Not standard gauge then?

[Stephen Rainsbury]

The likelihood would be that only one engine would be used at any one time and either mixed trains where the goods wagons were shunted on arrival. If a second train was needed (fair days) then some sort of paper token would have been used, but from what I've read they just piled all the stock behind one loco (they only had three coaches, remember!). Rule of the day would be only two or three trains each way each day, with the morning and evening ones being mixed. Hence not many passenger trains survived once buses and coaches became more efficient and roads better.

Operation in preservation days is very different.

This was a freelance model base on prototypical operation during the 20-30s' but that all makes sense, thanks.

I am aiming for a preservation line so the punter will want to see more than one loco operational and mid summer maybe even three, including rail cars etc. 
This would mean the introduction of something a little more sophisticated than the old token system, but the the little plastic punters would want to see that at work too.  It could be argued that as TPWS is so common the company would be remiss not to fit that. (3d printer on standby)

It looks like a three way point at the start of the station, as there are no 009 three-way electrofrog points you will need to use a LH and then one RH point and change the plan for these. 

The Y point in the plan looks a lot larger radius than the 18 inch radius Peco 009 Y point, it is up to you if you use one but a normal LH or RH point with an approaching curve may look better.

All good points Brian. As I am using a Freem009 end plate on the board I have had to re-arrange the trackplan a little so the approach is in from the middle of the board, and I have bought 12" standard points throughout. Some from 009 Soc sales at a very good price!

I understand that coal staithes were something of a trope at one time in railway modelling and were not actually all that common. Possibly just popular because Peco made a model of them. Also that they were quite a regional feature perhaps Northern English (it does sound like it might be a Viking word).

I believe that coal was as likely to be shovelled directly onto the back of cart or lorry or even directly onto the ground and bagged up. I'm not sure, but I think the coal was for distribution not refueling engines. It is water that is most likely to be consumed and taken on and there is little logistic sense in transporting coal to a small branch terminus if the bunker can hold enough for the (in all likelihood) short round trip.

I don't understand what you mean by the "Y".

There was a Coal Yard right next to my local station when I was a lad, it is car park now, but you can just see the loading gauge in this photo, at the end of the left hand platform.  In this the wagon doors opened onto raised staithes that could then be shoveled straight into sacks on the back of a lorry.  Local legend has it that Henry cooper and his brother worked there when they were still very young as they saw it as good training.

The Y referred to the points on the approach, I seem to remember reading somewhere about not having them pointing that way to the incoming main line, but I might well have mis-read that.

As ever do your research, there's plenty of information out there!

Thanks, I have been but still find myself wondering about the reasoning behind a specific track plan.  ::)

[engerth399]

Aaaah - Branch line to Porthleven - I dream of seeing a 45 beside the quay.  Coupled with the proposed light railway to The Lizard, Helston would have been such a busy place.  The one road shed would certainly not have been enough.  Dreaming is one of the best bits of railway modelling!!

[Graeme Dunbar]

The Y referred to the points on the approach, I seem to remember reading somewhere about not having them pointing that way to the incoming main line, but I might well have mis-read that.

Thanks, I have been but still find myself wondering about the reasoning behind a specific track plan.  ::)

I think the main concern is with not having facing points in double track operation where through, non-stopping trains are likely to take them at speed. I don't  think being a Y point rather than LH or RH makes any difference as the distinction is one limited largely to models and permanent way engineers do not categorize points in that way.

Looking at the track plan there is an element of 'everything but the kitchen sink'  in getting as much operational interest in a small portable layout. 

Passenger service - check
Goods shed - check
Milk churns - check
Cattle dock - check
Coal staithes - check
NG transfer - check  ;D

It looks as if part of the decision to use a three-way point is set by having three similar length boards and avoiding having points over the join or separating them either side of the join.

Regarding steam era train operations excellent resources (and another rabbit hole to fall into  :D ) are:

https://signalbox.org/

Signalling in the age of steam by Michael Vaans.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Signalling-Age-Steam-Ian-Allan/dp/0711023506

[Hobby]

TPWS?!!!

What exactly are you modelling Stephen?

[Graeme Dunbar]

Is that a man with a flag?  ;)

[Stephen Rainsbury]

TPWS?!!!
What exactly are you modelling Stephen?

I was only being partially serious, but as a heritage line they would want to squash in as many paying services as possible, more than a simple token system was designed for.  ;)

[Stephen Rainsbury]

Regarding steam era train operations excellent resources (and another rabbit hole to fall into  :D ) are:
https://signalbox.org/

That is a really useful site, just the track plans themselves are fascinating :-)

[Graeme Dunbar]

TPWS?!!!
What exactly are you modelling Stephen?

I was only being partially serious, but as a heritage line they would want to squash in as many paying services as possible, more than a simple token system was designed for.  ;)

For a modern heritage railway then I think radio electronic token block working might possibly (or potentially) be employed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Electronic_Token_Block

[Hobby]

It is, many use it these days and it's a damn sight cheaper... As for squeezing as many services as they can, well yes and no, putting on more services creates more wear and tear on the stock which has to be paid for, and also there are no "peak times" as such where large numbers turn up. I still feel you are thinking about how a fully fledged "main line" SG railway would operate, rather than a typical British NG which was the point being made by Chris, although he was talking specifically about track plans, it's easy to extend it out into operation which is also very different to "main line" SG.

If you want to run a high intensity NG lines, Stephen, then forget the UK, we simply don't do that sort of line over here and never have. The only one I could think of would be the Cork, Blackrock and Passage Railway in Eire which not only had double track but also rush hour services, but that was back in the 1920s and 30s. For a modern line with all the gubbins you seem to want and an intensive service, including steam specials, have a look at the Zillertalbahn in Austria.

[Graeme Dunbar]

 I imagine that one thing that affects the nature of operation and control of movement is line length (or rather he travel time) on top of things such as passenger density. If a train can get to its destination and back again before enough passengers have gathered to travel on the next journey there is little point in having more than one train operating - until the engine needs refueling and carriages cleaned.

I bet there is some clever equation for calculating the crossover point where lengthening trains vs running more frequently and ultimately running multiple trains occurs.

[B.Meldon]

All good points Brian. As I am using a Freem009 end plate on the board I have had to re-arrange the trackplan a little so the approach is in from the middle of the board, and I have bought 12" standard points throughout. Some from 009 Soc sales at a very good price!

I would strongly recommend that you avoid using the Peco 009 points that were made before they were updated in 2010.

The 12inch LH, RH and the 18-inch Y 009 points made before 2010 can give running problems, the 2010 update included far better geometry through the points, especially on the curves, a more constant curve through the point, previously they had two straights with a curve in the middle, extended check rails and the straight is actually straight. The straight was previously curved slightly.

The quick way to tell if they are the updated points is the pivot for the point blades. The pre-2010 points have a fishplate blade pivot, the updated 2010 onwards points have a proper pivot for the blades.

The pre 2010 versions may be cheaper second hand, but it is well worth spending extra on the updated version.
You could allways sell the ones you do not want on e-bay, as I have no doubt some mug would purchase them!!

[Stephen Rainsbury]

Thanks Brian, I already checked they are the later ones.

[Derek Clark]

I understand that coal staithes were something of a trope at one time in railway modelling and were not actually all that common. Possibly just popular because Peco made a model of them. Also that they were quite a regional feature perhaps Northern English (it does sound like it might be a Viking word).

From Old Norse 'stoth' - a landing stage

[Graeme Dunbar]

Yes, looking online to check my facts in case I was mis-remembering or making its up (after posting of course!) I found there is not a lot in the way of photos of prototypes but loads of models. Also I guess that what are referred to as staithes on layout plans should perhaps really be called bunkers (which I can see would cause confusion) or bins as they are nearly always modelled as ground level items not raised loading platforms.

Now that's how to do it!  :)

[Stephen Rainsbury]

For a modern heritage railway then I think radio electronic token block working might possibly (or potentially) be employed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Electronic_Token_Block

That would be an option, and reminded me that I really do need to get a colour printer to make signs like that.  That is going to have to wait until after we move, the debate is already how many pantechnicons we are going to need.
That site actually got me slightly excited for a minute, I thought it said "Modernisation of The Caribbean" which took me back to the idea of a sea and sunshine micro layout based on "Death in Paradise"  8), but it was Cambrian which does not conjure up the same image.