Is this station possible?

[Sad Sprinter]

I'm looking for places to model, right now it's a tossup between a small Minories style station or my previously mentioned "Upper Tooting Branch", but I'm also looking at a grand through station in the Fleet Valley to serve the LCDR and a fictional mainline from Portsmouth. I imagine the station would have at least 8 platforms and run down a steep incline from a bridge at Blackfriars, with a station building over the station throat. This is what I've designed below, but is it possible from an engineering perspective? Of course in this world Holborn Viaduct, Blackfriars, City Thameslink and Ludgate Hill stations wouldn't exist.

 

[yoyothehobo]

Anything is pretty much constructable from an Engineering point of view. What you need to decide is when your station was built to work out what the engineering solutions would be.

I guess you need to look at how high the track is as it comes off the bridge and how far from the bridge the station is. You could do something funky and have the south end of the station on a low bridge going into a cutting as the land rises to the North.

No engineering problem is insurmountable, its just a question of money

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Anything is pretty much constructable from an Engineering point of view. What you need to decide is when your station was built to work out what the engineering solutions would be.

I guess you need to look at how high the track is as it comes off the bridge and how far from the bridge the station is. You could do something funky and have the south end of the station on a low bridge going into a cutting as the land rises to the North.

No engineering problem is insurmountable, its just a question of money

The bridge at Blackfriars is 56 meters high in reality, and the line would have just under a quarter of a mile to reach ground level below Ludgate Hill.

Can paintwork be installed on sloped track or does it have to be flat?

 

[yoyothehobo]

The bridge at Blackfriars is 56 meters high in reality, and the line would have just under a quarter of a mile to reach ground level below Ludgate Hill.

Can paintwork be installed on sloped track or does it have to be flat?

Dont think its 56 metres! The roof of the station is 20m above sea level, the track itself is about 10m above sea level. Holborn Viaduct and the land around it is 10-15m above sea level. You probably want to lose 10m of elevation on that 400m or so, so that would be 1 in 40 which is steeper than you would like. You could use modellers licence to cut it down to 5m and another 100m of distance you get to 1 in 100 which is manageable. I dont see why you couldnt install points on the slopes, but you are mostly dealing with the issues around setting off on the steep

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Dont think its 56 metres! The roof of the station is 20m above sea level, the track itself is about 10m above sea level. Holborn Viaduct and the land around it is 10-15m above sea level. You probably want to lose 10m of elevation on that 400m or so, so that would be 1 in 40 which is steeper than you would like. You could use modellers licence to cut it down to 5m and another 100m of distance you get to 1 in 100 which is manageable. I dont see why you couldnt install points on the slopes, but you are mostly dealing with the issues around setting off on the steep

Ah thank you, don’t know where I got 56 meters from. The real life ramp down to the Snow Hill tunnel is 1 in 37, wouldn’t this be too steep for freight trains? Somehow it worked

 

[etr221]

After looking at maps on the NLS website, my interpretation is that the LCDR rail level from its Blackfriars Bridge into Holborn Viaduct is about 50 feet (above sea level), with Queen Victoria Street and foot of Ludgate Hill (where the railway crossed) being 25 to 30 feet. By Farringdon station, roads are 45-50 feet, with the Met Railway being about 22 feet (estimate).
Assuming that the north end of your through station connects to the Met (somehow), that defines the levels (and change thereof) needed...

But - simplifying - the station proposed seems to be an equivalent - in place and height - to City Thameslink: from which, southbound it is about 1 in 30 up to Blackfrairs and the bridge. For steam, straight off the platform end, that is very steep (how does it compare to Camden Bank or the climb out of Glasgow Queen Street?) - undesirable if not impossible. So probably a lot of modeller's licence required to fit it all in.

Ah thank you, don’t know where I got 56 meters from. The real life ramp down to the Snow Hill tunnel is 1 in 37, wouldn’t this be too steep for freight trains? Somehow it worked

Probably misunderstanding heights, as whether they are feet or metres. Regarding the Snow Hill incline, it was a combination of short trains and bankers to get it to work...

But there were Victorian proposals for the sort of station being suggested - a through 'city centre' main line station in the Fleet Valley - given that (AIUI) these were at least prepared to put to Parliament, these must have come up with a solution to the levels issue. Whether there are any details available anywhere, I've no idea.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

After looking at maps on the NLS website, my interpretation is that the LCDR rail level from its Blackfriars Bridge into Holborn Viaduct is about 50 feet (above sea level), with Queen Victoria Street and foot of Ludgate Hill (where the railway crossed) being 25 to 30 feet. By Farringdon station, roads are 45-50 feet, with the Met Railway being about 22 feet (estimate).
Assuming that the north end of your through station connects to the Met (somehow), that defines the levels (and change thereof) needed...

But - simplifying - the station proposed seems to be an equivalent - in place and height - to City Thameslink: from which, southbound it is about 1 in 30 up to Blackfrairs and the bridge. For steam, straight off the platform end, that is very steep (how does it compare to Camden Bank or the climb out of Glasgow Queen Street?) - undesirable if not impossible. So probably a lot of modeller's licence required to fit it all in.

Probably misunderstanding heights, as whether they are feet or metres. Regarding the Snow Hill incline, it was a combination of short trains and bankers to get it to work...

But there were Victorian proposals for the sort of station being suggested - a through 'city centre' main line station in the Fleet Valley - given that (AIUI) these were at least prepared to put to Parliament, these must have come up with a solution to the levels issue. Whether there are any details available anywhere, I've no idea.

Dont think its 56 metres! The roof of the station is 20m above sea level, the track itself is about 10m above sea level. Holborn Viaduct and the land around it is 10-15m above sea level. You probably want to lose 10m of elevation on that 400m or so, so that would be 1 in 40 which is steeper than you would like. You could use modellers licence to cut it down to 5m and another 100m of distance you get to 1 in 100 which is manageable. I dont see why you couldnt install points on the slopes, but you are mostly dealing with the issues around setting off on the steep

Thanks for this analysis. I did think it looked a bit unbelievable. Presumably the short-lived suburban trains that called at Holborn Viaduct Low Level were also banked before chugging up the incline?

 

[etr221]

Thanks for this analysis. I did think it looked a bit unbelievable. Presumably the short-lived suburban trains that called at Holborn Viaduct Low Level were also banked before chugging up the incline?

Trains called at Snow Hill (Holborn Viaduct Low Level) for about forty years (1874-08-01 to 1916-04-01), scarcely short lived. I doubt passenger trains were normally banked up the (1 in 39) incline, but I imagine loads and loco power were carefully matched.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

Can paintwork be installed on sloped track or does it have to be flat?

That in itself should not pose a problem. The main issue in my experience (00 gauge) inclines, can be the smaller scale tension lock couplings between vehicles at places where the gradient changes. I had an incline that worked out at about 1 in 50 in real terms, but I had need for a short level stretch mid way up (where I had a turnout/point located). Said point was not the problem, but the change in incline being less than a smooth gradual change from rising to level, resulted in my trains of Mk1's starting out with say 4 or 5 coaches in tow, but after passing the point of incline change the last one or two would detach themselves and head off back down the way they had just come! Regulation 22/ bell code 2-5-5, which thankfully never had to use in real life, only on my model railway.... But not ideal, so in essence, any change in gradient needs to be smooth and gradual (in model terms - unless you are using prototype 3 link couplings of course), and as said points are not an issue, providing the entire point (itself) is level within itself, ie: all on the flat or all on the slope. Don't try and 'bend' a point to breach a change in incline - that won't work in model terms.

 

[Magdalia]

This is what I've designed below

Basically, that's a bigger version of Holborn Viaduct.

Trains called at Snow Hill (Holborn Viaduct Low Level) for about forty years (1874-08-01 to 1916-04-01), scarcely short lived. I doubt passenger trains were normally banked up the (1 in 39) incline

The line crossed Ludgate Hill on a bridge, the steep gradient down into what is now City Thameslink, going under Ludgate Hill, only dates from the reopening of Snow Hill tunnel. Here is the view north from Blackfriars to Holborn Viaduct in 1972.

View from Blackfriars station towards Holborn Viaduct in 1972

The tracks over the upstream bridge bypassing the station were disused but evidently still in situ. The long disused platform of Ludgate Hill station can be seen, with some sort of hut on it.

www.flickr.com

View from Blackfriars station towards Holborn Viaduct in 1972​

The tracks over the upstream bridge bypassing the station were disused but evidently still in situ. The long disused platform of Ludgate Hill station can be seen, with some sort of hut on it.​

And here is a picture of the Ludgate Hill bridge from the road, with St Paul's in the background.

Ludgate Hill bridge

Until 1990 this bridge carried the four lines from Blackfriars to Holborn Viaduct. Ludgate Hill station was around the corner to the right, though out of use by many years. The line is now below ground and extensively built over, so that this scene is much different today.

www.flickr.com

Ludgate Hill bridge​

Until 1990 this bridge carried the four lines from Blackfriars to Holborn Viaduct. Ludgate Hill station was around the corner to the right, though out of use by many years. The line is now below ground and extensively built over, so that this scene is much different today.​

 

[30907]

I have only recently come across this site which might help with the levels:
https://en-gb.topographic-map.com/map-kffs8/London/
- though it seems to reference the natural ground level (look at Holborn Viaduct and Farringdon St for example).
You are neatly outside the City of London (see the Town Plans on NLS) which probably makes it less unlikely.
You have to decide on your approximate date and work out how much of the Fleet area you can remodel: for example, to ease the gradient, could you block off Earl St the predecessor of Queen Victoria St?
I wonder whether the levels to the West of the modern route might be more conducive, and/or moving the station north towards Smithfield.

Intriguing anyway!

 

[Deepgreen]

The bridge at Blackfriars is 56 meters high in reality, and the line would have just under a quarter of a mile to reach ground level below Ludgate Hill.

Can paintwork be installed on sloped track or does it have to be flat?

All you need is a special sloping brush...

 

[Sad Sprinter]

All you need is a special sloping brush...

Hahaha!

Thanks all for your points. My assumption is that the LCDR and my fictional Portsmouth mainline straighten Queen Victoria Street giving the space between the river bank and Ludgate Hill for the tracks to decline. I did wonder about a straight decline along the current path of the Thameslink route but the Apothecaries Hall is in the way which I doubt would be easily flattened, so I assumed the line would have to curve around it.

Moving the station northwards is the only way I think to make it more realistic, but what about raising Ludgate Hill over the railway?

Operationally, the layout would be set in the only era that matters the late 80s Network SouthEast era. DC trains would terminate in the platforms, with storeage sidings under Smithfield and DC powered sidings next to Farringdon station. Thameslink 319s would use any available platform, adding to the operation complexity. I’d imagine the station would have been near derelict in the 70s, with a classic corporate raft built over the top in the mid-80s

 

[yoyothehobo]

Hahaha!

Thanks all for your points. My assumption is that the LCDR and my fictional Portsmouth mainline straighten Queen Victoria Street giving the space between the river bank and Ludgate Hill for the tracks to decline. I did wonder about a straight decline along the current path of the Thameslink route but the Apothecaries Hall is in the way which I doubt would be easily flattened, so I assumed the line would have to curve around it.

Moving the station northwards is the only way I think to make it more realistic, but what about raising Ludgate Hill over the railway?

Operationally, the layout would be set in the only era that matters the late 80s Network SouthEast era. DC trains would terminate in the platforms, with storeage sidings under Smithfield and DC powered sidings next to Farringdon station. Thameslink 319s would use any available platform, adding to the operation complexity. I’d imagine the station would have been near derelict in the 70s, with a classic corporate raft built over the top in the mid-80s

I think what would add interest is that you have some older style brick built platforms and you have some storage sidings clearly in an area with more concrete piles etc...

 

[DerekC]

Here's a gradient profile diagram for what is now the Thameslink core, that I produced about ten years ago. It was only for a slideshow, so don't take any notice of the wobbles in the curve. (The original had labelled axes). It does confirm that the fall from track level from Blackfriars down to City Thameslink is 15 metres and the gradient 1:29 which would have been impractical at the entry/exit from a major steam operated main line station. Why not put your station on a viaduct at Blackfriars track level and (if you want) have a couple of platforms with tracks burrowing down to the Met at the far end, Kings X suburban style? Would need to get under Holborn Viaduct, though!

 

[James H]

Aerial photo of the area under discussion displayed at St Bride's Church Fleet Street

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Aerial photo of the area under discussion displayed at St Bride's Church Fleet Street
View attachment 171062

Thanks for this.

Atfter some thinking, I've come to the following conclusion that the only way to make such a station work would be to:

1. "Demolish" Holborn Viaduct and Ludgate Hill stations, and build a new large station on a viaduct where Ludgate Hill station extending southwards towards Blackfriars and burrowing tracks down where Holborn Viaduct station is
2. To have a subterranean Liverpool Street style station, which is what I was getting for (Southern Region, but with LST's approaches), I could move the station underneath Holborn Viaduct itself and Smithfield Market, and potentially move the Ludgate Hill road further south to use the road bed as the site of a more gentle incline. This is physically more practical but politically I doubt the City of London Corporation would ever agree to such a scheme.