Titanius Anglesmith

Wickham Bishops on the Great Eastern. Access to the platform from the station building was by crossing the goods siding

Kynochtown was walking distance from the works. The carriages were bought for the Corringham Light Railway service between Kynochtown and Corringham (where I grew up). The terraces nearest to Corringham station were built by Kynochs though. Kynochtown was eventually demolished (by then renamed Coryton) to make way for expansion of the Mobil refinery, which was built adjacent to the site of the Kynochs works. Apparently the Kynochtown / Coryton platform still exists but is not accessible to the public.

The LT&SR wagons were probably built for traffic from the Kynochs munitions factory near Shell Haven.

What’s an average modeller? I found this discussion quite interesting, I must be above average. Slightly more seriously, I was contacted a few months back by a modeller who wanted my advice on how to programme an Arduino to receive and issue bell codes. So this must be relevant to someone. edit: multiple replies beat me to it

Just last weekend I wired up the same PWM controller to a new motor on SWMBO’s Unimat lathe. It never occurred to me to use one for model railway control. I’d be very interested to know how it performs compared to a traditional variable voltage controller. I’ve never been 100% satisfied with my Gaugemaster Combi as some of my locos don’t seem to agree with it.

In Peter Kay’s The LT&SR series, there’s a photo, taken in 1959, clearly showing an LOS board on the bi-directional line between Grays and West Thurrock Junction….

Just the goods yard, or was it a public road? The layout is very similar to a station local to me, except that the level crossing was at the other end (where the bridge is here. And it was a public road)

I don’t disagree with anything you just said, but the original layout at Fenchurch St had a release road between two of the platform roads, and after remodelling in the 20s (or 30s?) it still had a release crossover between the two middle roads :)

Yes there were, eg 20’s lever at West Thurrock Junction https://signalbox.org/~SBdiagram.php?id= 1221

I'm inclined to agree. I know of course that there were many single-track BLTs (and practical and thematic reasons for modelling one), but I get the impression that some modellers think that all termini were either Ashburton or Paddington, with no variation in between. I certainly feel that double-track termini are under-represented, though I acknowledge again that single track layouts have their advantages.

Southend had a kickback goods yard https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=51.53752&lon=0.71039&layers=170&b=1 Although after 1884 it became a through station, many services still terminated there. The signalling allowed for arrivals and reversals at all platforms except for the up-through. So a Minories with kickback yard seems perfectly justifiable to me.

I wasn’t suggesting that you was, sorry if I gave that impression.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I've walked more miles of track than I care to think about, but I'm not offended by OO gauge.

No. Many (even most?) double track termini had conventionally laid out goods yards accessed by a trailing point. Bromley North for example, or Windsor & Eton. The original Southend station had the goods yard on the arrivals side, and shunting was via the departure line blocking both roads (not an unusual arrangement). When it was remodelled in 1894 there were goods sidings on both sides of the line, again both shunted from the departure line blocking both roads. When the station was remodelled again in 1915 the goods yard was wholly on the arrivals side, accessed only from a kickback very similar to your recent plan. Uxbridge Vine St had one of the goods connections via a facing point on the arrivals line, but the interlocking would only allow reversing moves across it from the departures line.

I like that a lot 👍

The coal pens at Uxbridge Vine St (GWR!) backed up to the siding, but it looks like there was enough space to swing the door fully open, so it wouldn't be propped up by the back of the pen. https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW041117

Do you have a layout thread? My wife is from Heybridge and her father was an apprentice at Bentalls

Upminster in 1934, with what looks to me like coal bins that back up to the siding, opposite the goods shed https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW043925 Bromley North, 1929. Coal bins backed up to a siding, but opposite another siding https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW028346 Uxbridge Vine St, 1933. Coal bins backed up to the siding https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW041117

I’ve been on track circuit failures on the real thing where metallic dust has bridged across 12mm of insulated T-piece. It doesn’t take much. If the rails have ever been cleaned with a track rubber or other abrasive, that can drop dust / filings into the joint. I took it as a given that if a reed switch was being used then the links on the bottom of the points would have been cut, and the switch rails bonded directly to the stock rails. You’re right of course, they may not have been.

It’s an insulated joiner. Its only purpose in life (apart from mechanically joining the rails, obviously) is to separate opposite polarities. If it never had opposite polarities across it, there would be no need for it to be insulated. >>edit- unless it’s the non-insulated joiner on the other rail that you’re talking about? << I think @Michael Hodgson has it right, a short with a small cross section developed at the insulated joint (perhaps due to rail expansion), and the heat from that short melted the joiner. The Reed switch, being the only current path to the frog, would have to carry that fault current and that’s probably what ruined the switch, not the other way round.

I can give one a try, but from what @AndyID has said it’s the current pulled on the supply lines that’s the issue, rather than the control method

Thank you for the suggestion, but I don’t have a issue with servos twitching on power up. What I do have a problem with, is the servos sometimes scrambling my internet router when they move, or when they power up (without moving or twitching).

Time for an update.... Despite my initial optimism I never fully got rid of this problem. As it's sporadic it's hard to pinpoint what steps are actually making a difference. While I was doing some other mods, I took the opportunity to rearrange the feed arrangements and connect all the servos to a dedicated busbar, itself fed fed directly from the +5v PSU via a twisted pair. The +5/ground legs to individual servos have mostly been shortened where possible and twisted together. Quite often the glitch occurs when I power the whole lot up. I've realised that in the "void setup" part of the code told all the servos to go to the correct positions immediately. I don't know if this is causing a problem as all the servos are usually in their correct positions to start with, so don't need to move. I will try removing that bit of code (commenting it out) to see if it does make a difference. Another idea I'm toying with is driving the servo busbar via a transistor so that it can be turned on and off via the arduino only when required. The idea being it will remove the separate problem of servo twitch whenever certain locos go past, but obviously it may exacerbate any potential problem caused by the servo power-up surge. I haven't tried the capacitor yet, or the 3x AA batteries. I thought I had some in the bits & bobs box but apparently not. This is something else that I still need to try....

These are all excellent, food for thought! Thank you!

Thank you all for the excellent examples so far!