Starter question - track work

Help and advice for those starting in, or converting to P4 standards. A place to share modelling as a beginner in P4.
User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Sat Jan 16, 2016 2:53 pm

I am thinking of doing a model of the old MR Monsal Dale station on the Peak line (circa 1900) as a first stab at P4. To date I have been experimenting with loco and coach/waggon kit building. I am now turning my mind to track construction. I am trying out some sacrificial experiments at the moment which will hopefully form my test track. I have an initial question however as I start to look at a workable track plan. The track is double ... an up and down line. What distance should the tracks be set apart - is there a standard distance? I attach some images for information. Also what distance is the rail typically set from the platform. Is there a handbook which sets all these things out?

ImageImageImage

If anyone could point me in the right direction it would be much appreciated.

thanks

Tim
Last edited by Le Corbusier on Tue Jan 19, 2016 8:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Tim Lee

User avatar
John Donnelly
Web Team
Posts: 1092
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:03 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby John Donnelly » Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:04 pm

Standard distance between rail centres is 44.67mm

John

User avatar
grovenor-2685
Forum Team
Posts: 3918
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby grovenor-2685 » Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:38 pm

Go to http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/MoT_Requirements1950.pdf
and see last page in particular.
Note however a lot of early platforms were lower than the 1950 requirement asked for and that looks to be the case in your photos.
Regards
Regards
Keith
Grovenor Sidings

garethashenden
Posts: 405
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 9:41 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby garethashenden » Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:40 pm

John Donnelly wrote:Standard distance between rail centres is 44.67mm

John


Which is 6 feet between inside rails?

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:54 pm

Thanks everyone .... that's really helpful.

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Noel
Posts: 1975
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Noel » Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:55 pm

If you click on "Digests" above, and go to section 62, very near the bottom of the page, this section is available as a .pdf and should answer your questions [and some you may not have thought of yet].

Noel
Regards
Noel

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:12 pm

Noel,

Hadn't got to that section yet .... fantastic .... Thanks.

Tim
Tim Lee

Phil O
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 5:23 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Phil O » Mon Jan 18, 2016 9:06 am

John Donnelly wrote:Standard distance between rail centres is 44.67mm

John


It may need to be wider on curves to allow for the over and under swing on bogie stock.

Phil

martinm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby martinm » Mon Jan 18, 2016 2:25 pm

On which topic, I just happened on this, whilst looking for something else.
Can't remember where it's from, either,
martin

Curves
Throw = 4400/r mm
Radius, mm Minimum track centres Minimum structure clearance
Over 8800 45 31
8800 – 5867 46 31.5
5867 – 2933 48 32.5
2933 – 1760 50 33.5
1760 – 1257 52 34.5
1257 – 978 54 35.5
978 – 800 56 36.5

ps sorry, lost the table format
m

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Mon Jan 18, 2016 5:10 pm

Next question. The learning curve is still high when it comes to understanding track work.

I wondered if anybody could tell me exactly what is happening with the track formation here ... I am struggling to understand how it works and therefore what I ought to be drawing. See attached pictures.
ImageImageImageImageImageImage

It seems to me that it isn't a simple crossing? I am not sure what is switched and what isn't ... and what it is called.

Tim
Last edited by Le Corbusier on Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tim Lee

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Mon Jan 18, 2016 5:14 pm

Track plan and signal plan attached.

ImageImageImage
Tim Lee

User avatar
grovenor-2685
Forum Team
Posts: 3918
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby grovenor-2685 » Mon Jan 18, 2016 5:26 pm

The track component I think you are referring to is a single slip, the arrangement is pretty much the standard way to access wayside goods yards, especially so on the Midland through the peak and on the S&C. As clearly seen on the signal plan it is operated by levers 6 & 7.
In this scenario 7 would be released by 6. Pulling 6 operates the trailing crossover between up and down lines, then pulling 7 as well provides a route from the sidings direct to the up line.

i initially thought you were asking about the 'formation' which is usually the term used for the underlying earthworks supporting the track. More relevant than the formation in this case is the ballast that sits between the formation and the sleepers, the main lines having a nice thick layer of stone ballast and the sidings just a thin layer of ash putting a short gradient in the access tracks to the sidings.
This is a rarely modelled feature which would give the suspension on the trains something of a workout. At least try and show the difference in ballasting even if the change in level is avoided. Nice stone ballast in sidings always looks wrong in this period.

Regards
Regards
Keith
Grovenor Sidings

User avatar
Noel
Posts: 1975
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Noel » Mon Jan 18, 2016 5:44 pm

Le Corbusier wrote: I am not sure what is switched and what isn't ... and what it is called.


I'm not sure what exactly your question is, Tim. The layout is classic Midland in its avoidance of facing points. Reading the diagram from left to right points 6 are a trailing crossover between the main lines, with a trailing connection to the down siding superimposed [points 7], the whole forming a single slip in the middle. Next is a trailing connection to the goods siding [points 8], and at the far end is a further trailing connection to the down siding, in this case operated by a ground frame, undoubtedly released from the box when required. All of the points are in pairs, with each pair operated by one lever.

The down siding acts as a lie-by if required, for both directions in theory, and also as somewhere for up goods trains to leave and collect stock to/from the goods siding, shunting being done by down trains, most likely, since there is only one visible crossover. Unless, of course, there was a horse available... The goods siding and the down siding can both be accessed from the down main, so down goods trains would be left in the platform whilst the loco does any necessary shunting. Probably the guard would operate the gf if there was a need to collect stock from or place it in the down siding for collection by an up train.

Interesting in the top photo is the SR brakevan on the train in the down siding.

Drafted before Keith's post but submitted "as drafted" as hopefully it adds useful info.

Noel
Regards
Noel

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Mon Jan 18, 2016 5:54 pm

Thanks Keith and Noel,

Just the info I was looking for. Now I know what I am looking at, everything falls into place.

note to self ..... formation is for the ground not the rail!

early days at the moment.

Tim
Tim Lee

martinm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby martinm » Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:25 pm

More relevant than the formation in this case is the ballast that sits between the formation and the sleepers, the main lines having a nice thick layer of stone ballast and the sidings just a thin layer of ash putting a short gradient in the access tracks to the sidings.
This is a rarely modelled feature which would give the suspension on the trains something of a workout. At least try and show the difference in ballasting even if the change in level is avoided. Nice stone ballast in sidings always looks wrong in this period.


Keith has highlighed the new, probably limestone, ballast. This seems to be coincident with the upgrading of the main line to flatbottom rail.

The earlier photos show mainline ballast that would not be believed in model form, possibly dating back to the earlier practice of the Midland Railway

It would be helpful to know the dates of the photographs

martin

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Mon Jan 18, 2016 8:15 pm

Martin,

I understand that the bulk of the photos are from 1957 - 9ish. The earlier view is circa 1910 .... so nearer to the period I intend to model. Why would this ballast not be believable in model form?

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Martin Wynne
Posts: 1172
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Martin Wynne » Mon Jan 18, 2016 10:57 pm

This video shows how to create that track layout in Templot -- a trailing yard connection with single slip:

https://flashbackconnect.com/Movie.aspx ... dDu1OJJhA2

Click anywhere to restart the playback when it pauses.

Also available in much better video quality, and with a jump list to different video sections, from within Templot -- click the help > watch a video > single slip menu item.

Martin.
40+ years developing Templot. Enjoy using Templot? Join Templot Club. Be a Templot supporter.

Alan Turner
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:24 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Alan Turner » Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:49 pm

A couple of things to note about Monsal Dale.

The diagonal fencing, so beloved of Midland modellers, only appears in the 1950's photos. In 1910 the fencing is vertical.

The ballasting of 1910 is much finer than the ballasting of the 1950's. This was because, as I understand it, a finer ballast layer was placed as a final top layer.

The short "goods" platform was provided to enable material mined in the valley (see mine head gear in 1910 photo) to be loaded into wagons.

regards

Alan

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:02 am

Thanks Alan,

I had wondered about the fencing.

Thanks Martin.

In an endeavour to try and research all of this further .... would anybody be able to give a steer/suggest a source where I might find out a little more on prototype Midland track work in the Edwardian era? I was thinking in terms of the sleepering configuration and also what switches might have been used in this location ... the choices are bewildering in templot and my knowledge is currently limited to 4 bolt chairs/9ft sleepers and Alan's steer on ballast plus ash to the siding.

I assume that as the signal box was in place from 1896 none of the switches would have been hand operated.

Tim
Last edited by Le Corbusier on Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Tim Lee

User avatar
grovenor-2685
Forum Team
Posts: 3918
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby grovenor-2685 » Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:26 am

Track layout and signalling wise just replace all the signals including the colour light distants with Midland lower quadrant types.
Bob Essery wrote quite a bit on Midland track in Modellers Backtrack.
Regards
Regards
Keith
Grovenor Sidings

User avatar
Noel
Posts: 1975
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Noel » Tue Jan 19, 2016 11:39 am

Le Corbusier wrote:I assume that as the signal box was in place from 1896 none of the switches would have been hand operated.


Interlocking was introduced in the 1850s, expanded greatly from the 1860s onwards and was made compulsory by the 1889 Regulation of Railways Act. Some smaller lines took a few years to complete the work required, having started from a low percentage or having financial reasons, but there was virtually 100% compliance nationally by 1896. Larger companies such as the Midland generally were either compliant already or took steps to become so quickly. If the box shown actually dates from 1896, rather than a few years earlier, then it may be that it replaced an earlier box, rather than this location being interlocked that late.

Certainly you may assume that the signalling and pointwork were fully interlocked and operated from the signal box by 1896, if not earlier. The points operated by the ground frame would be interlocked indirectly, in that the ground frame being released would back lock any levers in the box capable of permitting any conflicting movements. After that time only points within areas such as good yards or engine sheds [not relevant here] would have been hand operated, and the exits from such areas would have been interlocked and operated from a signal box.

On any signalling diagram, the presence of a number indicates the lever in the frame of the relevant box which operates that signal, point, facing point lock, detonator placer, etc., hand operated points normally not being shown.

Noel
Regards
Noel

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:26 pm

Noel wrote:
Le Corbusier wrote:I assume that as the signal box was in place from 1896 none of the switches would have been hand operated.


If the box shown actually dates from 1896, rather than a few years earlier, then it may be that it replaced an earlier box, rather than this location being interlocked that late.

Noel


I believe it was indeed a replacement for an earlier box .... which was situated a little further down the track.

Thanks for the rest of the info which is extremely helpful.

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Tue Jan 19, 2016 3:00 pm

Le Corbusier wrote:In an endeavour to try and research all of this further .... would anybody be able to give a steer/suggest a source where I might find out a little more on prototype Midland track work in the Edwardian era? I was thinking in terms of the sleepering configuration and also what switches might have been used in this location ... the choices are bewildering in templot and my knowledge is currently limited to 4 bolt chairs/9ft sleepers and Alan's steer on ballast plus ash to the siding.

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Noel
Posts: 1975
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Noel » Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:28 pm

Google threw up articles by Bob Essery in MRJs 21, 22 and 26 which may help IF you know someone who has copies [your local area group, perhaps?].

Also http://www.scalefour.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1925 on this Forum and http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/56856-midland-railway-prototype-turnout-design-loose-heel-turnouts/ on RM Web.

There may be others I haven't found.

You could also try the Midland Railway Society http://www.midlandrailway.org.uk/

Noel
Regards
Noel

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:45 pm

Noel wrote:Google threw up articles by Bob Essery in MRJs 21, 22 and 26 which may help IF you know someone who has copies [your local area group, perhaps?].


Noel


Thanks Noel ... tracked them down via abe books and ordered - the internet can be really great!

Looking at the photos .... what would you hazard a guess the switches were..... B7 ? .... or longer ? Templot gives so many options!

Tim
Tim Lee


Return to “Starting in P4”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ClaudeBot and 0 guests