder Tim]

That's a really good point, thanks.  I worked it out and it would have to be a 1:36 which is excessive, even for the dales.  I was able to rotate the station a little which moved it into the centre so I can run alongside for a bit and now it's 1:60 which should be ok since I can only fit 6-coach trains anyway.  It also freed up a bit of space for the station building which is a nice bonus.  Revised plan below:

[DCB]

I must say I liked the earlier curved platform designs better, I think curving the platforms so giving less of an S bend reverse curve at the throat would improve this design. But 

 

Having operated a very similar 4 platform terminus I think the lack of carriage sidings would cause problems.  Normal operation will have the incoming trains having their stock pulled out by the station pilot and with no carriage sidings it will have to be set back into a platform to release the loco to the shed, unless the stock is taken a long way down the gradient to allow the train loco to follow and still clear the points.

 

It is probably worth repeating that especially in steam days a train would not normally hang around long after arrival, the loco would usually be released to shed fairly quickly, 5 to 15 minutes. However a departing train may well be in the platform an hour before departure, plenty of pictures of two departures an hour apart in the platforms together so you do need more departure platforms than arrivals, 

 

The station pilot will do a lot of running and will need to be powerful enough to stop and restart full length rakes on this gradient around the s bend and through the pointwork.  I use a 94XX pannier with a  Farish cast body and before that a Wrenn Std  4 tank chassis under a BR std 3 2-6-2T Powerful brutes a lot more powerful than a Bachmann Pacific. I know all sorts of locos did station pilot duties but lots of modern locos may well not be up to the task. Couplings are an issue as tension locks and propelling moves uphill over reverse curves don't mix well. I use Peco H/D 

 

The goods facilities are a little sparse considering a head .shunt is provided .

 

I am wondering what is at the other end of the layout, a reversing loop? Hidden sidings?  My Bed Layout had a Terminus, continuous double track main line and a reversing loop and storage loops at the bottom of a spiral in only 54" X 76"

[Coder Tim]

Thanks for the suggestions.  I think you're right, the big S in the throat takes away the feel that it had.

 

I was thinking that it needed carriage sidings from a visual point of view but I couldn't work out what purpose they would serve operationally.  It makes sense now, cheers.  The original plan was to operate it like Minories: as soon as a train arrives a fresh loco takes it back out.  The scope has grown since then and as you pointed out that isn't how it would operate any more.  I think the root of the problem is that the original design was for a secondary terminus on a large layout but now it is going to be the main terminus on a smaller layout.

 

I'm not sure what I'm going to use as a pilot, I'd like it to be an early 08 but as you said I don't know if one will have the grunt to handle full length trains on the gradient.

 

I haven't fully decided where the line will go after it disappears into the tunnel.  The sensible thing would be a reverse loop with some hidden storage and that's probably what I'll do at first.  I do like the idea of a spiral down to a second deck with another terminus though.  Point to point systems appeal to me because it feels much more railway-like to be moving things from somewhere to somewhere else.

 

Taking the change in scope into account, along with the extra foot of length I've found I have, I've had a bit of a re-design this evening.  It's now based around (ripped off from) an Iain Rice design called "Bank Street".  I've also pruned the shed a bit.  I'm a lot happier with it.  It's simpler and more compact but can now fit 9 coaches behind a pacific on the longest platform which will look a lot better than 6.  The gradients are easier and the whole thing looks more balanced.  I'm not fully happy with the goods facilities, I'm thinking of making the bottom-most siding into a headshunt for some kick-back sidings by the throat.  I'm also not at all happy with the through station but I've run out of tinkering time for tonight.  As always thoughts and suggestions greatly appreciated.

 

Edit: Forgot to mention, I'm planning on using DG couplings which have a central buffer for propelling so hopefully will be ok on long-ish trains.

[Coder Tim]

Done a bit of tweaking.  I'm pretty happy with it now, can anyone spot anything obviously wrong?

 

Summary of the latest changes:

 

Modified the throat to allow a lot more parallel moves.  It's now a mixture of the previous two designs.

Flipped the layout left/right so that the complicated track is easiest to reach in the location it has to live in.

The road that the sidings come off is now pointing towards the throat which makes the yard a lot bigger.

MPD simplified further and now attached to the station rather than further down the line.

Through station completely re-worked.

 

I'm not sure why it looks so much more complex when it's actually fairly similar to the previous versions.  I suppose that's a good thing as full length expresses won't look out of place.  The main thing I'm unsure about is the throat.  Parallel arrival and departure is possible from any pair of platforms.  I can't work out what parallel moves are possible with moving empty stock to the carriage sidings or involving more than two trains moving at once.  I think freight, and moves to and from the shed will be horribly bottlenecked by the common access road but I can live with that.  Does the throat make sense as it is now?  Are there any ways to improve it?

 

Cheers folks,

 

Tim