Theory of General Minories

[t-b-g]

9 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Stoke Summit?

 

No but that would have fitted the bill. At the risk of being struck down I will name 4 layouts I have operated (two at exhibitions, two at home), all of which are very highly regarded in the hobby and which have very good pedigrees. All 4 are, in my view, dull for the operator.

 

These are Dunwich and Retford, Gresley Beat and Little Bytham. In 3 cases, they are models based on real places, where most trains just went through.

 

Dunwich and Gresley Beat both have, or had, sidings that were used regularly during a show to vary the operation but as a novice who hadn't run the layouts before the exhibitions I stayed off them and the regular operators did the fancy stuff. I just ran trains round the main lines for hour after hour. Set the loop in the fiddle yard. Set the signals. Drive a train round. Put the signals back. Set the next loop. Repeat.

 

Retford and Little Bytham have yards and sidings that were rarely used and that is what happens on the models. One or two trains out of the entire sequence stop and do something.

 

To some folk, this is the ultimate in desirable layouts and the punters at shows love them. So they cannot be "wrong" in any way. They are just not my sort of layout. 

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

 All 4 are, in my view, dull for the operator.

 

... and for this viewer.  

[t-b-g]

25 minutes ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

 

... and for this viewer.  

 

Sadly, at the vast majority of exhibitions, the need to "keep something running" seems to trump the "make it interesting" approach.

 

Finding a layout that is interesting to watch for more than a couple of minutes is a rarity but when it does happen, I really do appreciate the effort made to achieve it.

 

"Proper" operating is much more difficult than just running trains round a circuit and to keep it up for a whole two or three day show takes a degree of concentration and enthusiasm for operating that not many can, or want to, manage.

 

So I do understand why it doesn't happen more often but it does make it all the more special when I find a layout that is being worked in that way.

[Zomboid]

I imagine most of us in this particular thread would prioritize operation over visuals, if we could only have one. We're probably also a minority at the moment.

 

Personally I don't find exhibitions particularly interesting partly because the operation is generally the model railway catwalk type. Which I must stress is absolutely fine, it just doesn't hold my attention.

 

I've found that what I enjoy most is the American approach of operating *a train* over a stretch of route (imaginary driver), rather than operating *the trains* over a section of railway (imaginary signaller). But either way it's vastly more interesting if I've got the controller in my hand rather than if I'm watching someone else do it - which is another mark against exhibitions for me.

 

And I prefer both of those to watching one train circulate and then another, regardless of who's driving.

[Clive Mortimore]

This conversion about interesting and not so interesting layouts to operate has had me reflecting on past layouts I have driven and operated. 

 

Some of the layouts mentioned which are of the roundy roundy type are what I would lump into the "trainspotters" layout, loads of trains running. This seems to hold the attention of those who went train spotting and didn't really take in much of the surrounding features, or at times the rolling stock. "My layout is set in June 1957. All the locos have the correct curly six." So why have you got wagons that were built in 1962? Boring to operate.

 

One roundy roundy I have been part of the crew was Vauxhall Road, now that could have been very boring to play with but the gang Bob used to put together enjoyed each others company and had a good laugh as well as running trains for the public.

 

Andi Dell's Dagworth first time I drove it was more complicated than it should have been as it was basically fiddle yard to fiddle yard but the train went round 3 times (some clever scenery) plus you had to follow the signals. After he erected the OLE and the expresses had a loco swap at the station, electric on or off and diesel off or on things did liven up. 

 

Then there are the operators layouts, be they a branch terminus, small shunting yard, loco depot, or a minories type layout. Some are rubbish and over difficult to operate, the real railways made things as simple as they could to save time and time is money (and a shorter tea break). There are some very well modelled branch line terminus that either work slower than the real railway or run so badly I think the builders should have stuck with set track.

 

The ones where the builder has taken time to study how a real railway works are normally enjoyable to watch and enjoyable to operate.

 

Sheffield Exchange Mk1 was a Minories type layout and to prove how absorbing the operating was I would potter out to the garage to do some scenery. "It won't hurt to run a train or two". "Cor blimey, is that the time I should have gone to bed an hour ago. The scenery can wait until tomorrow."

 

 

Edited August 10, 2021 by Clive Mortimore

[St Enodoc]

He's far too modest to mention it himself but I will nominate @LNER4479 Graham's Grantham layout as one of only a few large roundy-roundy exhibition layouts that can be, and is, operated properly.

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

The last layout I can recall enjoying at an exhibition was Happisburgh.  A compact but interesting terminus, believable engine movements to and from the shed and turntable, and the rotary tipper meant there was some meaningful shunting to be done.

 

My favourite layouts tend to be the American ones set in the 70s and 80s, with long runs and controlled by an authentic US&SCo dispatchers panel. 

 

 

I also really like Tony Koester's Magnum Opus, but I do not understand a word of the TTO system it uses to control trains.

 

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

10 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

He's far too modest to mention it himself but I will nominate @LNER4479 Graham's Grantham layout as one of only a few large roundy-roundy exhibition layouts that can be, and is, operated properly.

 

I would have mentioned Grantham, as it is a favourite of mine - but I've never seen it being operated properly!  One day...

[Pacific231G]

2 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

No but that would have fitted the bill. At the risk of being struck down I will name 4 layouts I have operated (two at exhibitions, two at home), all of which are very highly regarded in the hobby and which have very good pedigrees. All 4 are, in my view, dull for the operator.

 

These are Dunwich and Retford, Gresley Beat and Little Bytham. In 3 cases, they are models based on real places, where most trains just went through.

 

Dunwich and Gresley Beat both have, or had, sidings that were used regularly during a show to vary the operation but as a novice who hadn't run the layouts before the exhibitions I stayed off them and the regular operators did the fancy stuff. I just ran trains round the main lines for hour after hour. Set the loop in the fiddle yard. Set the signals. Drive a train round. Put the signals back. Set the next loop. Repeat.

 

Retford and Little Bytham have yards and sidings that were rarely used and that is what happens on the models. One or two trains out of the entire sequence stop and do something.

 

To some folk, this is the ultimate in desirable layouts and the punters at shows love them. So they cannot be "wrong" in any way. They are just not my sort of layout. 

Hi Tony

I've found there's nothing like operating other people's layouts to discover what you want  (what you really really want) in your own layouts. I've operated several "round and round through beautiful urban/rural scenery" layouts and, apart from the opportunity on some to give my own main line stock a good run, found them very unsatisfying. OTOH operating a relatively simple BLT can keep me interested for far longer, especially if the owner has come up with a well thought through sequence (I'm not interested in running against a speeded up clock- that's too much like work)

I think my favourite layout to operate at exhibitions, which I have several times, was Gile Barnabe's 0e Puerto Paseo which was a single track approach to a three platform terminus (think single track Minories) with a two road goods yard and a kickback branch to the off stage docks.   A well thought through sequence meant that running the complete sequence a couple of times a day held my interest. It was Giles' earlier H0/H0m  St. Emilie - in fact the standard gauge terminus rather than the metre gauge through station- that inspired my own current layout and led me to a rule of three for interesting operation. With two sidings facing one way and a third the opposite way shunting can be quite challenging.  That layout didn't have a planned sequence but it was possible to set up scenarios - e.g. passenger train arriving before the local goods has finished shunting- that required careful planning in order not to be snookered.   Layouts with realistic operation do hold my interest at exhibitions with good examples having included Bradfield Gloucester Sq. Borchester Market and of course Peter Denny's Leighton Buzzard (Linslade) as exhibited by your good self. 

 

Minories itself is an interesting case as having operated and watched a number of "pure" Minories I've found the passenger only version didn't hold my interest for quite as long as I'd expected, even less so if it was run with MU sets: However, with the addition of a small goods yard, and some parcels working ,it does.   

 

On layouts with trains mostly just passing through I've found that these can be interesting to watch for some time IF  they're fully operated with bell codes and block instruments and with the "signalman" operator fully visible to watch. Normally though I can look at these for long enough to admire the modelling, scenery and buildings and perhaps a couple of trains but then I tend to move on.

[fezza]

In terms of design, I think much depends on whether you are a driver (you like driving through a landscape between places) or a signalman (like operating one station or location). Minories is very much for the latter.

[t-b-g]

4 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

Hi Tony

I've found there's nothing like operating other people's layouts to discover what you want  (what you really really want) in your own layouts. I've operated several "round and round through beautiful urban/rural scenery" layouts and, apart from the opportunity on some to give my own main line stock a good run, found them very unsatisfying. OTOH operating a relatively simple BLT can keep me interested for far longer, especially if the owner has come up with a well thought through sequence (I'm not interested in running against a speeded up clock- that's too much like work)

I think my favourite layout to operate at exhibitions, which I have several times, was Gile Barnabe's 0e Puerto Paseo which was a single track approach to a three platform terminus (think single track Minories) with a two road goods yard and a kickback branch to the off stage docks.   A well thought through sequence meant that running the complete sequence a couple of times a day held my interest. It was Giles' earlier H0/H0m  St. Emilie - in fact the standard gauge terminus rather than the metre gauge through station- that inspired my own current layout and led me to a rule of three for interesting operation. With two sidings facing one way and a third the opposite way shunting can be quite challenging.  That layout didn't have a planned sequence but it was possible to set up scenarios - e.g. passenger train arriving before the local goods has finished shunting- that required careful planning in order not to be snookered.   Layouts with realistic operation do hold my interest at exhibitions with good examples having included Bradfield Gloucester Sq. Borchester Market and of course Peter Denny's Leighton Buzzard (Linslade) as exhibited by your good self. 

 

Minories itself is an interesting case as having operated and watched a number of "pure" Minories I've found the passenger only version didn't hold my interest for quite as long as I'd expected, even less so if it was run with MU sets: However, with the addition of a small goods yard, and some parcels working ,it does.   

 

On layouts with trains mostly just passing through I've found that these can be interesting to watch for some time IF  they're fully operated with bell codes and block instruments and with the "signalman" operator fully visible to watch. Normally though I can look at these for long enough to admire the modelling, scenery and buildings and perhaps a couple of trains but then I tend to move on.

 

I agree with all you say. Even a well designed terminus can be dull if the operation has not been considered properly.

 

To me, it is the variety of operation which makes a layout interesting. When the viewer can never be 100% sure of what the next train to move will be, or what it will do, then you begin to really draw them in.

 

I may have said this earlier in the thread but for my Minories inspired layouts I have always included one goods/loading dock type siding, to allow for tail loads, or perhaps for a goods to arrive to have a few vans detached.

 

A straight suburban all passenger set up, with every train doing the same thing (train arrives, loco on back, train leaves) doesn't hold my interest  for long.

 

So I tend to make it a mix of local and long distance trains, with them being able to be dealt with at least 4 different ways.

 

1) Pilot shunts stock to another platform to release train loco to go "to shed" for turning.

2) Pilot draws stock out to release train loco then puts the carriages back in the same platform.

3) Pilot takes stock to off scene carriage sidings (fiddle yard).

4) A new train loco backs on and the train departs, allowing the original train loco to be released.

 

Add to that removing and attaching vans, horse boxes or a through carriage it it gives plenty of variety without needing a huge station with lots of platforms.

 

There are other combinations of these that could be used too.

 

A couple of my designs have had dedicated arrival and departure platforms plus a bi directional one, which adds to the shunting moves required. 

[Lacathedrale]

I know we've spoken about this before, but that's precisely why I think HV 1874 is an excellent pre-modern railway terminus - one inbound-only and one outbound only platform on the outside and two bidirectional platforms on the inside - one of which has a carriage dock and are the only roads with a runaround. It is of course lacking freight facilities but in Modular Minories-fashion I imagine them being a bolt-on module between the throat and the FY akin to Grand Vitesse depot over the bridge past Blackfriars. A city Minories plan could easily justify a large amount of parcels and newspaper traffic - again taking HV for inspiration with the proximity of the mail and the printing presses of the capital.

If you were going for suburban rather than urban per se, then Central Croydon (another of my pet faves) had a stone yard (and then engineers depot) which was a headshunt off the station, accessed through the same tunnel that the station throat projected from. Though the whole lot was gone very early on, you could draw inspiration from Purley's modern(ish) aggregate depot (and how they used the Caterham branchline platforms for running around the train until it was rebuilt in the 80's) you've got a little bit of shunting, at least. Assuming MSO/MSV wagons rather than PGA hoppers you'd also need a brake van. In later eras it was PGA, but if you moved forward enough for Speedlink then it was a hub for that also.

 

That said, the SR being my local baby is very tough to imagine without a full profileration of multiple units - which is anathema to a strong-operation Minories. A case of being penny-wise and pound-foolish, in terms of focus?

 

[Zomboid]

7 minutes ago, Lacathedrale said:

That said, the SR being my local baby is very tough to imagine without a full profileration of multiple units -

Bits of the Southern avoided large numbers of MUs until quite late - pre-thumper Southampton Terminus or Bournemouth West, for example. Though push-pull steam on the local services might still have been there to make model operation less interesting.

[Nearholmer]

Ryde Pier Head. Minories-upon-Sea.

 

A bit suburban though, even if the trains had retired from the suburbs a long time ago.

 

https://sremg.org.uk/location/iow/ryde-pier-mob.shtml

 

 

Edited August 10, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Pacific231G]

5 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Ryde Pier Head. Minories-upon-Sea.

 

A bit suburban though, even if the trains had retired from the suburbs a long time ago.

Definitely and I think there were others a bit like that at Ardrossan and Gourock.

One of my very early childhood memories is of arriving at Ryde Pier Head off the ferry and being very impressed by the line up of four trains with their locos (which must have been those that had brought them in and had uncoupled with other locos at the landward end?) We were staying in a guest house on Ryde Esplanade so, to my disappointment then but not now, we used the pier tramway for the run along the pier. This would have been on a summer Saturday in the mid 1950s when the service to and from Ryde Pierhead was quite intense. Later in the week we did travel by train from Esplanade to Shanklin but all I remember of that was the rain pouring down the windows and I think our other trips to Blackgang Chine etc. were by bus/coach.  I did go back there a couple of times in the last year or so of steam but things were far quieter.

[Nearholmer]

I only went to Ryde Pier once while it was still steam, and even then, which must have been mid-60s, it was still a pretty magic place. The trip over by paddle-steamer was special too, in a way that travelling to the IoW by seagoing car-park isn't.

 

The station only had three platforms, fed from the double track by a scissors and one turnout, until c1930, so nearly the perfect prototype.

[Lacathedrale]

At the complete other end of the spectrum from tinplate Dublo, is S-scale. It's something I've dabbled in from time to time and has the attraction of being quite tangible.

 

Building in anything other than N gauge would require multiple baseboards and if you're going with early-era stuff then likely 90% will need to be be scratchbuilt anyway, so why not do it in S-scale and reap the benefits of the huge mass and much greater volume? Here's a Minories throat in S-scale in 4' x 18" using B7 geometry. It JUST fits with my usual dodges of slips instead of plain pointwork.

 

The first version uses a tandem turnout and a single slip:

 

The threeway can be omitted and replaced with a double slip on the 'P1' road turnout. While I appreciate that it has more operational flexibility with departures from platform's 1 and 2 (topmost) able to occur simultaneously with arrivals into 3 and 4, I'm not sure if I like it as much, maybe because of the repetition of the same kind of pointwork so close to each other:

 

 

Were I to build this, I'd for for late 19th century - ballast over the sleepers and yellow london brick everywhere.

[RJS1977]

9 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

I think I like the IDEA of operating the railway. Certainly this is something that earlier layout builders expected from their creations - maybe because they were closer to the prototype, typically had the space (dedicating the spare billiards room) - but I am drawn back again and again to the author of the Paddington-Seagood line's construction, paraphrasing "A shorter train doing more, would be preferable to a longer train doing less" i.e. he would prefer to have a three or five coach passenger train and be able to fit in within reason an extra station or junction - as opposed to a 10-coach train which would circambulate interminably on a simpler layout. This is VERY DIFFERENT to the approach we've seen in layouts like Copenhagen Fields, Stoke Summit, Heaton Lodge, Chee Tor, etc.

 

I'm sure this is related to the fact that the vast majority of modellers that actually saw steam traction in the flesh would have been unable to meaningfully participate in the operation, but would no doubt have been amazed as a Duchess or A1 roared through a station, or glimpsed from the back of a garden. The modellers of the pre-boom era (i.e. when trainspotting was cool) would have likely been intimiately familiar with the workings of the railway, as well as its looks - and sought to emulate that.

 

We see a single axis of visual realism (including track formations) with less and more realistic as the two opposing points - but modellers of that era would have seen the other axis, that of operational realism as equally relevant - and I believe it would have factored into their design choices.

 

Long story short - that's my excuse if I build a HD Minories and run four shorty coaches as my intercity express.

 

Agreed, I've always felt a train of 4 9" coaches looks more impressive than a train of 3 12" coaches....

[t-b-g]

9 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

Agreed, I've always felt a train of 4 9" coaches looks more impressive than a train of 3 12" coaches....

 

It is one of my reasons for modelling pre-grouping times. It allows either 4 or 6 wheelers which look even better in a short train.

 

The longest train on Buckingham, which is what I use as my "yardstick" for a train length, is 5 short corridor bogie carriages and a 4-6-0 and that measures 4 ft 3ins long. The earlier versions of the layout were limited to 4 carriages and a loco.

 

If you look at photos of genuine GCR express trains of the period (1907), 4 or 5 carriages is quite a normal sort of length. So they are not only shorter but totally realistic too.

[KingEdwardII]

3 hours ago, t-b-g said:

So they are not only shorter but totally realistic too.

Yes, it is a sad reflection of the truth that very few of us have the space and the budget to be able to model the full 14 coach "Cornish Riviera Express", wonderful though that would be...

 

My current rakes are max 6 coaches, which does not quite match the length used on the prototype preserved lines like the West Somerset and GWSR. I wonder if I could sweet talk my wife into allowing me to invade another bedroom with the railway ?? 

 

Yours, Mike.

[t-b-g]

1 hour ago, KingEdwardII said:

Yes, it is a sad reflection of the truth that very few of us have the space and the budget to be able to model the full 14 coach "Cornish Riviera Express", wonderful though that would be...

 

My current rakes are max 6 coaches, which does not quite match the length used on the prototype preserved lines like the West Somerset and GWSR. I wonder if I could sweet talk my wife into allowing me to invade another bedroom with the railway ?? 

 

Yours, Mike.

 

If I had the space to model a main line with 14 coach trains, I wouldn't want to do it!

 

I would rather have a system type layout with several smaller stations. Castle Rackrent by the late Richard Chown was a great example. I would dare to suggest that my own pet favourite, Buckingham, is another example but with fewer stations.

 

As people have mentioned with layouts based on USA practice, Castle Rackrent had trains which worked their way along the line, stopping to shunt or for passengers along the way and meeting trains going the opposite direction at designated passing places.

 

I was once offered the chance to visit the layout to have a go at operating it but sadly it was only shortly before Richard passed away and I never got the chance.

 

I once read an article which I found fascinating. I can't remember who wrote it now but it was all about how we view layouts. I developed the article into an idea that I call my 4ft rule. If I am standing in front of a layout, my eyes allow me to view around 4ft of layout length without having to move my eyes or my head. So if a train 4ft long appears on scene, I can pretty much see it all. If a 10ft long train appears, I have to move my head or eyes to view it, so I have to focus on the train and I don't see the train and the scene all in one view as in moving my head or eyes, I lose my view of the layout.

 

It also means that if one 4ft section of layout is exactly the same as the next door 4ft section, it doesn't really add anything visually. It is just more of the same. So when I plan layouts, I always try to break them up into 4ft sections. So a Minories would be 4ft of platform and 4ft of station throat. Even when I design a layout to take longer trains, like Narrow Road, which has a 24ft long scenic section and 8 coach trains, each 4ft of layout has a different theme. 4ft overall roof. 4ft uncovered platforms, 4ft station throat, 4ft open goods yard, 4ft large goods warehouse and 4ft loco shed.

 

It is all about balance and proportion. I think it explains why I find a shorter train far more visually appealing than a longer one. If I can see it all and still see the scene through which it is running without my eyes darting about, then it just seems more pleasing to me.

[KingEdwardII]

7 hours ago, t-b-g said:

If I had the space to model a main line with 14 coach trains, I wouldn't want to do it!

I can imagine modelling a place along the GWR West of England line like Newbury or Taunton. Not a particularly big station in either case, but with plenty going on with large and small trains, the latter serving the local branch lines like the Didcot, Newbury & Southampton. And of course the occasional full length express thundering through...

 

Taunton would involve quite a level of operation, given that passenger trains were divided and assembled there and the fact that it served 4 branch lines.

 

A nice dream, but I am unlikely to ever have the space or the finance to attempt it. Even a more modest place like Aberystwyth would take a fair bit of space to do justice - and that was only a 5 platform terminus not much bigger than Minories...

 

...but the idea of multiple Manors simmering in the sun is very tempting...

 

Yours, Mike.

[JohnR]

For some reason I've got a hankering to do a Minories as originally intended - in TT using the Triang Jinty and suburban coaches. Has anyone else done this?

[St Enodoc]

8 hours ago, t-b-g said:

If I had the space to model a main line with 14 coach trains, I wouldn't want to do it!

 

I would rather have a system type layout with several smaller stations.

Me too. I have plenty of space but my passenger trains are only 60% the length of the full-size ones. My longest will be 9 coaches, representing 15 on the prototype.

[St Enodoc]

20 hours ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

The last layout I can recall enjoying at an exhibition was Happisburgh.  A compact but interesting terminus, believable engine movements to and from the shed and turntable, and the rotary tipper meant there was some meaningful shunting to be done.

 

My favourite layouts tend to be the American ones set in the 70s and 80s, with long runs and controlled by an authentic US&SCo dispatchers panel. 

 

 

I also really like Tony Koester's Magnum Opus, but I do not understand a word of the TTO system it uses to control trains.

 

The layout I've enjoyed operating more than any other at exhibitions is @Michael Edge's Cwmafon.

 

Never-ending streams of empty and full coal and steel trains between pit and steelworks, plus a genuine gravity marshalling yard and the occasional passenger train (or, at least, as many as I could get away with).