A 1 in 5 or a 1 in 6

[Acfield]

Martin

Can I ask, would 1 in 5 turnouts be used on main running lines or would they be confined to sidings?

I’m considering put in a 1 in 5 trailing cross over road between a terminal station platform line and an engine release line (both on the straight). My concern is whether it is prototypical or not – should it really be a 1 in 6 cross over road. The station will be a one platform branch terminus.

Cheers
Tony

 

[Phil O]

Hi Tony,

A lot will depend on what prototypical locos intend using the crossing, each class tends to have two minimum radii related to speed, one is normal and the other is dead slow. Possibly the easiest way to find out what would be prototypical would be to have a look at prototype stations where the loco(s) operated.

 

[Martin Wynne]

Hi Tony,

1:5 strikes me as very short for a platform release. As Phil says you would be restricted to short-wheelbase locos, and the platform edge is likely to need a significant cut-out to clear the buffer beam overhang.

Even 1:6 might be tight. Normally turnouts against a platform face would be at least 1:7 and probably longer.

1:5 turnouts are normally found only in yards and sidings.

But everything depends on your prototype. If you can find a photo or map showing a Midland Railway terminus having a very short engine release, you have your answer. I'm sure one of the MR experts will know.

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Acfield]

Morning Martin

Thanks for your comments. I like an honest opinion. I hadn’t considered platform edge clearance, so I need to watch that. So more research needed on this I think.

Whilst I have got a handful of circa 1900 photos available to me, other than counting turnout timbers to estimate the length of a turnout and perhaps switch lengths, I find vee angles are impossible to judge from photos.

I’ve attached a late 1890’s view of the MR Ilkeston Town station which shows the type of engine release line cross over I had in mind.

Building my own track in S7 to MR practise for a location set in circa 1905 is I'm finding not for the faint hearted. As for consulting MR experts, I'm afraid some of the questions I ask seem to go beyond what many bother with.

Cheers

Tony

 

[Martin Wynne]

@Acfield

Hi Tony,

Thanks for posting a great pic.

I think the lens is foreshortening the image, and the crossover is longer than it looks.

Here's a quick dabble on the NLS Ilkeston map:

The rails are a bit out, but the marked switch toe positions (ringed yellow) can usually be relied on. Assuming standard 6ft way I found that a good fit for the crossover length would be a 15ft switch and 1:9 RAM.

Doing it properly with a MR switch and CLM angles would likely get even closer. Note that the marks are the switch toes (blade tips), not the stretcher bar.

Certainly those aren't 1:5 turnouts!

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Jim Guthrie]

Building my own track in S7 to MR practise for a location set in circa 1905 is I'm finding not for the faint hearted. As for consulting MR experts, I'm afraid some of the questions I ask seem to go beyond what many bother with.

And that looks like inside keyed chairs as well.

Jim.

 

[Acfield]

Martin

Blimey, possibly a 15ft switch and 1:9 vee crossing! I may need to move to a larger house at this rate. Here I was thinking I could get a basic single platform branch terminus layout in a 13 x 13 back bedroom.

Yes, I’m certain you’re right the lens has foreshortened the image. Thanks for going to the trouble of dabbling with the O.S. map, a helpful and useful means of determining turnout detail.

Earlier today I obtained a photo of a better 1 in 6 MR vee crossing drawing. This one provides much more detail.

As for the inside-keyed chairs. Thankfully I’ve decided not to attempt to include any – the local P. Way Supt. had eradicated them at my station by 1905 – there are advantages in modelling a fictional station. As with the real thing special chairs are required. Just turning Exactoscale rail chairs around is no good, flanges simply run on the tops of keys – I’ve seen it done!

Cheers
Tony

 

[AndyB]

What are the two gents doing in the hole where the buffers should be? ☺

That pic captures the set at the trailing point perfectly.

 

[Acfield]

The station master dropped his wedding ring and the search got out of hand..........

 

[Tony W]

At a guess it could be preparations for extending the length of the loco release. I know the Midland liked small engines, but there comes a point when they no longer fit. Although whatever they are doing appears to affect both roads.
Regards
Tony.

 

[Paracelsus]

I think they may be installing buffer stops, which are partly underground. Early photos show nothing but a stone wall, whereas in later years they definitely existed.

For later view see

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Ilkeston...-Trowell-Line-Midland-Railway-1-/262024044124

 

[Tony W]

Yes, I would agree with that.

 

[Acfield]

The early photo is quite a find. I like how it shows the ballasting practise of 'boxing in' where sleepers and timbers are covered over. Though wouldn't this encourage rain water to remain on sleeper tops and ultimately cause rot to set in. It may be this photo was taken shortly after the station opened in July 1879 and the buffer stops were added later. By the look of the later view it appears to be of an all timber construction.

 

[Paracelsus]

The opening of the Ilkeston Town branch has a complicated history, IIRC. I think that 'early' photo shows the beginning of the second attempt by the Midland to make a go of it, in response to the opening of the Great Northern line. The photo with buffer stops is after a platform level building was added. There was a long history of the line in the HMRS Journal many years ago by Bob Essery and a discussion about modelling the line.