click here for a list of all existing Templot documentation
about Templot Club cookie information pre-print options:    

click image to open Templot Club in a new tab
Templot club top logo
looking for Templot? - (free)



 you are not logged in  - Login | Join


receive all messages by email: info


Recent Topics
Front Page  Search  Image Gallery  Gallery Upload  My Account  Members  Help  
make a donation  
please click: important information for new members and first-time visitors Templot Companion - User Guide
            messages archive on Yahoo
page trail:  Templot Club > Forums > Baffled beginners > What is this formation called?
Templot web site

                                       What is this formation called?
     
 Start new topic   Reply blank   Printer friendly 
  Rate this topic  
AuthorMessage
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
1st message | this message only posted: 13 Oct 2017 17:05
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Ian Bunch
 



view images in gallery
view images as slides

__________
message ref: 22356

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
2nd message | this message only posted: 13 Oct 2017 17:09
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Ian Bunch
 



view images in gallery
view images as slides
This is Stretford Bridge junction at Craven Arms where the BCR diverged from the Shrewsbury Hereford line.
I’ve been trying to design something similar but with the inside curve on a more consistent radius.
__________
message ref: 22357

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
3rd message | this message only posted: 13 Oct 2017 17:23
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Rob Manchester
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi Ian,

It is a double track mainline with a double lead junction to the branch that soon becomes single track. It doesn't offer any real advantage over a single lead junction except that it can protect a train coming off the branch from a head-on collision with a train that overruns a signal (SPAD)travelling from the bottom of the picture.

Rob

__________
message ref: 22358

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
4th message | this message only posted: 13 Oct 2017 17:49
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Martin Wynne
West Of The Severn, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides

Please do not send requests for help direct to me via email or PM.

Post your questions on the forum where everyone can see them and add helpful replies.
Hi Ian,

I don't know a specific name, but it needs one.

It's not an ordinary double-junction because the branch tracks are converging and do not need to maintain a running clearance between them. That means that there is no need for the two turnouts to be of the same crossing angle and slightly staggered, as in a conventional double-junction. In fact I think I can see in the photo that the turnouts differ in crossing angle.

regards,

Martin.

__________
message ref: 22359

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
5th message | this message only posted: 13 Oct 2017 18:21
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Martin Wynne
West Of The Severn, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides

Please do not send requests for help direct to me via email or PM.

Post your questions on the forum where everyone can see them and add helpful replies.
Hi Ian,

To create this, see the second part this video, starting at 4mins-15secs:

 https://flashbackconnect.com/Movie.aspx?id=z3LZpZ1HyGx4Mzpft5UXUA2

At 4mins-39secs, instead of making double track, insert a turnout and then make branch track.

Then it is much the same for the remainder of the video.

Some trial and error on the size and position of the inserted turnout may be needed for an optimum result.

The video is also available directly within Templot from help > watch a video > Scruff curviform double-junction.

regards,

Martin.

__________
message ref: 22360

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
6th message | this message only posted: 13 Oct 2017 18:32
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Ian Bunch
 



view images in gallery
view images as slides
Thanks both
__________
message ref: 22361

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
7th message | this message only posted: 16 Oct 2017 15:12
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Ian Bunch
 



view images in gallery
view images as slides
There was this compact example, just down the road.
__________
message ref: 22410

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
8th message | this message only posted: 16 Oct 2017 15:17
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Martin Wynne
West Of The Severn, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides

Please do not send requests for help direct to me via email or PM.

Post your questions on the forum where everyone can see them and add helpful replies.
Ian Bunch wrote: There was this compact example, just down the road.That was at Bewdley. The SVR ripped it out within minutes of taking over. So much for "Preservation" I thought. It coloured my attitude to the whole thing for years.

Martin.

__________
message ref: 22411

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
9th message | this message only posted: 16 Oct 2017 18:42
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Phil O
Plymouth, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides
I would imagine that it was a real pain, too maintain and that's why they did away with it. A nice piece of S&C though.
__________
message ref: 22418

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
10th message | this message only posted: 16 Oct 2017 19:20
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Martin Wynne
West Of The Severn, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides

Please do not send requests for help direct to me via email or PM.

Post your questions on the forum where everyone can see them and add helpful replies.
Phil O wrote: I would imagine that it was a real pain to maintain and that's why they did away with it.Hi Phil,

On that argument they could have done away with the steam locomotives and gone over to DMUs.

Martin.

__________
message ref: 22420

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
11th message | this message only posted: 16 Oct 2017 21:10
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Rob Manchester
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Martin Wynne wrote: Phil O wrote: I would imagine that it was a real pain to maintain and that's why they did away with it.Hi Phil,

On that argument they could have done away with the steam locomotives and gone over to DMUs.

Martin.
Hi Martin,
On that argument they could have done away with the whole railway and gone over to buses and private cars. That would have been a shame though....

Maybe the H&S at work book only allows preserved railways to operate plain track and simple single turnouts.

Rob


__________
message ref: 22423

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
12th message | this message only posted: 16 Oct 2017 23:09
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
d827kelly
Coventry, United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Rob Manchester wrote:
Hi Martin,
On that argument they could have done away with the whole railway and gone over to buses and private cars. That would have been a shame though....

Maybe the H&S at work book only allows preserved railways to operate plain track and simple single turnouts.

Rob

Could simply just be cost grounds. Either that or there are limits on what they're allowed as they're run using the Light Railway Acts iirc.

__________
message ref: 22424

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
13th message | this message only posted: 16 Oct 2017 23:26
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Martin Wynne
West Of The Severn, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides

Please do not send requests for help direct to me via email or PM.

Post your questions on the forum where everyone can see them and add helpful replies.
d827kelly wrote:Could simply just be cost grounds. Either that or there are limits on what they're allowed as they're run using the Light Railway Acts iirc.It happened more than 40 years ago.

Martin.

__________
message ref: 22425

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
14th message | this message only posted: 17 Oct 2017 12:20
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Phil O
Plymouth, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides
Martin Wynne wrote: Phil O wrote: I would imagine that it was a real pain to maintain and that's why they did away with it.Hi Phil,

On that argument they could have done away with the steam locomotives and gone over to DMUs.

Martin.
Hi Martin

Having relaid a plain diamond and fettled a second, I can safely say that they are bad enough, I for one would not like to fettle that formation very often. Using DMUs may only increase the time between maintenance periods and I doubt whether they could get a replacement lump for the outside slip if that was worn.

As a piece of trackwork I do admit, it does look nice.

Phil
__________
message ref: 22427

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
15th message | this message only posted: 17 Oct 2017 12:32
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Martin Wynne
West Of The Severn, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides

Please do not send requests for help direct to me via email or PM.

Post your questions on the forum where everyone can see them and add helpful replies.
Phil O wrote:Having relaid a plain diamond and fettled a second, I can safely say that they are bad enough, I for one would not like to fettle that formation very often.Hi Phil,

But their stated aim at the time was "Preservation".

Nowadays many of them have dropped that, and simply call themselves "Heritage" lines.

regards,

Martin.

__________
message ref: 22428

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
16th message | this message only posted: 17 Oct 2017 17:29
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
John Palmer
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
My guess is:

Number of people who were interested in the preservation of steam traction : hundreds
Number of people who were interested in the preservation of historically interesting track formations: negligible.

__________
message ref: 22430

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
17th message | this message only posted: 17 Oct 2017 19:03
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
DerekStuart
United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
John isn't wrong there. A local "siding with locos" masquerading as a preserved railway, has spent much of its money on signals, signal boxes and other infrastructure.

The result? It hasn't the money to extend the line. Further result? It's hardly the NYMR, SVR, Nene etc in terms of visitors.

That said, if the formation was still in good enough condition for continued use it does seem a shame to remove it, after all it wasn't an intensive HST service over the top of it.
__________
message ref: 22431

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
18th message | this message only posted: 17 Oct 2017 19:54
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Dave Summers
Urchfont, Devizes, United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Gents

Can I just remind you of the thread title. This is drifting into the philosophical areas best suited to a pub rather than Templot Club. If you wish to continue your 'discussion' can you please start another thread which I (and no doubt others) can delete without fear of losing anything remotely relevant.

Ta!

Dave
__________
message ref: 22433

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
19th message | this message only posted: 17 Oct 2017 22:29
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Martin Wynne
West Of The Severn, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides

Please do not send requests for help direct to me via email or PM.

Post your questions on the forum where everyone can see them and add helpful replies.
Martin Wynne wrote: It's not an ordinary double-junction because the branch tracks are converging and do not need to maintain a running clearance between them. That means that there is no need for the two turnouts to be of the same crossing angle and slightly staggered, as in a conventional double-junction. In fact I think I can see in the photo that the turnouts differ in crossing angle.It's interesting that this junction was remodelled some time between 1883 and 1901. On the 1883 map it is a conventional double-track double-junction with the single-line junction some way along the BCR branch. It looks to have been a nice long curved turnout:



By 1901 it is as shown in the photo:



This may have been done to bring the single-line points within the 350yd limit for rodding runs. As best I can measure it is just about on the limit on the older map. Also to improve the signalman's view of the signals -- the branch advanced starter (S.P.) has been removed on the later map.

BCR trains were short, so it may have been intended to hold a BCR down train at that signal clear of the main line while waiting for a BCR up train on the branch. Assuming of course that the BCR had more than one train? Possibly the discovery that they didn't, and weren't ever likely to, led to the decision to remodel the junction. :) 

Here is Google's present day view of the junction:

 https://goo.gl/maps/jhHxPNUPGkT2

regards,

Martin.

__________
message ref: 22434

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
20th message | this message only posted: 17 Oct 2017 22:41
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
DerekStuart
United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Martin,

could you kindly delete my comment above. It seems that Mr Summers has has been upset by a reply to your own post.

I was not aware that members were taking it upon themselves to police your forum as happens in 'the other place.'

My sincere apologies to you, Mr Summers. I do hope in time you will manage to overcome your horror. And your lack of manners.

Dave Summers wrote: Gents

Can I just remind you of the thread title. This is drifting into the philosophical areas best suited to a pub rather than Templot Club. If you wish to continue your 'discussion' can you please start another thread which I (and no doubt others) can delete without fear of losing anything remotely relevant.

Ta!

Dave


__________
message ref: 22435

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
21st message | this message only posted: 17 Oct 2017 22:54
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Martin Wynne
West Of The Severn, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides

Please do not send requests for help direct to me via email or PM.

Post your questions on the forum where everyone can see them and add helpful replies.
Steady on folks. :)

I'm not deleting anything substantive. We don't have any moderators here.

If anyone wants to edit their post down to the single word "delete", I will then delete it. There isn't a lot of point doing that, bearing in mind that everyone will have received it in an email, and it is also in the message archive on Yahoo.

The original diversion was my fault, so apologies.

Martin.


__________
message ref: 22436

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
22nd message | this message only posted: 18 Oct 2017 01:40
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
John Palmer
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
It's a bit hard to work out the signalling arrangements for the junction. The splitting (home?) signal immediately to the south of the overbridge doesn't appear on the 1883 survey, and both ordnance plans show another signal post further out on the branch, and not visible on the extracts from the plans shown in this thread – probably the distant for the junction. That prompts a query as to whether there was a down home signal for the branch pre-1883, and if so where it was located.

I too wondered whether the more capacious layout of 1883 was intended to provide standage for a Bishops Castle-bound train, but I don't see how one could properly permit such a train to pass over the junction points after acceptance of a train coming from Bishops Castle. Whilst I can see the advantage of being able to clear the main line in this way, one would normally do so either by sending the train on its way down the branch or by holding it in the BCR bay at Craven Arms where it wouldn't conflict with main line movements anyway.

I am unable to tell from any photographs of the junction whether the branch connection from the main line was trapped. If it wasn't then the employment of a double lead junction in this case provides little by way of flank protection.

__________
message ref: 22437

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
23rd message | this message only posted: 18 Oct 2017 05:28
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Andrew Barrowman
USA

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
DerekStuart wrote: Martin,

I was not aware that members were taking it upon themselves to police your forum as happens in 'the other place.'



I have abandoned 'the other place' entirely. I was finding the intolerance intolerable, if you see what I mean :)

Carry on. Sorry for the distraction.

__________
message ref: 22438

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
24th message | this message only posted: 18 Oct 2017 06:10
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Dave Summers
Urchfont, Devizes, United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
The current view taken from the same place as the original post:
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/s/stretford_bridge_junction/index2.shtml
This shows the halt platform which had appeared by 1906
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/s/stretford_bridge_junction/stretford(bcrs1906)bridge_old2.jpg
Dave
__________
message ref: 22439

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
25th message | this message only posted: 23 Oct 2017 10:37
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
madscientist
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Presumably the primary reason was to remove the need for a crossover on the double line to allow single line trans to regain the correct running line on the double track
Though the trend with modern track seems to be a crossover followed by a simple turnout , removing the diamond etc. 

__________
message ref: 22523

 
This is topic ID = 3109     Page created at 02:54 (local time)  
You can type a quick reply to this topic here.

Click in the box to begin.


But to reply to an individual message, or to include images, attachments and formatted text, use the reply buttons on each message above.

To start a new topic in this forum, click the Start new topic button below.
To start a new topic in a different forum, click the Forum Jump drop-down list below.

             Start new topic 

 click to jump to a different forum:     Back to top of page

Templot Club > Forums > Baffled beginners > What is this formation called?
about Templot Club

list recently active topics Templot Companion - User Guide - A-Z Index Old Templot Companion Please click: important information for new members and first-time visitors.
indexing link for search engines only

back to top of page


Please read this important note about copyright: Unless stated otherwise, all the files submitted to this web site are copyright and the property of the respective contributor. You are welcome to use them for your own personal non-commercial purposes, and in your messages on this web site. If you want to publish any of this material elsewhere or use it commercially, you must first obtain the owner's permission to do so.

The small print: All material submitted to this web site is the responsibility of the respective contributor. By submitting material to this web site you acknowledge that you accept full responsibility for the material submitted. The owner of this web site is not responsible for any content displayed here other than his own contributions. The owner of this web site may edit, modify or remove any content at any time without giving notice or reason.
Problems with this web site? Contact webmaster@templot.com.   This web site uses cookies: click for information.  
© 2017  

Powered by UltraBB - © 2009 Data 1 Systems