Terminal station

[Nick_Burman]

Hello all,

 

 

Has anyone ever considered using trackplan nº6 ("Switchman's Nightmare") from Kalmbach's "101 Track Plans" as a terminal station? I was looking at it and it bears an enormous resemblance to Joshin Dentetsu's Takasaki terminal...

 

 

Cheers NB

[kvp]

It would be a little bit hard to shunt freight around a yard like that, but i'm not suprised since according to the description, the original switchman's nightmare also had a prototype somewhere. The Joshin Dentetsu version is just one switch short of the trackplan. I really wonder how did they end up with this. Personally for a terminal station, I would choose something more simple and easier to handle, this setup is really a nightmare to handle.

[Nick_Burman]

It would be a little bit hard to shunt freight around a yard like that, but i'm not suprised since according to the description, the original switchman's nightmare also had a prototype somewhere. The Joshin Dentetsu version is just one switch short of the trackplan. I really wonder how did they end up with this. Personally for a terminal station, I would choose something more simple and easier to handle, this setup is really a nightmare to handle.

 

Thanks kvp. Considering I'm interested in using the track plan in a Japanese context, it would be more than just a freight yard, but rather a complete terminal, with passenger station and servicing facilities for MU trains. In the plan, "Alpha Yard" would be the freight side, "Beta Yard" would be where MU trains would be stabled and serviced (Just like Takasaki, if you look carefully); "The Trap", just a warehouse to give some local freight switching for the crews. Like Joshin Takasaki, the station would be a dead-end terminal located where the "yard office" sits on the plan.

 

You are right, the only thing missing in the "Switchman's Nightmare" plan compared to Joshin Takasaki is the JR connection. I guess that they inherited this arrangement from the days when the railway was 762mm gauge.

 

Cheers NB

Edited January 2, 2014 by Nick_Burman

[westfalen]

The more I look at this plan the more I agree with you. Where the yard office is on the plan you could put an island platform.  You could also place it in the modern era and use the Alpha Yard as a base for the track maintainence forces.

[katoftw]

anyone got a pic/example of the plan?  has me interested.

[Nick_Burman]

 You could also place it in the modern era and use the Alpha Yard as a base for the track maintainence forces.

 

Alvin, that's exactly what Joshin does to its version of Alpha Yard...

 

 

Cheers NB

[kvp]

anyone got a pic/example of the plan?  has me interested.

Edited January 3, 2014 by kvp

[westfalen]

Alpha Yard at bottom left, Beta Yard at top right, island platform could go between tracks at bottom right.

[Nick_Burman]

anyone got a pic/example of the plan?  has me interested.

 

The only difference is that I would put the optional crossing between Alpha Yard and the upper "platform" track.

 

I'm also doodling a version with a double-track entrance.

 

 

Cheers NB

[marknewton]

G'day Nick.

 

Do you have a drawing/diagram of the Takasaki yard for comparison?

 

Cheers,

 

Mark.

[bikkuri bahn]

G'day Nick.

 

Do you have a drawing/diagram of the Takasaki yard for comparison?

 

Cheers,

 

Mark.

Here's a diagram of the track layout at Takasaki circa 1958.  Joshin's trackage is in the upper left (first diagram):

http://senrohaisenzu.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/2009/12/post-55a0.html

[Nick_Burman]

Further to the subject, I decided to sit down and work towards modifying the track plan to suit my necessities, namely adapting it to T-Track standards (or rather to my reading of T-Track standards, using the PECO rather than Unitrack track centers - also known as NickTTrack) and to PECO code 55 track. To achieve that I placed the track plan over a 5x T-Track module (has anyone ever used such a size? It's 1540mm long). I also modified the runaround siding to permit some easier switching.

 

Cheers NB

N_ST_SwNmJPTerm_Peco55_edit.bmp

[Densha]

Oh I like this one!

[Nick_Burman]

Oh I like this one!

 

Thanks Densha. So far this is the track plan which has arrested most my attention. I'm interested to hear what other members of the form have to say about it.

 

One thing I'm trying to work out is signalling for this layout - I placed a signal box on the end of the platform and I plan to work switches and signals (Tomix) using a working interlocking frame. Given the fact that signalling arrangements on Japanese private railways tended to be rather basic, I need help in setting up which switches and signals would be manual and which would be worked from the box. So far, I identified 4 signals (1 Distant - off layout - 1 Home and two starters at the end of the platform tracks) and 5 switches (the one right at the entrance, the 4 surrounding the crossing and the one on the entrance of the platform on the lower track), plus 3 manual switches to be locked from the box (switch leading to the - off-layout - JNR yard, switch on the runaround by the platform and the switch leading to the industrial plants). Everything else will be manual. Am I missing something, or am I overdoing it?

 

Cheers NB

[kvp]

My 2 cents:

-signal box controlled turnouts: everything required for normal passenger operations

-manual turnouts: industrial track (2), jnr track (1), runaround (2)

-signals:

 a ) home

 b ) starters (2)

 c ) small shunting for the sidings (5)

 d ) fixed at the buffer stops for ats (at least 2 at the end of the passenger platforms)

 

Signal protections should be route based, so each sidings shunting signal must interlock with their turnout(s). The same is true for starting and the home signals, which should also interlock with track circuits on the main and the two passenger sidings, which should have ats. (this means two track circuits on each of the 3 sections, one for sensing a train and one short or point based direction dependent for stopping before the buffer or the home signal) And imho this is pretty much all.

Edited July 9, 2014 by kvp

[Ken Ford]

I like this very much, Nick - it reminds me of the UK outline DMU layouts I'm so fond of.

[Nick_Burman]

My 2 cents:

-signal box controlled turnouts: everything required for normal passenger operations

-manual turnouts: industrial track (2), jnr track (1), runaround (2)

-signals:

 a ) home

 b ) starters (2)

 c ) small shunting for the sidings (5)

 d ) fixed at the buffer stops for ats (at least 2 at the end of the passenger platforms)

 

Signal protections should be route based, so each sidings shunting signal must interlock with their turnout(s). The same is true for starting and the home signals, which should also interlock with track circuits on the main and the two passenger sidings, which should have ats. (this means two track circuits on each of the 3 sections, one for sensing a train and one short or point based direction dependent for stopping before the buffer or the home signal) And imho this is pretty much all.

 

kvp,

 

Very enlightened 2 cents. However I forgot to say that my layout would be set in the late 50's - early 60's, so ATS and it's attending paraphernalia would not (yet) be in use. Also rural private railway signalling arrangements tend to be simple (the big metropolitan lines have, of course, the full signal complement), not  to say downright spartan. For instance, I've never seen any form of mechanical shunting signal on a rural private railway and it seems that many such lines continue living without having ever used them, one example seeing Shimonita station on the Joshin Dentetsu. So I think I'll go without them, not only because I have yet to see a working N scale shunting disc...

 

Cheers NB