5BarVT

Back in the early 80s, sand traffic was routed off the ECML onto the GN/GE route between Doncaster and Peterborough because leaking sand was causing too much delay on the main line. (Got into the clamp lock point mechanisms and ground them away til they failed.) Paul.

No help here, but those sound like the problems i have had, so thanks for the heads up on where to go looking. Paul.

More thinking aloud then! Really off the wall (and I’d want some input from other engineers and operators to confirm I’m not raving . . .) operate the loop trap off the FPL lever, just leaving three ends on the point lever. Or, more conventional, operate the siding traps off a separate lever and probably the single hand point too. (Risk management - don’t want a guard/shunter forgetting and either running through traps after just swinging the hand points, or dropping off on mis set hand points after just operating the traps.) i.e. for modelling purposes, an extra lever on the GF. Paul.

Electric token M’head to Bourne End. That released the GF at Bourne End which in turn released the staff for Bourne End to Marlow. With the train shut in to the Marlow section the token could be handed back and another train run down to Bourne End. That used to be the peak operation, off peak one train down to Marlow and all the way back. Paul.

First one I’ve seen with the branding on. Is it just the end cars with all the others still white? Paul.

Technically, yes. With a trained signalman (in those days) and not too far from the box, no problem. But with a guard, even if they had more practice back in those days, I’m less sure. The GF would be right on top of the points, so not a desperately long run, but still not convinced. I’m currently about 48 1/2 years ago reading the Oxford Techs fault book: Radley GF O.O.O. Guard instructed in use of ground frame. . . . But as well as keeping the signalling as simple as possible, the pway should also be the minimum required. Is there a need to both sand sidings to be accessed from the running line? Making the slip two single ends (or a Barry slip if you must), saves one of the traps. A bit more simplification could get it down to one trap. Empties in the exchange road. ES&T Propel fulls down onto empties, shunt out to 2nd siding, shunt fulls to exchange, back onto empties and take away. Likewise, the BR train - down into loop, run round and brake into platform (never shunt with a brake, spills the tea, spoils the fire) collect fulls into platform with brake, empties into exchange siding, back onto train in platform and away. Obviously, not all achieved in one session. And I’m pleased that your shunting timetable doesn’t start until the passenger is back down at Berwick. Paul.

Some may say that, I couldn’t possibly comment! Paul.

As far as I know NSKT was a BR invention, and not that early. Shut in ground frames with an intermediate instrument were about earlier I think, but my assumption is that there would have been a signalman at each end. This century we did something clever at Stranraer to permit staff working most of the time but token working when two trains needed to be down there at the same time - that did require the box to be staffed for one shift a week. Thinking ‘out loud’, I could envisage a staff released by one lever at Berwick (for the EMU) (could be a mechanical release) interlocked with a separate lever for the shut in staff (released electrically). Each reverse to release the staff and requiring staff in to be normalised. The clever bit is allowing the release lever for the ‘shut in’ staff to be normalised if the staff was locked in at the Cuckmere end. From the guards point of view, this arrangement is very similar to a normal shut in GF, except that the staff is received from the signaller at Berwick and returned there later, but the GF operation is no different. Having seen examples of clever stuff that SR engineers did, this seems well within the sort of things they might have tried. Paul.

There is a ZN218.6 and a ZN218.4.2 and they are not the same (to do with whether the extra 2 outputs are logic level or not (‘12V’?). So I would imagine that the RoS is similar. I haven’t managed to get all the lights to work on my SPCs and I suspect this might be something to do with it. Paul.

And to which service do you propose to allocate this loco? Paul.

It was an Irn Bru advert mounted on the wall of (I think) Caledonian Chambers (part of Central Station) facing up Renfield St. in my time, it was a large clock with blue hands and orange numerals (and some Irn Bru advertising). Very useful if you were running down Renfield St a bit tight for a train! Internet searches reveal previous incarnations of the advert, but I haven’t found one of the clock. After privatisation it was taken down, because (allegedly) no-one knew who could authorise it to remain. (I suspect the wall was ScotRail in Caley Chambers and the roof beneath it was whoever owned Central Hotel.). Strangely, it seemed no bother to find out the ownership to effect a new electronic advertising sign in its place . . . Paul.

Not the right station for the Irn Bru clock (mores the pity!!). Paul.

Nicely done. I rather like it. Paul.

Thank you - should have gone to . . . Now I look properly I can see that the shield is fixed to the post not the arm. I wonder if it’s the same Annett as in GF release instruments. Yes, a plate in place of the green glass. Paul.

I’ve just lost half an hour of my life. And really enjoyed it! Paul.

Usually in conjunction with a colour light head for Y (YY) G at the fringes of a colourlight area. The Southern were particularly fond of that fringing arrangement. Perhaps that part is yet to come. Paul. See below for correct explanation!

Agreed. Paul.

Potentially try a topic in the DCC Help forum to see if anyone else has solved the problem, or can at least advise on output pins. Paul. Just seen that you have already asked on the 18100 topic.

Have you another (make) of decoder to try? Would confirm its decoder not loco, though working on DC is reasonably conclusive. Or, paracetamol, hot damp towel and the ESU manual . . . Never used ESU, but some of my modelling colleagues swear by them. Manual is indeed comprehensive (read incomprehensible). Do you know which outputs drive which lamps (as a start to whether function mapping is the issue). Paul.

Do you need that many volts for O gauge? :-) Paul.

That’s a fine piece of instrumentation on the O gauge shelf. Paul.

If you have the extra sidings within the reversing section, you need to make sure that you never (even inadvertently) have a train coming into the section from both ends at the same time. (Also applies without points in there but much less likely to happen as it’s “obvious” there is nowhere to go.) If you shorten the section to keep the points out of it then train length becomes an issue. If your only vehicles with power connections to the wheels are locos then you might get away with it, but metal wheels running through joints could still touch both together. If you have coach lighting etc you could end up with the loco at the front bridging one gap and a lighting compatible coach (even if not fitted with lights) bridging the other. My inclination would be to go for the longer section and manage the two trains issue. Paul.

Ahh, memories! I used to cycle old railway lines. Fine when they have a proper surface or in dry weather, but I have had the “all jammed solid under the mudguards” experience. Paul.

Most interesting to see a view showing how close everything was. Many years spent standing on that low level platform at c.17:25 to 17:32 when you could hear the DMU engines on the platforms above so I knew there wasn’t much gap, but nice to see it confirmed photographically. Also a revelation that 6&7 weren’t always as long as 2-5. And following the Queen St upgrade, they are shorter once more as 2-5 have been lengthened by a coach length. Paul.

Fair weather cyclist? Or do you go for the ‘brown line up the back of the jacket’ look? I used to be an any weather cyclist, now I just cart mudguards around as extra weight! Paul.