Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

Thank you again Nick C, but a quick reminder, the station is a terminus and needs to be signalled as such. The through track part is a removable section and would be used mostly as light entertainment, so yes, trains from the branch and main need to enter westbound into platform 4.

 

I can jiggle about some turnouts to reduce the number that lead off running lines. Will go play with the software asap.

 

Yes, the plan is based closely on Hunstanton.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ian said:

 

I'd suggest seeing how many levers Hunstanton had as a sanity check.

 

Edit -

Lots - over 70.

 

Thanks. I think my surprise is because I have never tried to properly signal such a large station. All my plans so far have been CJFreezer-ish BLTs, etc. Clearly this number of levers is quite normal for a station of this size.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
13 hours ago, Martin S-C said:

Thank you again Nick C, but a quick reminder, the station is a terminus and needs to be signalled as such. The through track part is a removable section and would be used mostly as light entertainment, so yes, trains from the branch and main need to enter westbound into platform 4.

 

I can jiggle about some turnouts to reduce the number that lead off running lines. Will go play with the software asap.

 

Yes, the plan is based closely on Hunstanton.

Ah yes, I forgot that, sorry! 

 

Yes, a terminus will be more complicated to signal - and you've got the branch as well for extra complexity. Somewhere that big would get extra attention from the BoT, so they'd not get away with the sort of things they might do at a sleepy branch line station...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, Ian, its definitely not working. Is it a signalling diagram? If it is would you mind taking a screenshot of it and sending it to me as a PM? Best not to put it up on here for copyright reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 minutes ago, Martin S-C said:

Sadly, Ian, its definitely not working. Is it a signalling diagram? If it is would you mind taking a screenshot of it and sending it to me as a PM? Best not to put it up on here for copyright reasons.

 

Murphy's Law in action.

 

Fortunately it is still in my browser's cache so you have a PM.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
53 minutes ago, Martin S-C said:

Sadly, Ian, its definitely not working. Is it a signalling diagram? If it is would you mind taking a screenshot of it and sending it to me as a PM? Best not to put it up on here for copyright reasons.

If you go to the main SRS website, follow the links through Sales, Drawing Office and LNER, then click on Hunstanton you'll see it. It's only the low-resolution version though. You either have to be a member of SRS or purchase the relevant CD to see the hi-res version.

Edited by St Enodoc
Grammar
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
44 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

If you go to the main SRS website, follow the links through Sales, Drawing Office and LNER, then click on Hunstanton you'll see it. It's only the low-resolution version though. You either have to be a member of SRS or purchase the relevant CD to see the hi-res version.

How odd: I went through that process and arrived at a page with the same address as Ian supplied, but able to see the image!

  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can now see the lo-res version that Ian just sent me by PM and I shall go buy the CD those images are on as I think the hi-res one will be extremely useful.

Moving the discussion on. Here's my thoughts in reply to Nick's comments on my attempt to set down exactly what is needed and where. Nick's comments remain in red, my new ones in green.
 

Eastbound home at the exit from the fiddle yard (out of view to the left), (1 HS lever).
 

P3/P4 west crossover is a ground signal (GS), (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

P3 westbound starter is a simple home or stop signal, (1 HS lever). This and the previous two would, I think, be on a ground frame.
 

I can see your thinking there but in the case of a through circuit set up, passenger trains will be passing here, so to me a small “West Box” seems more appropriate. The bobby here would issue the westbound line token as well. I tend to think of ground frames as things worked by loco crews with a key attached to the token staff and while I know that's not always the case such frames always feel "local" or "part time" to me while this one is controlling mainline traffic when the layout is configured for a circuit so would need to be manned for the same daily hours as the main box and the bobby would need full instruments, a roof, stove, telephone, etc., so this location to me says "signal box" more than "ground frame".

P3 crossover/loco release is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

Signal from middle siding is a ground signal, (1 GS lever).
 

Signal from P2 siding is a ground signal, (1 GS lever).
 

Signal at P2 loco release crossover is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts). Looking at a few diagrams from termini on SRS, several don't have signals protecting the loco release crossovers - presumably they'd have been hand-signalled. Several have then worked from a local ground-frame as well, so probably worked by the loco crew themselves - usually with an electrical release from the 'box.

 

Thanks. The whole question of ground signals becomes relevant if I model working ones which isn’t decided yet. A dummy ground signal here (and everywhere else) is not a great deal of work in comparison to installing working ones with all the mechanical and electronic apparatus required. The jury is still out on this one.

Signal at P1 loco release crossover is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

Shunt signal to parcels bay is a ground signal, (1 GS lever).
 

Middle siding is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout).
 

P3 & P4 eastbound starters and both bracket signals with 2 arms, left arm being lower for the branch. Each post also carries a shunting arm (SA), (4 HS levers + 2 SA levers). If P3 is only used for terminating branch trains, you might not need the route to the main being signalled?
 

As discussed previously, in its terminus format the station will need two starters here. I do like the idea of a branch service always terminating at P3, the loco running around and then shunting its train to the departure platform P4. I’m all in favour of anything that increases play value. I am also considering running freight up the branch in mixed trains which I imagine would involve:

Up branch service arrives in P3.
Loco runs around, couples to passenger brake van/coach and shunts it to P4.
Loco then collects whole train and shunts it to P4 so that now the passenger vehicles with brake coach in rear are ready for a return service.
Loco shunts goods vehicles across to freight loop (below P1) and leaves them there to be dealt with by the yard shunter.
Any outgoing goods wagons are picked up at the same time and moved across to P4.
The passenger coaches are moved to P3, the goods vehicles put onto the brake coach in P4 and finally the passenger rake put on the front of the train.

I see this as incredibly time-consuming as well as blocking two platform roads. I could I suppose, between branch services, leave the train in the middle siding between P2 and P3. I have a photograph of Hunstanton that shows a complete train here so it seems it may have been used for that purpose.

Would there be a more efficient way of shunting a mixed train though?


East P4 points is a turnout lever, (1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout).
 

Shunt from middle loop is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout).
 

P1 & P2 starters are simple home/stop signals. Each post also carries a shunting arm (SA), (2 HS levers + 2 SA levers). NOTE: Branch services never leave from P1 & P2 so bracket signals not necessary here, all departures head down the main.
 

Shunt from P1 loop is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

Cattle dock siding is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout). [See thoughts on Phil’s proposal below].
 

Yard exit siding is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout). No point lever here, it's on the same crossover as P1 loop.
 

My apologies. I wasn’t clear there. It’s the turnout directly north of the cattle dock, not the one to the left that joins the P1 loop crossover. However see thoughts on Phil’s proposal below.
 

Yard contains 2 hand-operated single turnouts and one crossover, (on the control panel this will be 3 turnout levers).
 

P2 and P3 crossover is a turnout lever, (1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

P1 and P2 entry is a turnout lever, (1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout).
 

Shunt from loco yard is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout). NOTE: Entry to loco yard is via P3/P4 controlled by shunt arms.

Loco yard contains 2 hand-operated single turnouts and the turntable, (on the control panel this will be 2 turnout levers and a rotating track-selector switch).
 

Main to P1 & P2 crossover is a turnout lever, (1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

Shunt from CS1 is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout).
 

Shunt from CS2 & CS3 is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 2 turnout levers operating 2 turnouts). Only one point lever, the other is covered by the main-P1/2 crossover.
 

Again with a 3-way point at the main line crossover, this lever operates the right hand road of that 3-way that accesses CS1 so I think it is needed.

NOTE: Would it be more correct to have all 3 CS stem from one set of points connected to the running lines? So CS2 & CS3 turnout runs off CS1 rather than join the centre track of the 3-way? This removes the need for a 3-way and 1 ground signal. Yes - usually you want to minimise the number of facing points on any passenger line, so much better to have just one and hand-points within the CS yard. Similarly, if you could move the cattle dock points the other side of the loop crossover, they'd be hand points too, and save another ground signal.
 

Good to know. Currently playing with track planning software as we speak (type?). Now done - see below!

Branch home is a 2-arm bracket signal that controls access to P3 & P4, plus a shunting arm for goods trains to access the P1 loop, (2 HS levers + 1 SA lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts). Would branch trains run into P4? or just P3?

They might if it’s a push-pull or railcar. I’d like to keep the flexibility.
 

Main home is a 4-arm bracket stepped down from left to right to control entry to P1, P2, P3 and P4, plus a shunting arm for goods trains to access the P1 loop, (4 HS levers + 1 SA lever).
 

Do you need main trains into P4? I'd assumed westbound + branch in P3, eastbound in P4.
 

Yes, when in terminus mode.

NOTE: Above two sets of signals could be a gantry spanning the branch and main tracks.

 

Advanced starters are both simple home or stop signals, (2 HS levers).

 

Outer homes are both simple home or stop signals, (2 HS levers).
 

TOTALS:

15 ground signals
8 single arm stop signals, two with shunting arms
2 twin arm bracket signals, left arm lower, both have shunting arms
1 twin arm bracket signal, right arm lower, with shunting arm
1 four arm bracket signal, rightmost arms stepped lower, with shunting arm
21 turnout levers
 

I make it 19 points (including hand points/ground frames), 17 stop signals, 19 shunt signals - or with the above-mentioned changes, 13 shunt signals. A total of 55 or 49 levers, including hand points and ground frames. There would also be 14 facing point locks, unless you used "economical" ones as per the Midland Railway.
 

Correct. I am not going to model facing point lock release levers. With my new thoughts following your kind comments I’ve tried to clarify a few specifics with the number of levers and the number of arms remains as I first estimated. If I merge two yard/CS turnouts away from the running lines I can dispense with two ground signals.

And now, over to Phil for a special report from our on-site correspondent:
 

Quote

The bottom most section of the station [parcels & milk, loop, cattle dock, coal siding, goods shed, goods loop and brake vans siding] forms an isolated, non-passenger-rated area.

 


So I don't think any ground signals are needed for movements within that area at all.

I suggest only ground signals for the two crossovers to and from the passenger-rated P1 line would be needed and only for three of those movements because the move from loop to P1 loco release would never happen during normal operations.

 


 

Alternatively if we take on board this suggestion I can dispense with two more ground signals here. However my first version of the notes omitted ground signals controlling entry INTO the three loco release crossovers (P1, P2, P3), so we are one ground signal up. If a passenger train had tail traffic would such van(s) be shunted against P1, P2 and P3 buffer stops via these crossovers while those platforms were occupied with (empty) passenger rakes, or would all tail traffic be propelled down the platform road before the passenger rake was propelled down onto it? Second option seems more correct but first option seems more fun and unusual. I’m not a massive stickler for correct operations so if the first option was possible I would prefer that. Either way, if the ground signals are dummies it’s not a big concern.

Total of 60 levers in the frame (of which 3 are assumed to be at West Box).

Now 58 if ground signals are operational and 43 if not, with 2 goods yard lines merged.

If I have ground signals controlling entry over P1, P2 and P3 loco crossovers towards the buffer stops it becomes 61 and 43.


= = = = = = = = = =

Here's an edited track plan. The CS access was easy to alter and now looks much better. There is also an open area of hard standing adjacent to the brake van road so guards don't have to watch their step nearly so much. There may even be room to model an old coach body here as a guards bothy/office.

The cattle dock road though is a problem. I've shown in red a couple of options for the end loading dock and livestock siding. Problem is the end loading dock road now denies access to all the siding in green for loading/unloading. The reversed cattle dock siding denies access to all the siding in orange for loading/unloading, however this area was never going to be occupied by standing coal wagons, the coal merchant activity will all be to the far right and this section of track was just a lead-in but even so access the cattle dock now requires a reversal plus it feels awkward; if this were a real railway, it would have just swept off to the right (southwards) more and the railway company would have used more land. So this arrangement to me really cries out "model railway" rather than "modelled railway". Can anyone offer a better solution? If not I'll keep that siding as it was and reinstate the 3-way turnout.

1613025648_Non-passengerlinechanges.jpg.af6666644f6df485cc73f1ef3b903221.jpg
 

Edited by Martin S-C
  • Like 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 29/04/2021 at 14:51, Martin S-C said:

A couple of positive things I can be doing as I'm destroying a previous universe (muahaha).

Galactus much?

 

 

33 minutes ago, Martin S-C said:

Here's an edited track plan. The CS access was easy to alter and now looks much better. There is also an open area of hard standing adjacent to the brake van road so guards don't have to watch their step nearly so much. There may even be room to model an old coach body here as a guards bothy/office.

The cattle dock road though is a problem. I've shown in red a couple of options for the end loading dock and livestock siding. Problem is the end loading dock road now denies access to all the siding in green for loading/unloading. The reversed cattle dock siding denies access to all the siding in orange for loading/unloading, however this area was never going to be occupied by standing coal wagons, the coal merchant activity will all be to the far right and this section of track was just a lead-in but even so access the cattle dock now requires a reversal plus it feels awkward; if this were a real railway, it would have just swept off to the right (southwards) more and the railway company would have used more land. So this arrangement to me really cries out "model railway" rather than "modelled railway". Can anyone offer a better solution? If not I'll keep that siding as it was and reinstate the 3-way turnout.

1613025648_Non-passengerlinechanges.jpg.af6666644f6df485cc73f1ef3b903221.jpg

Great to see you having some inspiration come to you Martin. Looks very complex.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Martin S-C said:

I can now see the lo-res version that Ian just sent me by PM and I shall go buy the CD those images are on as I think the hi-res one will be extremely useful.

Moving the discussion on. Here's my thoughts in reply to Nick's comments on my attempt to set down exactly what is needed and where. Nick's comments remain in red, my new ones in green.
 

Eastbound home at the exit from the fiddle yard (out of view to the left), (1 HS lever).
 

P3/P4 west crossover is a ground signal (GS), (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

P3 westbound starter is a simple home or stop signal, (1 HS lever). This and the previous two would, I think, be on a ground frame.
 

I can see your thinking there but in the case of a through circuit set up, passenger trains will be passing here, so to me a small “West Box” seems more appropriate. The bobby here would issue the westbound line token as well. I tend to think of ground frames as things worked by loco crews with a key attached to the token staff and while I know that's not always the case such frames always feel "local" or "part time" to me while this one is controlling mainline traffic when the layout is configured for a circuit so would need to be manned for the same daily hours as the main box and the bobby would need full instruments, a roof, stove, telephone, etc., so this location to me says "signal box" more than "ground frame".

P3 crossover/loco release is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

Signal from middle siding is a ground signal, (1 GS lever).
 

Signal from P2 siding is a ground signal, (1 GS lever).
 

Signal at P2 loco release crossover is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts). Looking at a few diagrams from termini on SRS, several don't have signals protecting the loco release crossovers - presumably they'd have been hand-signalled. Several have then worked from a local ground-frame as well, so probably worked by the loco crew themselves - usually with an electrical release from the 'box.

 

Thanks. The whole question of ground signals becomes relevant if I model working ones which isn’t decided yet. A dummy ground signal here (and everywhere else) is not a great deal of work in comparison to installing working ones with all the mechanical and electronic apparatus required. The jury is still out on this one.

Signal at P1 loco release crossover is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

Shunt signal to parcels bay is a ground signal, (1 GS lever).
 

Middle siding is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout).
 

P3 & P4 eastbound starters and both bracket signals with 2 arms, left arm being lower for the branch. Each post also carries a shunting arm (SA), (4 HS levers + 2 SA levers). If P3 is only used for terminating branch trains, you might not need the route to the main being signalled?
 

As discussed previously, in its terminus format the station will need two starters here. I do like the idea of a branch service always terminating at P3, the loco running around and then shunting its train to the departure platform P4. I’m all in favour of anything that increases play value. I am also considering running freight up the branch in mixed trains which I imagine would involve:

Up branch service arrives in P3.
Loco runs around, couples to passenger brake van/coach and shunts it to P4.
Loco then collects whole train and shunts it to P4 so that now the passenger vehicles with brake coach in rear are ready for a return service.
Loco shunts goods vehicles across to freight loop (below P1) and leaves them there to be dealt with by the yard shunter.
Any outgoing goods wagons are picked up at the same time and moved across to P4.
The passenger coaches are moved to P3, the goods vehicles put onto the brake coach in P4 and finally the passenger rake put on the front of the train.

I see this as incredibly time-consuming as well as blocking two platform roads. I could I suppose, between branch services, leave the train in the middle siding between P2 and P3. I have a photograph of Hunstanton that shows a complete train here so it seems it may have been used for that purpose.

Would there be a more efficient way of shunting a mixed train though?


East P4 points is a turnout lever, (1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout).
 

Shunt from middle loop is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout).
 

P1 & P2 starters are simple home/stop signals. Each post also carries a shunting arm (SA), (2 HS levers + 2 SA levers). NOTE: Branch services never leave from P1 & P2 so bracket signals not necessary here, all departures head down the main.
 

Shunt from P1 loop is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

Cattle dock siding is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout). [See thoughts on Phil’s proposal below].
 

Yard exit siding is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout). No point lever here, it's on the same crossover as P1 loop.
 

My apologies. I wasn’t clear there. It’s the turnout directly north of the cattle dock, not the one to the left that joins the P1 loop crossover. However see thoughts on Phil’s proposal below.
 

Yard contains 2 hand-operated single turnouts and one crossover, (on the control panel this will be 3 turnout levers).
 

P2 and P3 crossover is a turnout lever, (1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

P1 and P2 entry is a turnout lever, (1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout).
 

Shunt from loco yard is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout). NOTE: Entry to loco yard is via P3/P4 controlled by shunt arms.

Loco yard contains 2 hand-operated single turnouts and the turntable, (on the control panel this will be 2 turnout levers and a rotating track-selector switch).
 

Main to P1 & P2 crossover is a turnout lever, (1 turnout lever operating both turnouts).
 

Shunt from CS1 is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 1 turnout lever operating 1 turnout).
 

Shunt from CS2 & CS3 is a ground signal, (1 GS lever + 2 turnout levers operating 2 turnouts). Only one point lever, the other is covered by the main-P1/2 crossover.
 

Again with a 3-way point at the main line crossover, this lever operates the right hand road of that 3-way that accesses CS1 so I think it is needed.

NOTE: Would it be more correct to have all 3 CS stem from one set of points connected to the running lines? So CS2 & CS3 turnout runs off CS1 rather than join the centre track of the 3-way? This removes the need for a 3-way and 1 ground signal. Yes - usually you want to minimise the number of facing points on any passenger line, so much better to have just one and hand-points within the CS yard. Similarly, if you could move the cattle dock points the other side of the loop crossover, they'd be hand points too, and save another ground signal.
 

Good to know. Currently playing with track planning software as we speak (type?). Now done - see below!

Branch home is a 2-arm bracket signal that controls access to P3 & P4, plus a shunting arm for goods trains to access the P1 loop, (2 HS levers + 1 SA lever + 1 turnout lever operating both turnouts). Would branch trains run into P4? or just P3?

They might if it’s a push-pull or railcar. I’d like to keep the flexibility.
 

Main home is a 4-arm bracket stepped down from left to right to control entry to P1, P2, P3 and P4, plus a shunting arm for goods trains to access the P1 loop, (4 HS levers + 1 SA lever).
 

Do you need main trains into P4? I'd assumed westbound + branch in P3, eastbound in P4.
 

Yes, when in terminus mode.

NOTE: Above two sets of signals could be a gantry spanning the branch and main tracks.

 

Advanced starters are both simple home or stop signals, (2 HS levers).

 

Outer homes are both simple home or stop signals, (2 HS levers).
 

TOTALS:

15 ground signals
8 single arm stop signals, two with shunting arms
2 twin arm bracket signals, left arm lower, both have shunting arms
1 twin arm bracket signal, right arm lower, with shunting arm
1 four arm bracket signal, rightmost arms stepped lower, with shunting arm
21 turnout levers
 

I make it 19 points (including hand points/ground frames), 17 stop signals, 19 shunt signals - or with the above-mentioned changes, 13 shunt signals. A total of 55 or 49 levers, including hand points and ground frames. There would also be 14 facing point locks, unless you used "economical" ones as per the Midland Railway.
 

Correct. I am not going to model facing point lock release levers. With my new thoughts following your kind comments I’ve tried to clarify a few specifics with the number of levers and the number of arms remains as I first estimated. If I merge two yard/CS turnouts away from the running lines I can dispense with two ground signals.

And now, over to Phil for a special report from our on-site correspondent:
 


 

Alternatively if we take on board this suggestion I can dispense with two more ground signals here. However my first version of the notes omitted ground signals controlling entry INTO the three loco release crossovers (P1, P2, P3), so we are one ground signal up. If a passenger train had tail traffic would such van(s) be shunted against P1, P2 and P3 buffer stops via these crossovers while those platforms were occupied with (empty) passenger rakes, or would all tail traffic be propelled down the platform road before the passenger rake was propelled down onto it? Second option seems more correct but first option seems more fun and unusual. I’m not a massive stickler for correct operations so if the first option was possible I would prefer that. Either way, if the ground signals are dummies it’s not a big concern.

Total of 60 levers in the frame (of which 3 are assumed to be at West Box).

Now 58 if ground signals are operational and 43 if not, with 2 goods yard lines merged.

If I have ground signals controlling entry over P1, P2 and P3 loco crossovers towards the buffer stops it becomes 61 and 43.


= = = = = = = = = =

Here's an edited track plan. The CS access was easy to alter and now looks much better. There is also an open area of hard standing adjacent to the brake van road so guards don't have to watch their step nearly so much. There may even be room to model an old coach body here as a guards bothy/office.

The cattle dock road though is a problem. I've shown in red a couple of options for the end loading dock and livestock siding. Problem is the end loading dock road now denies access to all the siding in green for loading/unloading. The reversed cattle dock siding denies access to all the siding in orange for loading/unloading, however this area was never going to be occupied by standing coal wagons, the coal merchant activity will all be to the far right and this section of track was just a lead-in but even so access the cattle dock now requires a reversal plus it feels awkward; if this were a real railway, it would have just swept off to the right (southwards) more and the railway company would have used more land. So this arrangement to me really cries out "model railway" rather than "modelled railway". Can anyone offer a better solution? If not I'll keep that siding as it was and reinstate the 3-way turnout.

1613025648_Non-passengerlinechanges.jpg.af6666644f6df485cc73f1ef3b903221.jpg
 

The cattle dock doesnt really need its own siding. Wagons were loaded and unloaded as quickly as possible. Cattle docks were often sited at the beginning of sidings so you could legitimately and realistically site yours at the beginning of the lowest siding on the plan.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Denbridge said:

The cattle dock doesnt really need its own siding. Wagons were loaded and unloaded as quickly as possible. Cattle docks were often sited at the beginning of sidings so you could legitimately and realistically site yours at the beginning of the lowest siding on the plan.

Interesting. I didn't know that. I have this impression from lots of model railway layout photos that 2 or 3 cattle vans seemed to spend a long time standing at the loading docks. Yes, I suppose the actual loading and unloading of animals would be done almost as speedily as one would like to load human passengers but surely the dock and any associated siding would be a convenient place to store other goods wagons, even if they were not cattle vans?

Is this better? The space freed up by the moved cattle dock allows me to slip in one of those scenes I love seeing - a row of railwaymen's cottages, complete with back yards. If I make them three floors high it will make a nice sight break and there is no need to reach over these models very much as the track work beyond is all throat-work where trains will move past. Access to couplings and such is only needed to left (passenger stock) and right (goods stock) of them.

1863853518_Non-passengerlinechanges_02.jpg.9737a039daf3c2354ea95c09a4b2287f.jpg

I've slewed the brake van siding over so now there's room for a guard's tea break hut to the right of that siding's buffer stop and the area below the word "BRAKE" is now wide enough to allow horse and cart access so although I lose the siding length adjacent to the end loading dock I gain the track above that. I'm working on the premise that end loading dock roads didn't need to be long as only one vehicle could use the dock. There is always the goods shed interior and the platform concourse where a couple more short sidings end-stop at platform height, so carriages and motor cars could arguably be entrained here as well.

I'm very much in favour of the simplified pointwork. I was never fully comfortable with the look of the PECO 3-way points.

Tentative board joints added in pink. No points across board joins this time.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

That looks a lot better, you've saved 2 signalbox controlled points, saving the NM&GS quite a lot of money in maintenance! The whole good yard can now be accessed by a single shunt signal at the toe of the crossover - make it a yellow one so it only applies for movements across the crossover as per Phil's suggestion and you then don't need one to leave the yard.

 

The end loading dock could be at the end of the parcels road rather than in the goods yard - they were often built for loading carriages for the local gentry, and they wouldn't sully themselves with a goods yard!

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I think that works. Lord and lady gentry's motor vehicles and carriages at the parcels depot but nasty smelly grubby workman things like traction engines and wheeled farm machinery would need to be loaded somewhere less decorous. That does mean I now sense a fun cameo coming along under a vehicle arch at the parcels depot where a pre-Great War car can be getting pushed forwards towards a loading dock. Something I don't recall seeing modelled too many times.

I agree about the pointwork. I much prefer the single point exit from the goods yard and the single point exit from the carriage sidings. Seems much more sensible. I wouldn't countenance twin entries to a loco yard so I'm puzzled why I went this way in the first case. I blame you lot for not slapping me into line with a wet fish when I first put the plan up.

Here's the full current plan. Pink lines are baseboard joins.

NewPlan_NineJ.jpg.7a3b8974c4b87d46b2f125164f66d890.jpg

  • Like 6
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Looks great! The rest will be much simpler to signal, just a couple of signals at each of the junction boxes, and potentially nothing at all at the branch terminus, with one train working. 

 

 

Edited by Nick C
  • Like 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking a home and a starter at the branch terminus, mostly for decoration. I'm reminded that the Highworth Branch was one engine in steam and had two signals at the terminus. The colliery will probably need a small ground frame hut and 2 or 3 signals at the entrance to the running line, and again 3 signals at the junction. The lime kilns siding will have a small GF unlocked by the train crew staff (so in effect nothing on the model except decoration).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 minutes ago, Martin S-C said:

I'm thinking a home and a starter at the branch terminus, mostly for decoration. I'm reminded that the Highworth Branch was one engine in steam and had two signals at the terminus.

The home signal allows trains to enter station limits, and leave the section, thus allowing the block instruments to be cleared. The starter signal is for trains leaving station limits and entering into the section, and the starter could only be released once the block instruments had been set by the next station to allow a train into the section.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but ...... the railway appears to have become a tramway by the time it reaches the BLT, and tramways don’t have signals, they operate on line-of-sight.

 

I’m with you on the decorative point though: signals are attractive to look at.

 

You might well need a signal to let a train proceed from the tramway bit into the railway bit, though, so you probably need to decide where the boundary lies.

 

Unless the tramway bit is actually not a tramway, but an enormously long un-gated level crossing, like the one on the WC&PR. 
 

The extension to Portishead had been planned from the beginning, but financial constraints delayed its construction. It required another Act of Parliament, which was passed in Aug1899, There were many objections to the proposed extension, one of which was that the line was to run through the streets in Clevedon. These objections were overcome, but a man with a flag had to lead trains across the street at 4 mph. 

 

 

Edited by Nearholmer
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Martin, if the continuous-run link across the lifting flap is only for testing/playing trains, I wouldn't worry about it as far as signalling is concerned. A p-way hut would do instead of the ground frame if you want a small building for visual effect.

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is but I can see times when I might want to have a CJF-style through-terminus set up and operate that way if 2 or 3 friends come round. With a group session you'd get two quite different forms of operation with the lifting section in place vs without.

  • Like 3
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 01/05/2021 at 23:44, Nearholmer said:

You might well need a signal to let a train proceed from the tramway bit into the railway bit, though, so you probably need to decide where the boundary lies.

The upper final section through the town of Witts End is tramway, so as it passes the last building going east where it leaves the road, it becomes railway and is classified as such through the tunnel. At the Catspaw lime kilns it rejoins the road so in effect is tramway again until it becomes railway once more at the NE suburban villas. So leaving Witts End terminus in the up direction we have Tramway-Railway-Tramway-Railway. So a bit complex. Perhaps it should all just be tramway until we get to the main line terminus.

Also some actual modelling. My first railway-related modelling for over a year. Just an ordinary pair of Dapol coal wagons grabbed off e-Bay. Yes, I realise these are post-grouping RCH 1920s steel underframe models. I have been searching for a Speech House wagon ever since the project started in 2018 and now two arrive together. The moulded end door hinges will be replaced with something a bit more appropriate, some strapping detail added to the interiors and be weathered.

Dsc06583.jpg.2af0282d59fb12d5a17a58884cbc680a.jpg

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...