Simulating ETB , electric token block , on a model railway

[Junctionmad]

Specifically, in my case ETS ,

 

I was wondering how to best implement simulated ETS and associated bells on my layout under construction , this station had five Webb and Thompson machines .

 

In my case the other signal boxes will be simulated by a computer , ie the bells would be connected to a computer , which will acknowledge bell codes etc

 

Since I don't want to , or can't actually do token exchanges , I need to simulate this.

 

I was thinking of making a minature dummy W& T machine , but adding an indicator to show " normal, train to, train from " indicators and a " token removed / out of phase " indicator along with a " remove/replace token button " . ( the two could be combined )

 

The sequence would be , call attention , computer answers , then offer " is line clear " , assuming fiddle yard has a free line, computer acknowledges . Operator presses " remove token " button , and indicator switches to " train to " automatically ,token out light is illumInated , train is dispatched

 

On reaching fiddle yard ( or some time later to give operator some breathing space and to simulate a train journey, the computer signals train out of section and extinguishes "token out" light and resets the indicator to " normal/line blocked "

 

The reverse is where the computer dispatches a train from the fiddle yard and it generates the appropriate bell codes ,waits for line clear bell code , illuminates the " token removed " light , switches the indicator to " train from " and dispatches the train , on receipt the operator ,sends train out of section , presses the " token removed replaced " button and the token light goes out.

 

In refer to speed up the process , given a one operator layout ( at times ) , I proposed to put a few buttons along the bottom of the simulated W&T machine to direct,y generate common bell codes , allowing " one touch " actions , ie pressing the button labelled " express " would send a call attention , appropriate " is line clear " and activate the indicator and token out light sequence automatically.

 

Also I was thinking of making the " one touch buttons , illuminated, which would illuminate after the computer sends " is line clear for " , allowing a one touch response and serving as a reminder that the fiddle yard wishes to dispatch a train

 

The system could be extended to acknowledge , warning arrangements , blocking back, obstruction removed etc

 

Feasible , too complex , am I mad ?

 

Any other ideas ?

 

Thanks

Edited October 2, 2017 by Junctionmad

[PaulRhB]

The only extra realism you create though is the audible part, the replica machine is only half a replica if you replace the key with a set of buttons that illuminate.

Obviously it's up to you what parts you like but it seems a lot of effort to then shortcut the main interface with the system

It wasn't uncommon to find a list of bell codes taped up in a box by newer Signalmen on duty but it certainly wasn't left up for the older hands or management to hide

[imt]

This may be of absolutely no interest, but I went one stage further and imitated a form of Tokenless Block.  But then I only have a station and a fiddle yard.  The main line is single (of course) and entry is controlled by signals interlocked with the (button and light simulation of) Tokenless Block instruments.  Signals are replaced by passing an IRDOT, so it all looks the thing - though no real railwayman would recognise it!  A photo of the layout diagram is attached.  Since there are only 2 block posts the whole thing is consolidated into one panel which sits between them for join operating when there are two or more operators.  If there were more block posts then there could be more control boards and the Tokenless Block lights would then be repeated on them.  The panel is single button route setting (just in case you wondered?)

Edited October 2, 2017 by imt

[imt]

I do hope I haven't clumsily traipsed over this thread.  My intention was merely to show that there were other methods of control without trying to simulate the issue of tokens - which I thought about and discarded. Since most often there is only me operating the layout I also looked for a way to do away with bells - since I would feel a little foolish signalling to myself.  The idea of using a computer so that you felt you were in the middle of a "proper" railway system had escaped me - but then I only have an end to end system with 2 control points (block posts).  The ideas are interesting and worthy of more discussion - please ignore my ignorant interruption and continue ..................... sorry.

Edited October 3, 2017 by imt

[Flying Pig]

It (OP) all sounds very logical and reminds me of Clecklewyke's "Digital Crispin" which was described in MRJ many moons ago. Given that you don't plan to use real world train staffs, it could probably all be done in software* and I'm wondering how much is already provided in available train control systems. Someone will no doubt know.

 

*or maybe you yearn to possess a 5 foot tall lump of red-painted cast iron, and who can blame you?

[imt]

I haven't heard about this "Digital Crispin" before (I don't think so anyway).  Is Cleklewyke around on this forum or can anybody give a reference so I can look at it please?

 

 

[Edit] Aaargh! now who feels a twit - it's Peter Denny's "Digital Crispin" for when his son was otherwise engaged!  Is there a proper description?  I have the book , but it isn't explicit.

Edited October 3, 2017 by imt

[Flying Pig]

Clecklewyke is indeed a current RMweb user. His Digital Crispin was inspired by Peter Denny's original but was created as a computer program for Clecklewyke's old Bradford North Western layout. It worked through block bells and instruments to control traffic between a fiddle yard and terminus.

 

The original Automatic Crispin was an electromechanical device of great wondrousness, like a cross between a player piano and a twin-tub washing mashine, but with trains. It may still exist with the rest of the layout (the curator of which also posts on RMweb).

[Junctionmad]

The only extra realism you create though is the audible part, the replica machine is only half a replica if you replace the key with a set of buttons that illuminate.

Obviously it's up to you what parts you like but it seems a lot of effort to then shortcut the main interface with the system

It wasn't uncommon to find a list of bell codes taped up in a box by newer Signalmen on duty but it certainly wasn't left up for the older hands or management to hide

Well of course , all I can simulate is the bell sequence , since I can't do much else , that's true

 

To the other post , I looked at tokenless block , but it doesn't use bells

 

And yes I have a web and Thompson ETS ( which I hope to restore ) , but that's a different story

[PaulRhB]

All I meant was why have a one touch button rather than make a striker and hit the code as though you were the Signalman?

Is it because it's in reality a simple switch selection that tells the computer what to respond with or does pressing the switch create an actual bell code pulse?

[Junctionmad]

All I meant was why have a one touch button rather than make a striker and hit the code as though you were the Signalman?

Is it because it's in reality a simple switch selection that tells the computer what to respond with or does pressing the switch create an actual bell code pulse?

 

the computer , a raspberry pi, would be programmed to detect any key strokes and to detect the bell sequences , so in theory the software could act on any bell sequence . the simulated W&T marines would have a conventional striker to send bell signals etc 

 

There idea behind the " one touch " buttons, was to speed up the common trains sequences , as this station has five ETS instruments and the load on little old me , who is also the driver could get rather extensive.  Hence the quick press button idea for common bell sequences , especially so at exhibitions when a fairly extensive running sessions are planned 

Edited October 4, 2017 by Junctionmad

[RailWest]

>>>>this station had five Webb and Thompson machines...

 

From a prototype perspective I'm wondering how that was done, as 'usually' there were only 4 different ETS configurations (A-D), tho' I have heard rumours that an E and possibly F did exist and would have been feasible.

[Junctionmad]

>>>>this station had five Webb and Thompson machines...

 

From a prototype perspective I'm wondering how that was done, as 'usually' there were only 4 different ETS configurations (A-D), tho' I have heard rumours that an E and possibly F did exist and would have been feasible.

 

one was a full sized machine, the others were miniatures 

[RailWest]

one was a full sized machine, the others were miniatures 

Ah, that would explain the confusion. In my experience the W&T epithet is usually reserved for the 'large' ETS, the METS being a RSC invention.

[Junctionmad]

Ah, that would explain the confusion. In my experience the W&T epithet is usually reserved for the 'large' ETS, the METS being a RSC invention.

 

while yes , RSC themselves referred to it as a Webb and Thompson Miniature Machine 

 

"

Control of Traffic on Railways by the Webb-Thompson Miniature Train Staff and Auxiliary Apparatus" railway signal company 

[The Johnster]

Cwmdimbath is worked by ETB, but not in any physical, tangible, electronic or electromechanical way; the whole thing only exists in the ruinous and febrile (sorry, I've been looking for an excuse to use 'febrile' all day) fastnesses of the mortal remains of my imagination.  As traffic is light and operation fairly straightforward, this is ok.  Tokens are (imaginarily) issued to trains which need to occupy the section, which includes an (imaginary) ground frame to access the colliery, inside which trains can be 'locked out' of the system until their crew insert their token into the machine at the ground frame and the signalman at Cwmdimbath, in accord with the one at the Junction and having no other tokens issued, switches them back into the system.

 

In fact, quite a lot of the operation of Cwmdimbath takes place nowhere else except the aforementioned febrile fastnesses, and is none the worse or less realistic for that!

[Junctionmad]

Cwmdimbath is worked by ETB, but not in any physical, tangible, electronic or electromechanical way; the whole thing only exists in the ruinous and febrile (sorry, I've been looking for an excuse to use 'febrile' all day) fastnesses of the mortal remains of my imagination. As traffic is light and operation fairly straightforward, this is ok. Tokens are (imaginarily) issued to trains which need to occupy the section, which includes an (imaginary) ground frame to access the colliery, inside which trains can be 'locked out' of the system until their crew insert their token into the machine at the ground frame and the signalman at Cwmdimbath, in accord with the one at the Junction and having no other tokens issued, switches them back into the system.

 

In fact, quite a lot of the operation of Cwmdimbath takes place nowhere else except the aforementioned febrile fastnesses, and is none the worse or less realistic for that!

Believe you me, given the progress on my layout , I need to use my imagination a lot at present . Never mind ETS or ETB. !!

[peach james]

I do box & bell codes on Long Marton, using mostly Digitrax (but some other !) bits to do it.  It's only a single signal box on a double track mainline, so no tokens for me.  I would try and actually incorporate a tablet if I was modeling somewhere like that- it means I can run LM as either the signalman, or as a engine driver.  (or, if I every get around to it, and a team of operators like oh, say my two boys, then it can be done as both...).  I'm using Railroad & Co 5.0.c.4 to program in, it is rather interestingly challenging to use what is available internal to the software to run the layout in the way _I_ want !.

 

https://flic.kr/s/aHsjySBT8C

 

James

[The Johnster]

I have considered the idea of actually physically representing the one token that is allowed to be out of the system with a token of some description, so that I am reminded visually that one is issued somewhere on the system and therefore to ask myself if another can be issued and under which circumstances. but have actually found that I can keep track of the imaginary ones adequately, even the ones 'locked out' in the colliery sidings.

 

But I doubt if I could keep up with any more complex system than this without some physical reminders!

[Junctionmad]

I have considered the idea of actually physically representing the one token that is allowed to be out of the system with a token of some description, so that I am reminded visually that one is issued somewhere on the system and therefore to ask myself if another can be issued and under which circumstances. but have actually found that I can keep track of the imaginary ones adequately, even the ones 'locked out' in the colliery sidings.

 

But I doubt if I could keep up with any more complex system than this without some physical reminders!

I find computers are very good at counting things and remembering things. So I'll use one.

[The Johnster]

I find computers are very good at counting things and remembering things. So I'll use one.

 

As I say, Cwmdimbath is an extremely simple railway, a tiny BLT with a run around loop, 2 sidings, and an imaginary coal mine offscene accessed by ground frame.  In many places, such a branch would be worked one engine in steam, but this is South Wales and traffic is too intense for that.  It is based on the real operation of Abergwynfi which was an even simpler layout, though the colliery branch was not accessed by ground frame but from the station box.  ETB is essential to cope with this volume and variety of traffic.  But there is hardly any railway to remember what you have (imaginarily) issued tokens for, and I have no need for visual or electronic reminders...

 

But any more complication in the operation would put the thing into a different league, and require a rethink!

Edited October 16, 2017 by The Johnster

[dunnyrail]

I have this concept in my head of a Block Bell and Block Instrument system on an iPad. Essentially the Instrument on screen would look like the real thing and the changes from Line Blocked, Line Clear and Train in Line would be carried out in the correct order with a Digital Knob that would essentially have 3 button locations. The Bell Tapper would be another that would look very like a real tapper. Options given by the iPad would be to have at least 4 or just 1 systems in the screen or multiple screens. This would then give Terminus to rest of the world single or double track. Or perhaps an intermediate Station with Block Sections either side. Link to another iPad by WiFi or just the iPad answering you with Train Out Of Section after a programmed break. Offering the next inbound train from the iPad with single Operation could perhaps be by a button that set up the process of offering a train of perhaps a background schedule/Timetable. Clearly this is all a little wooley at the moment, but a youngster who is doing the signalling for a Miniature Railway that I am involved with appears to see no difficulties with the basis of what I would like.

 

Comments welcome.

JonD

[imt]

I have this concept in my head of a Block Bell and Block Instrument system on an iPad. ..................

 

Comments welcome.

JonD

 

I got intrigued by something similar (see post #3 above).  I looked at programming solutions, and thought hang on that's expensive.  What I used were a couple of Programmable Logic Controllers from NCE (£38 each - they call them Mini-Panels or even Programmable Throttles - even less descriptive and helpful), two programmable relays from Uhlenbrock and a TrainTech LFX module for the lights. Those plus a few lights and switches made up a control system for Tokenless Block (plus a One Button Route Controller).  Now I haven't done the logic, but I don't see the problem in theory of making it a full Block system any more than the bright lad talking about using an expensive hand held general purpose computer with a sexy display at £340 each.

 

Now I appreciate that what I did was idiosyncratic, but it wasn't (that) expensive - maybe £100 in total.  The switches and light controllers for the points control and signal mimics cost a good deal more - nearer £300.

 

Now if there was a discernible market (and there may well be) your idea is a solution that those who don't use NCE gear and have iPads/iPhones etc available.  Again (in theory) since the NCE stuff only exports DCC commands it should be possible to link it to any other manufacturers system.  There may be more than one way to get where you want to be.

 

I really would like to hear how you get on with this and where it goes.  If you don't want to post it then PM me.  Good luck - happy to help if anything I have tried could be useful.

Edited October 16, 2017 by imt

[Junctionmad]

I do hope I haven't clumsily traipsed over this thread. My intention was merely to show that there were other methods of control without trying to simulate the issue of tokens - which I thought about and discarded. Since most often there is only me operating the layout I also looked for a way to do away with bells - since I would feel a little foolish signalling to myself. The idea of using a computer so that you felt you were in the middle of a "proper" railway system had escaped me - but then I only have an end to end system with 2 control points (block posts). The ideas are interesting and worthy of more discussion - please ignore my ignorant interruption and continue ..................... sorry.

Yes, for me , the key simulation is to exchange bell signals to represent the 5 signal cabins that connect to my box. Tokenless block " avoids" that issue , which , to me , is the whole point, the actual prevention of multiple trains per block not being of any consequence on a model railway

 

The issue is how to make it practical on a one man operated layout.

 

In my case the fiddle yard will have a computer controlled " dispatcher " , essentially following a preprogrammed sequence of preset train configurations ( for exhibitions , this will be supplemented by a fiddle yard " aid to the computer " person. ) hence the fiddle yard computer can easily generate bell signals as appropriate and on receiving " is line clear " can dispatch the appropriate train , this will even work in " roundy-roundy " mode where the same train is merely dispatched.

 

I also perceived that a semi-auto mode could also operate, where , once a route is setup, and the signals cleared ( mine is a lever frame ) , " my " box could auto respond to " is line clear " bells and equally generate " is line clear " requests to the " next " box , while this means bells after signals , rather then before , it does facilitate a " watching trains run by" mode of operation ,typical of exhibitions

 

Again my thought processes hinge around the operator workload more then anything else

Edited October 20, 2017 by Junctionmad