It’s been a while since I looked at urban termini. Looking at London Victoria in the 1950’s there seems to be an interesting ‘bitsa station’ design that is possible.
The distance between the road bridges is about 4′ in ‘N’, so this is very buildable. To the left one could add a traverser. To the right one could have a second scenic board with those interesting sidings (probably used for parcels stock from the Golden Arrow and fourgons off the Night Ferry.) Or perhaps just another hidden board to terminate trains. The named trains left from platform 1. The others had a range of EMUs and steam hauled trains for the eastern section of the Southern Railway (formerly the SECR).
The next question is which side to view the layout from. To give the full impression of a large London terminus, a view from the bottom of the plan, looking over to the LBSCR section of the station, would be best. This might look something like the next two photographs. (The first one is easily modelled with a Farish ‘N’ class and Dapol Maunsell coaches.)
However, the view from the top of the plan could be the better one. Here we have a terrace of tall houses, the Bishop & Sons depository, and the most attractive Victoria East signal box. Although less easily identified as a large terminus, this would probably be the best way to build this layout.
I like that. I could see it as a Scottish terminus with class 37’s hauling blue and grey Mk1 and 2 coaches.
Possibly a daft question but when you say:
“To the right one could have a second scenic board with those interesting sidings … Or perhaps just another hidden board to terminate trains.”
Given that the length of the model would seem to be the same if you have a scenic board or not, and a terminus would be more interesting than a bare board for operator and viewer alike, why wouldn’t you allow it to be visible?
I was thinking that it was easier to cut the scenic section at the bridge, rather than model a 12-coach platform like Victoria
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on sed30's Blog.