BobM Posted April 29, 2018 Author Share Posted April 29, 2018 (edited) I have modified the drawing to revert platform 5 to the goods yard area. I have numbered the traps so I can comment easier. traps.jpg 1. You have it so OK. 2A. redundant as the end of the Double slip shown as 2B acts as a trap. 3 and 4 redundant as internal within goods yard area. 5. trap is formed by the existing turnout. 6. Required to be added as you have shown. 7. You have it so OK. 8. Nothing to add as the trap formed by existing turnout. Regards Hi Keith thank you for your posting and kind assistance.....as I come to ballast these areas I will lift the unnecessary traps and insert sections of track as infill.....if I am reading your correctly I need to insert one at 6......and remove everything else except 1 and 7...? Regards Bob Edited April 29, 2018 by BobM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingsignalman Posted April 29, 2018 Share Posted April 29, 2018 Just to say I've redrawn my hasty diagram to make it clearer and to correct a few errors that occurred ( missing lever numbers and missing signals - I was tired, that's my excuse! ) and edited the post I made with it in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobM Posted April 29, 2018 Author Share Posted April 29, 2018 Just to say I've redrawn my hasty diagram to make it clearer and to correct a few errors that occurred ( missing lever numbers and missing signals - I was tired, that's my excuse! ) and edited the post I made with it in. Brilliant... Thank you... Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovenor Posted April 29, 2018 Share Posted April 29, 2018 (edited) Harlequin said,---I think what I've shown is largely in line with Keith's suggestions regarding traps except for the spurs between platforms 1 and 2 (Traps 7 & 8 by Keith's numbering). I think Keith is saying that neither of them is needed Keith was saying that both 7 and 8 are needed. (But don't have to be added because Bob had already provided them). Your diagram needs to be modified to provide this trapping. Regards Edited April 29, 2018 by Grovenor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovenor Posted April 29, 2018 Share Posted April 29, 2018 ..if I am reading your correctly I need to insert one at 6......and remove everything else except 1 and 7...? Regards Bob That would be correct. Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovenor Posted April 29, 2018 Share Posted April 29, 2018 Hi Keith.... So do appreciate the help here.... The line circled in green is no longer a passenger line only for goods use now....trapa.jpgRegardsBob Bob, I adjusted my advice in light of your statement in bold above, I note that some of your other advisors are still treating it as a passenger platform. I would recommend sticking to your decision to make it part of the goods yard. It simplifies the signalling quite a bit and , at least in my view 4 platforms is plenty for a single line terminus. Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingsignalman Posted April 29, 2018 Share Posted April 29, 2018 (edited) Following Grovenor's comments, here's my diagram amended to show Platform 5 as a goods only line. Photo taken on my phone so I hope its clear enough! Edited April 29, 2018 by flyingsignalman 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted April 29, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 29, 2018 (edited) Following Grovenor's comments, here's my diagram amended to show Platform 5 as a goods only line. 20180429_222426.jpg Hi FlyingSignalman (Keith), Thanks for the revised drawing but I'm not sure that you have drawn the track layout correctly. You show a direct route from the pilot loco spur into platform 2 but Bob's drawings and photos don't show that... Edited April 29, 2018 by Harlequin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobM Posted April 29, 2018 Author Share Posted April 29, 2018 Bob, I adjusted my advice in light of your statement in bold above, I note that some of your other advisors are still treating it as a passenger platform. I would recommend sticking to your decision to make it part of the goods yard. It simplifies the signalling quite a bit and , at least in my view 4 platforms is plenty for a single line terminus. Regards Hi.... Cheers..... I am perhaps more inclined to have it as a part a goods area yes... Regards always... Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingsignalman Posted April 29, 2018 Share Posted April 29, 2018 Hi FlyingSignalman (Keith), Thanks for the revised drawing but I'm not sure that you have drawn the track layout correctly. You show a direct route from the pilot loco spur into platform 2 but Bob's drawings and photos don't show that... Oops too many slips! Looks like another diagram to be done tomorrow! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted April 29, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 29, 2018 (edited) Here's my latest attempt: [Click to enlarge] Various tweaks and Platform 5 becomes a goods siding. Are the traps in the station correct now? What do the experts think about the traps in the carriage sidings (taken from Bob's drawing)? I suppose there should also be a trap before the line from the engine sheds joins the main line but that's your decision Bob, of course. (BTW: I'm aware that my slips don't show default routes yet. I hope I'll be able to fix that soon.) Edited April 29, 2018 by Harlequin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobM Posted April 30, 2018 Author Share Posted April 30, 2018 Hi Guys... This is brilliant work to observe and so much appreciated... Regards always... Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovenor Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 (edited) Here's my latest attempt: CambrianSt7.png [Click to enlarge] Various tweaks and Platform 5 becomes a goods siding. But needs to be trapped to protect the passenger line to platform 4, just reverse the lie of the point that is there. Are the traps in the station correct now? The loco spurs and the spurs between platforms 1 and 2 now Ok What do the experts think about the traps in the carriage sidings (taken from Bob's drawing)? I suppose there should also be a trap before the line from the engine sheds joins the main line but that's your decision Bob, of course. Carriage siding traps OK, engine sheds do need one. (BTW: I'm aware that my slips don't show default routes yet. I hope I'll be able to fix that soon.) Regards Edited April 30, 2018 by Grovenor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted April 30, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 30, 2018 Hi... With regards to the incorrect trap points..... To lift them I presume (thinking off the top of my head) I would need to saw through the fishplates at the rail joints unpin and then insert a short length of track to rejoin / fishplate together...? Regards Bob Just try pushing the fishplates to one side Bob - should be ok unless any adjacent sleepers by the rail joints are already firmly fixed down. Cambrian SB layout 002s.jpg Here is my quick sketch of the signalling required in my view. The goods yard frame has been ignored as I don't think it's required. The sketch is taken from your first diagram but I note from one of your later posts that what you call platform 5 is fenced off. I also think that the lines running in would have been a normal double track. I can only think of Bala to Bala Jcn that had a main line and a relief line on an otherwise single line railway. (Edited to provided a slightly less hasty diagram and to correct various errors I made! ) For simplicity i would suggest perhaps reducing the signalling to the standards I suggested earlier - entirely up to you of course Bob but considerable simplification would be possible if you went for post-war GWR standards (e.g no multiple ground discs) and some small/miniature arms replaced by discs if you were to do that. BTW your signalbox is now far too small for that size of track layout and would still be with some simplification! It would be much easier to signal as double track and once you put the other bit of the layout together with the station part things at the other end would be greatly simplified but it would mean that two platforms could only be used for departures. Here's version 4, with station approaches, carriage loop and loco facilities (again not fully shown in this diagram because I think they would not be signalled): CambrianSt4.png [Click to enlarge] I worked out a way to show the pilot loco spur double slip and that helped to compress things a bit. I think what I've shown is largely in line with Keith's suggestions regarding traps except for the spurs between platforms 1 and 2 (Traps 7 & 8 by Keith's numbering). I think Keith is saying that neither of them is needed and if I don't have to include them in the signalling diagram it would make life easier! But it's up to you... P.S. I've still shown Platform 5 as "passenger", not goods, because it has a direct connection to platforms 3 and 4 and it looks a lot like a parcels bay to me... Let me know what you want. If you know the name of the next station up the line I could show that. Similarly, if the overbridge has a name. Phil you need to alter the normal lie of the point from the spur/siding nearest to Platform 2 and you also need a trap for the sidings where they lead towards Platform 1. The lie of the ends in the slips is also incorrect for Western practice but that is a detail which can be sorted at any time before numbering is added. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted April 30, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 30, 2018 (edited) But needs to be trapped to protect the passenger line to platform 4, just reverse the lie of the point that is there. The loco spurs and the spurs between platforms 1 and 2 now Ok Carriage siding traps OK, engine sheds do need one. Regards Once the lie of the slips is corrected by Phil the engine shed will be provided with a trap point as the normal setting of the slip road will be towards the shed headshunt. And the headshunt will also be trapped out on to the single line by the other end of the slip connection from the shed towards the headshunt. The point ends would work as crossovers as shown in this sketch and the two ends of A will be closer together than shown on Phil's drawing if you go by Bob's original sketch. B and A act as traps for the two directions of movement off the shed/shed headshunt - now off for dinner. Sketch to follow after I've had my dinner Edited April 30, 2018 by The Stationmaster 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobM Posted April 30, 2018 Author Share Posted April 30, 2018 (edited) Hi Guys.... Thank you once more for the input....Stationmaster, is there something that I should consider altering within this area, before I steam ahead with it or should wait awhile....? I am prepared to lift some of the unnecessary trap points within the station area, as I can insert pieces of track to infill, although I do have limited experience (as you can see by the way I have obviously and so foolishly approached preparing this layout) but I willing to make an attempt to correct the howlers....if I can get away without some of them for the sake of my sanity then I may well have to adapt where necessary.... I am immensely grateful for all this assistance that is being posted here, please keep it coming as this process is not only giving me great heart to continue, it is a testament to the spirit of what rmweb is all about and all that are following this thread will also be taking note too... Once again thank you so much guys.... Regards always Bob Edited April 30, 2018 by BobM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted April 30, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 30, 2018 (edited) Here's version 9: Altered lie of points at end of what was platform 5 Added previously missing double slip into goods yard Added footbridge Set the lie of all the slips. Hopefully shown Mike's use of slips as traps for the shed and shed headshunt connections to the running lines. Bigger signal box ;-) Regarding the slips: Since the diagram uses quite thick lines the details got lost if I used the conventional representation so I have drawn them slightly differently to make the default route clearer and more consistent with the other turnout symbols (IMHO). Thinking it through, where line A crosses line B with a single slip at the crossing, although the two turnouts are independent, there are only two sensible combinations that can be set: 1. A Crossing B or 2. A Turning to B. So I've drawn my slips without allowing for the case where one turnout is set to cross and the other to turn. Similarly for double slips: There are four independent turnouts but only three sensible combinations: 1. B Turning to A, 2. A Crossing B or 3. A Turning to B. That seems logical but I guess in the real world there might be reasons to allow, or show on diagrams, other combinations even though they would lead to wheel flanges colliding with closed trailing point blades...? Expert advice needed, please! Edit: I made a start on point numbering, arbitrarily starting at 20 to leave some room at the left of the frame for signals but I will renumber everything later. (If only the drawing program could do that automatically!) Hmmm... I can already see some conflicts with what I was saying above about slip combinations but anyway the numbering should make discussion a bit easier. Edited May 1, 2018 by Harlequin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted May 1, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) During a very long, very boring conference call at work I was able to complete the initial point numbering. [Edit: Image removed to avoid confusion. I'll post a new one below.] Edited May 2, 2018 by Harlequin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted May 1, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 1, 2018 Here's version 9: CambrianSt9.png Altered lie of points at end of what was platform 5 Added previously missing double slip into goods yard Added footbridge Set the lie of all the slips. Hopefully shown Mike's use of slips as traps for the shed and shed headshunt connections to the running lines. Bigger signal box ;-) Regarding the slips: Since the diagram uses quite thick lines the details got lost if I used the conventional representation so I have drawn them slightly differently to make the default route clearer and more consistent with the other turnout symbols (IMHO). Thinking it through, where line A crosses line B with a single slip at the crossing, although the two turnouts are independent, there are only two sensible combinations that can be set: 1. A Crossing B or 2. A Turning to B. So I've drawn my slips without allowing for the case where one turnout is set to cross and the other to turn. Similarly for double slips: There are four independent turnouts but only three sensible combinations: 1. B Turning to A, 2. A Crossing B or 3. A Turning to B. That seems logical but I guess in the real world there might be reasons to allow, or show on diagrams, other combinations even though they would lead to wheel flanges colliding with closed trailing point blades...? Expert advice needed, please! Edit: I made a start on point numbering, arbitrarily starting at 20 to leave some room at the left of the frame for signals but I will renumber everything later. (If only the drawing program could do that automatically!) Hmmm... I can already see some conflicts with what I was saying above about slip combinations but anyway the numbering should make discussion a bit easier. The way A, B. C are shown on my sketch is the correct way of drawing it Phil. In the real world A would lock B, and B would therefore lock A (i.e. once you have pulled either of them the other can't be moved from normal). C would be released by B. Thus there is no way any move will come against points which are set against it once the signals are added on the engine shed lines as they would be locked in the same way as the points. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted May 1, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) Hi @Mike, How's this? The slip symbols are not conventional but hopefully show the lies exactly as your sketch now. Lever 21 operates a crossover as suggested even though the two affected elements are spaced out in the schematic. That's because I've straightened the curves in Bob's layout it out for the diagram. I'm sure that must happen on real-world diagrams too so hopefully this is acceptable. Edited May 2, 2018 by Harlequin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailWest Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 Some queries for Mike to comment on perhaps? 1 Ought not 66 to be worked by 62? 2. Could not 65 be a hand-point? 3. Should not the LH 49 be worked by 60 and 50 be worked by 49? 4. Ought there not to be a FPL on the LH 69? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobM Posted May 1, 2018 Author Share Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) Hi Guys.... Could I ask where on the layout which of my traps are correctly located....as I can then pluck up the courage to plan the removal these and the unnecessary ones in the goods area....and if possible insert the missing..? I may have to dispense with some though, if I cannot adapt what already exists...? Cheers Bob Edited .....Sorry I can see from the diagram the ones I have.....will study it closely.... my head has not been good today... Edited May 1, 2018 by BobM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingsignalman Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) After much re-drafting and many gallons of Tippex later ( hmm, these fumes smell good.......!) here is my latest attempt at the terminus station - I hope it's right! I've only shown the section to the right of the bridge as I feel the section to the left should have it's own signal box; especially if you take the view that the bridge could represent a good quarter to half mile or so of track. Anyway here's my go at the Loco shed SB. Finally (slightly tongue in cheek) is my idea for a "rationalised" layout with the Loco shed SB abolished and the frame in the Station box reduced in length. (EDIT; original photos replaced with scans of my drawings for better quality. The last one has the contrast increased so rubbings out etc. can be detected, apologies) Edited May 4, 2018 by flyingsignalman 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobM Posted May 1, 2018 Author Share Posted May 1, 2018 After much re-drafting and many gallons of Tippex later (these fumes smell good.......!) here is my latest attempt at the terminus station - I hope it's right! 20180501_212254.jpg I've only shown the section to the right of the bridge as I feel the section to the left should have it's own signal box; especially if you take the view that the bridge could represent a good quarter to half mile or so of track. Anyway here's my go at the Loco shed SB. 20180501_212544.jpg Finally (slightly tongue in cheek) is my idea for a "rationalised" layout with the Loco shed SB abolished and the frame in the Station box reduced in length (ignore the distant under signal 40, please). 20180501_212317.jpg (Photos taken with my phone so apologies for the (lack of) quality. ) Hi.... Absolutely superb.....you guys are tremendously supportive and so creative....I am so humbled by everything appearing on this forum..you are making me so happy guys..I don't know what to say...! Bob 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted May 2, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 2, 2018 (edited) Hi everyone, Sorry, I posted my simple numbering scheme above too quickly without properly taking into account all the expert advice, going back to Mike's post of #http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/133511-help-required-with-signalling-a-layout-plan-cambrian-street/?p=3144378 I'm doing that now so please don't spend too much time or effort thinking about correcting my point/fpl numbering. Thanks, Phil Edited May 2, 2018 by Harlequin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now