Roseladden Wharf development

[steve howe]

The long-awaited refurbishment of my old layout Roseladden Wharf edges closer to reality and I have been looking at the potential of adding a small through station to the rear of the wharf layout so as to introduce passenger workings and increase the depth of the scene to something more proportional to its length (currently around 13 foot). The plan is for a small station on a single track line running from the main line to a fictitious terminus on the south Cornish coast. A mineral branch, possibly for china clay or granite, diverges off the single track line with exchange sidings to handle the mineral traffic.

The attached plan shows current thinking. I would be interested to hear anyone's comments, particularly as to the positioning of catch points protecting the loop and mineral branch, and the location of the signal box. It would have been simpler to put a double slip at the junction with the loop and the mineral branch to facilitate easier access to the yard, but I felt the single slip would give more interesting operational potential and probably be more prototypical (?)

The layout will be designed so as to form part of the existing wharf layout, but also capable of being separated and displayed as a layout in its own right.

ROSELADDEN STATION PLAN.jpg

[grovenor-2685]

Unless the loop is to be used by passenger trains, which does not look likely, then it does not need to be protected, however the main line does need to be protected from the loop and sidings which means you do need a double slip in place of the single.You can then shunt the yard from the mineral branch rather than from the main line which makes more sense as it allows the passenger to pass through without suspending mineral branch operations.

[jon price]

without knowing anything about anything I would put the signal box opposite the end of the loop by the platform on the other side of the main line. This would (appear to) give line of sight down the mineral line cutting, as well as all the pointwork, and a single run of point rodding along the main line with offshoots to the turnouts in the yard.

[Noel]

I agree with Keith about the shunting not fouling the main running line any more than is absolutely essential [running round trains basically]. Given that space would not normally be an issue in such a set up in reality, I would suggest that the railway would reduce costs by not using a slip but simply another crossover slightly further to the right. The two crossovers then provide protection to the running line. Use of a single slip as shown would require one or more traps in the exit from the sidings, the number depending on how those points are arranged, with more installation and maintenance costs.

There is no obvious need for three exchange sidings, though, I don't think. Option 1 - mineral trains [including any non-mineral traffic] only work main line to mineral line and return - no sidings needed. Option 2 - mineral traffic is light and is worked as part of the normal branch goods workings - one siding possibly needed to park the rest of the train while the loco takes the van and traffic up the mineral line, and to park loaded outbound traffic or empties, depending on whether the branch is shunted on outward or inward journeys, while the rest of the train goes to the coast and back, although it can be worked without the siding by taking the whole train up the mineral branch. In either option, one or two of sidings adjacent to the station could be for local goods traffic.

Another possibility is for the mineral line to be worked by the owners of the quarry as a private line, but in that case the most likely scenario, I suggest, would be a set of loops on the mineral line, accessed from the station by the railway loco and from the other by the private operator's loco. This would imply a much heavier traffic on the mineral branch.

[steve howe]

Great stuff, thanks gents.
Unfortunately there isn't enough length to get a crossover and a separate junction point in without making the layout unduly compressed, I can invent a geographical reason for having the double slip arrangement! I agree one exchange siding will be sufficient for the mineral branch, the others are for local goods. The original inspiration for the layout was Coombe Junction on the Liskeard - Looe branch which was also the inspiration for much of the original Roseladden Wharf. I want to use the Mackenzie Holland signal box from Coombe, but its nothing to look at from the back, hence 'artistic licence' has it facing the audience, but I did consider placing it at the end of the platform as another option.

When I get time I will lay out some templates and play around with it full size.

Steve

[Noel]

Nothing wrong with the box being where you show it. Possible alternatives are to put a crossover where the slip is and move the yard access immediately to the right, alongside the loop point; the yard can then only be shunted from the mineral branch, but in railway terms that isn't a problem unless you want to be able to cross passenger trains using the loop, in which case the yard access would have to be operated from the box, with the yard access point acting as the trap. Otherwise it could even be on a hand lever. The box can then move to the middle of the loop with the sidings passing behind it. Equally, it could be at the other end of the loop, with the sidings behind again, or the station platform could disappear under the bridge [it did happen sometimes], with only part on the scenic side, or it could just be a halt as a later addition.