Inspired by Crianlarich

[New Haven Neil]

Now look what you've started...he's really got the idea though.

 

 

But on a serious note, those signals are very nice, and the concept of sitting there 'trainspotting' as they go by is rather enticing.  If only I had a continuous run....

[BoD]

As long as you keep him off the Doom Bar before he starts.

 

For a free/donate-if-you-like piece of software Rocrail is very impressive and is continually under development. For example, Suzie, of this parish, created symbols for British style semaphore signals and they were included in an update. I suspect I will use each of the three modes at one time or another.

[Jonsie66]

Hi Warren,

 

Great to see you have started on your loft layout! If it is anywhere near the standards of BOD then I know it is going to be a stunner! 

Looking forward to more updates, keep up the good work.

 

Cheers, 

 

James. 

[BoD]

Hi James. Great to hear from you again.

 

Yes, I finally retired and have started 'the big one'. Whether or not I ever finish it..... who can tell... but I'm certainly enjoying doing it.

If ever I get near finished you will have to pay another visit.

[Jonsie66]

Hi James. Great to hear from you again.

 

Yes, I finally retired and have started 'the big one'. Whether or not I ever finish it..... who can tell... but I'm certainly enjoying doing it.

If ever I get near finished you will have to pay another visit.

Yes totally, been a long time! Will have to bring along my Large Logo 4s to have a play.

[BoD]

I have just spent a couple of hours or so making up 3-link couplings. Well, it was actually about 15 minutes making up couplings and the rest of the time searching the floor for missing links.

 

I am seriously beginning to wonder if there comes a time in life when the cosmetic failings of tension lock couplings start to be outweighed by their convenience.  I also suspect that operating three links is going to get more challenging with each year that goes by. 

 

I have bought a trial pack of Sprat and Winkle couplings to see if they offer some sort of compromise.  I know that they can be operated automatically but I have also seen them uncoupled using a blunt implement to apply light downward pressure from above.  It appears much less of a fuss that uncoupling and coupling three links.

 

Any thoughts?

[Dave John]

I sympathise BoD, I too decided that using 3 link on a day to day basis was becoming impractical. 

 

I ended up using 3 link within coaching stock or short 4 wagon rakes and Alex Jackson couplings modified for use with moving magnets under the board as a working alternative. I now find I can do the majority of coupling /uncoupling without the hand going anywhere near.

 

I don't want to hijack your thread with my stuff; I have documented my experiences on my blog, together with some rough video.

[BoD]

That is interesting Dave. I hadn't seen that type of coupling before. I may experiment with them if I don't like the Sprat and Winkle. Like you I am minded to keep some fixed rakes with three links and run these as through trains without any shunting. Trains with wagons to be shunted will probably end up with something easier to use. I wouldn't try to mix the two, I don't think that would look right at all.

[BoD]

I created a quick and simple jig to help me with the Sprat and Winkle couplings and I must admit I was pleasantly surprised at how straightforward they were to put together.

 

 

 

I was also surprised at how easily they were to fit to some Bachmann wagons.  In this instance it was some of their 12T vans.  Once I had unscrewed and removed the coupling fixings and created a recess for the staple that allows the plate to lie flush,  the Sprat and Winkle base plate fitted like a glove. Some design clever has gone into this from either Bachmann, Messes Sprat and Winkle or Andrew at Wizard Models. I suspect some other types of wagon may take a bit more work, but not much.  Good news is that they work exactly as claimed and automatic coupling and uncoupling  is very easy to carry out.  If the wagons aren't located over a magnet a gentle prod with the hook I use for the three link couplings uncouples them. It is much, much easier than working with the three links.

 

I am now weighing up the pros and cons which boils down to ease of use against their appearance, which whilst an improvement over tension lock couplings is, obviously, not as good as the three link couplings.  I suspect that as I get older and eyes deteriorate the ease of use will become increasingly useful whilst their appearance will become less noticeable.  I feel they are already reasonably acceptable at 'normal viewing distance'. 

 

I think it likely that I will end up with a mix of through freights that use three link couplings and don't change formation once assembled and trains made up of stock with Sprat and Winkle with which I can shunt the goods sidings and branch station.

 

[newbryford]

Locos - especially diesels can be a little tricky to fit S&W to as they often have little room to put the hook counterbalance. Then again, you only need to fit loops to the locos if you are not doing any double heading.

 

Cheers,

Mick

[BoD]

Being able to fit just a loop to locos was one of the reasons I considered Sprat and Winkle.  As far as I can see the loop itself can be relatively unobtrusive compared to some other methods, allowing you to fit full buffer beam details. (I'm talking mostly diesel here).  I was also looking at the possibility of using the loop to couple to the hook on a tension lock coupling and having these at the end of rakes of coaches. Has anyone tried this?  Passenger trains will be not change their consist very often if at all.  That would leave me to identify locos that would be used on freight workings and fit just loops to both ends of them. 

 

I am also busy trying to work logically through freight wagons/trains seeing if I can get away with most wagons having a hook at just one end but still allowing shunting flexibility.  Some wagons would need to have hooks at both ends but I think most could do without.

Edited December 24, 2017 by BoD

[young37215]

Being able to fit just a loop to locos was one of the reasons I considered Sprat and Winkle.  As far as I can see the loop itself can be relatively unobtrusive compared to some other methods, allowing you to fit full buffer beam details. (I'm talking mostly diesel here).  I was also looking at the possibility of using the loop to couple to the hook on a tension lock coupling and having these at the end of rakes of coaches. Has anyone tried this?  Passenger trains will be not change their consist very often if at all.  That would leave me to identify locos that would be used on freight workings and fit just loops to both ends of them. 

 

I am also busy trying to work logically through freight wagons/trains seeing if I can get away with most wagons having a hook at just one end but still allowing shunting flexibility.  Some wagons would need to have hooks at both ends but I think most could do without.

 

I have replaced the tension locks on most of my loco fleet with loops made from 0.8mm brass. As you have identified, this allows detailing of the bufferbeams although space is still tight. Invariably I end up having to forgo the steam heat boiler pipe. The link below shows one of my locos as a before and after.

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1892/entry-16760-second-37-detailing-completed/

 

The other negative I have found is when shunting on curved track where I have suffered many derailments. From what I can see this is due to the buffers which, absent the tension lock, actually perform as they do in real life but cannot cope with the curvature and lock together. As yet I have not found a solution to this issue; fortunately my new layout has very few curved sidings!

[meanach]

Before I retired I didn’t have much spare time but did start building ‘in preparation’ for this layout.  One of the things I built were the signals I will be using. The first one is the small signal near the former engine shed. There are three of the larger signals for the three approaches and there is of course the junction signal.  Close up photos can be cruel. Some tweaking needed methinks. 

 

signal 1 lowres.jpg

 

signal 5 Lowres.jpg

 

signal 2 Lowres.jpg

 

 

[media]

]

Beautiful signals . Look spot on ! If I could build them that well I'd not have put RETB boards up!

[BoD]

Beautiful signals . Look spot on ! If I could build them that well I'd not have put RETB boards up!

 

 

I will make you some signals if you will come and do some of your beautiful scenery for me.

[meanach]

I will make you some signals if you will come and do some of your beautiful scenery for me.

That sounds like a deal ! I really enjoy making the scenery . It’s only polystyrene blocks which I then shape with aluminium car repair foil then covered in plaster bandage. A spray with track dirt then Hornby turf , layers of static grass and then start planting the trees ! Some bought , some made using sea moss covered with glue and dipped a few times in scatter. The rock faces are chopped up woodland scenics plaster moulds .

 

Cheers , Ian .

[PaulT]

From the very beginning I decided that I would use computer controlled DCC to operate the layout.  This was not because I needed to but because I could.  Having downloaded and had a play with RocRail in virtual mode I thought I would enjoy doing it.  I chose RocRail because a) it was free (they do ask for donations but they are voluntary) and b) it seemed to do what I wanted it to do.

Anyway, this week it has all been tested and all works as I had hoped. Today for the first time I had a full fiddle yard and the whole thing running automatically without any problem.  Yay, as they say.

 

I would be interested in any comments  or try to answer any questions anyone might have.

I have only just reached your thread so my question fits your posts of last Autumn.

My pre-grouping British layout will have part automation and will use free software to control it.

The electronics will be by MERG for flexibility and low-cost.

I am having trouble choosing between JMRI and Rocrail as both have pros & cons.

 

I would value input from you and others who have made the comparison and can tell us the reasons for whichever one of those two they chose

[Regularity]

You might want to look at this thread in the DCC part of the forum:

jmri-to-control-dcc-layout-anyone-using-it

Edited February 5, 2018 by Regularity

[BoD]

PaulT:  I'm afraid I can't offer you much in the way of helping you to choose.  Whilst I use JMRI's decoder pro I plumped straight for Rocrail rather than looking at alternatives.  The reason I did this was that, after reading the documentation and downloading and 'playing about' with it a little bit, I found it reasonably easy to use and that it did exactly what I wanted it to.  It gave me a screen mimic of my layout and allowed me to choose between fully manual, semi automatic and fully automatic operation.  It could automatically run sections of the layout or trains whilst I could operate other sections or drive the trains it wasn't operating.

 

If you have any specific questions regarding Rocrail I may be able to help.

 

I'm sure that these basic facilities will be offered by all the other programs too and I wish you well in your decision making.

[young37215]

Beautiful signals . Look spot on ! If I could build them that well I'd not have put RETB boards up!

 

I share Meanach's view on the quality of the semaphores as I too am struggling to find a way to construct the variety that I require for my WHL layout. I feel confident that I can automate them using servos and my Megapoints system but I am a long way away from working out how to source the actual semaphores and what size they need to be. Please share a little more detail about your signals, I am guessing they are MSE's but that is as far as I can work out.

 

Rob

[BoD]

Hi Rob.

I’ve just had a look through my photographs and normally I take shots of work in progress but for some reason I don’t seem to have done so here.  However I can describe roughly what I did and which parts I used to achieve the look. 

I know people always say this, but honestly, it’s not too difficult once you get into it.  I had no experience of such things but quickly learned the techniques and was surprised at the results.  Have a go! It really is amazing what a difference appropriate signals make to a model, in my opinion.

You are correct in assuming it is MSE parts.  The signal arms and other post fittings came from their upper quadrant signal parts kit.  The posts were made from etches of their Stevens & Co Lattice posts and dolls.  The platform for the bracket signal was made from some generic parts I had acquired over time.   I also purchased brass ladders and the appropriate finials from them.

If you look online at MSE’s instructions for a complete kit they are quite comprehensive.  They can be downloaded.  I also found ‘Constructing and Operating Semaphore Signals’ by Mick Nicholson a useful general introduction to the techniques.

As to the building I found that the most difficult part was folding and soldering the lattice post itself. Although with care and a bit practice it gets easier.  Tinning the edges and using the jigs provided makes the soldering fairly straight forward.  If you buy the tallest of the MSE posts you can cut it down to the required height.  I did this just by counting the lattice diamonds on photogaphs rather than using actual measurements.

The arms are quite easy to make being mostly a cut out from the etch job. Although you do need to solder a piece of brass rod to act as the joint to the arm.  The spectacle glass can be bought from MSE and although fiddly is not difficult to fit. A different signal but you can see the idea.

The signal arms are hinged using brass tube soldered onto the signal post. Other features such as the lamp bracket are also soldered on.  The various methods are seen in this photo although the post is a newer round type the principles are the same.

 

It looks a bit of a mess but does tidy up quite well.

The brackets, counterweights and cranks are all included on the etches above and can be folded quite easily.   At this point you have a quite reasonable representation of your prototype. If you want it working it only then takes some nickel silver/brass wire bent at right angles to connect your signal arms, cranks if any, and counterweights.

 

The lights were created with the small surface mound LEDs which I already had some of for other lighting projects. 

Wiring was done using armature winding wire which can easily be fed inside the lattice post and is almost invisible once painted.

 

As I have said, if I can do it anyone can and I would strongly suggest buying a complete signal kit from MSE and having a go.  The LMS Upper Quadrant Lattice Post Signal Kit would be a good starting point as it comes with suitable finials and all other parts.  If you do have a go and have any problems there is a whole section of the forum dedicated to signals with some very talented modellers contributing there,  or I will help where I can.

 

[young37215]

Wow, what a comprehensive reply; thank you.

 

I must confess that the thought of building MSE signal kits fills me with trepidation. I managed to buy several of their ready made LNER lattice signals a few years back where the excellent standard of the construction simply compounded my fears. Nevertheless I guess I need to have a go, the worst I can do is trash a kit! 

 

Virtually all of the signals I need for my WHL4 layout are tall ones where I have spent many hours pondering how to measure the height without any success. Your comment on counting the lattices is a simple and obvious solution (provided I can find sufficiently detailed pictures!) 

 

Thanks again, I really appreciate the time and effort taken to explain what you have done. 

[BoD]

Glad to be of help. 

 

Their kits aren't expensive and you probably have the necessary tools to hand.  As you say, nothing to lose.

Counting the lattices is a lot easier than counting bricks - which is why all of my buildings and layouts end with -ish these days.

[Barry O]

How is the layout progressing BoD?

Baz

[BoD]

On 11/03/2019 at 07:54, Barry O said:

How is the layout progressing BoD?

Baz

 

 

Sorry I missed that Baz and <red face> I haven’t looked at my own topic for a while.

 

Things are coming on really well.  Since last posts I have, in no particular order, .....

 

Laid the track for the branch line terminus station, which I suppose in real life represents the Oban branch but isn’t.

Incorporated the above and it’s signalling into the computer control.

Built and included a viaduct for the above.

Scratch built many of the buildings and structures.  The main layout is still fairly bare but I have many pieces of the jigsaw and hopefully it will all fall into place, just like that, pah!

Renumbered and weathered lots of stock.

Done lots of stuff not related to railway modelling.

 

i really must take some photos and post progress.

 

[Barry O]

Yes, some photos would be nice.

Baz