RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted December 10, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 10, 2019 Would the lack of room for a lockbar be a feature of the real-world, uncompressed station? If not you could just ignore that problem and imagine that it is present in the model??? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigtech Posted December 10, 2019 Author Share Posted December 10, 2019 Hello again Mike - just another quick question, have just realized 2 and 4 signals both have 4 ft arms, i assume that is o.k? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigtech Posted December 10, 2019 Author Share Posted December 10, 2019 (edited) Helo Phil - I don't know if you had read my last comments re a couple of small changes? one concerning the spare levers, numbered and with plates - not spaces, and the second the labelling of the headshunt behind the box as 'spur'. ( this was on the previous iteration of the diagram ) I have just been reading Mikes comments - hence my question re a track - circuit in lieu of the switch mounted lockbars (anything to make it easier)! and the fact that the new bracket signal has 4 foot arms on both dolls... Awaiting Mikes verdict on these questions, as this will probably affect some details on the drawing, apart from that it's all good! No further progress on layout to report.. Steve. Edited December 10, 2019 by sigtech grammar Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted December 10, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, sigtech said: Helo Phil - I don't know if you had read my last comments re a couple of small changes? one concerning the spare levers, numbered and with plates - not spaces, and the second the labelling of the headshunt behind the box as 'spur'. ( this was on the previous iteration of the diagram ) I have just been reading Mikes comments - hence my question re a track - circuit in lieu of the switch mounted lockbars (anything to make it easier)! and the fact that the new bracket signal has 4 foot arms on both dolls... Awaiting Mikes verdict on these questions, as this will probably affect some details on the drawing, apart from that it's all good! No further progress on layout to report.. Steve. Hi Steve, Yes, I've got those changes in the drawing. Will wait for the conclusion of these discussions before I post a new version. FYI: 4 is shown as a 3ft arm in the drawing currently but it's trivial to change. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigtech Posted December 10, 2019 Author Share Posted December 10, 2019 (edited) Thanks for that Phil - I assume it will have to be both with 4ft arms - not really relishing the idea of chopping lumps off a £55 signal....! Edited December 10, 2019 by sigtech missing p.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted December 10, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 10, 2019 2 hours ago, sigtech said: Hello again Mike - just another quick question, have just realized 2 and 4 signals both have 4 ft arms, i assume that is o.k? Yes - not at all unusual to have 4ft arms reading into bay platforms at both termini and through stations in GWR days. As far as the lock(ing) bars are concerned the use of two inside bars on the switch rails definitely happened and there are photos around which show it - including some surviving on lines which closed in the late '50s/very early '60s. I suspect they might have been something of a maintenance headache but can't recall coming across anybody who spoke about having to look after them. Again it really depends on teh date and whether there had been problems with maintenance however I a would have expected that if one set of bars were replaced by track circuits the others would have been done at the same time 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigtech Posted December 10, 2019 Author Share Posted December 10, 2019 Thanks Mike - think that solves the problem. so Phil - thats 4 foot arms on both 2 and 4 signals please, and I'll go with mechanical fpl on all 3 ends of facing points - 11 will have them mounted ( imaginary.. ) on both switches, due to the lack of space in rear of the toe of these points. No track circuits . I believe that just about covers all the necessary alterations. Are you happy with this Phil,- after all you're the one in charge of producing the new diagram?? Regards Steve . 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted December 10, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 10, 2019 Hi Steve, Here's the new version, then: 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigtech Posted December 10, 2019 Author Share Posted December 10, 2019 Phil that is great! I suspect this will be the final version, i'll just ask Mike to give it his seal of approval... Regards Steve. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted December 10, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 10, 2019 2 hours ago, sigtech said: Phil that is great! I suspect this will be the final version, i'll just ask Mike to give it his seal of approval... Regards Steve. Lovely job - all square!! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junctionmad Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 Lovely work am i correct in thinking that more colors got added to differentiate track circuited sections in later years ( ie WR);? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailWest Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 (edited) WR track circuits were shown black. There was a small gap left between the end of each adjacent TC, which I assume had the same colour as the un-circuited sections of that line. NB: the above applies to later (illuminated) versions of diagram. IIRC early GWR ones had a horizontal red line along the centre line of the track.....Mike??? Edited December 11, 2019 by RailWest 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junctionmad Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 So I’ve seen certainly WR era diagrams with seemingly multi colour sections that seem track circuited. Maybe these are much layer diagrams Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailWest Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 42 minutes ago, Junctionmad said: So I’ve seen certainly WR era diagrams with seemingly multi colour sections that seem track circuited. Maybe these are much layer diagrams Were those of WR origin, or perhaps from other lines (eg SR) which had been taken over by the WR? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junctionmad Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 5 hours ago, RailWest said: Were those of WR origin, or perhaps from other lines (eg SR) which had been taken over by the WR? Good point Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigtech Posted December 11, 2019 Author Share Posted December 11, 2019 (edited) Finally completed installation and testing of Sproston's inner home signals. no2 and no4 signed into use @ 22.30 hours. I have included a few photos just to prove it.... All ready for the new revised signalling box diagram. Had great fun extending the operating cables - as I said previously they are 11 inches long!!! (each) - The Dapol spares number for additional 2metre extension 3 core cables, Dapol part #4a-000-014 seems to be a total work of fiction - none available....anywhere!!! So I used the old fallback viz: - 2 x 3 hole terminal blocks, 6 length of single colour multi strand cable, solder, soldering iron, insulation tape, side - cutters, and a terminal screwdriver, add a lot of colourful language, stir well whilst cutting both cables carefully in half, insert centre sections include a couple of thumps on the head whilst scrabbling around underneath the layout!, result it all works. I AM NOW GOING TO HAVE A NICE CUP OF TEA!! Regards, (SIGTECH) Steve. Edited December 11, 2019 by sigtech 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted December 12, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2019 On 11/12/2019 at 09:28, RailWest said: WR track circuits were shown black. There was a small gap left between the end of each adjacent TC, which I assume had the same colour as the un-circuited sections of that line. NB: the above applies to later (illuminated) versions of diagram. IIRC early GWR ones had a horizontal red line along the centre line of the track.....Mike??? Yes, the original style of showing track circuited sections was a red centre line on the diagram drawn through the track circuited section of track. (I know that for a fact as I own a diagram which has track circuits shown in that manner. I don't know when the style changed but I'm fairly sure that it was sometime between the wars - it might be mentioned in one of Vaughan's books (one I haven't got). I wonder if the change came in when illuminated diagrams became compulsory for 'boxes with 5 or more track circuits? I think we can reasonably safely say that as long as Reading Drawing Office survived, in whatever form/location, WR diagram style in respect of track circuits did not change from the WR standard to the BR standard but it would need some dated diagrams to be certain of that. (The recent GWR Signalling Practice book appears not to cover the subject although its index is rather poor.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted December 12, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2019 (edited) "GWR Signalling Practice" covers the subject briefly on Pages 258-259 (with photos of two different styles on 257 and 258). It suggests that the change in the representation of TCs was not coincident with the introduction of illuminated diagrams. For some period the style of showing black track sections was used with the TC indicators on the shelf amongst all the other instruments. So the sequence for showing TC on box diagrams was: Thin red lines, non-illuminated Thick black lines, non-illuminated Thick black lines, illuminated (mid 1930s onwards starting at larger installations) Edited December 12, 2019 by Harlequin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junctionmad Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 (edited) could we review the colours for the diagrams in GWR /early WR , Im a little confused , thanks . I hope Phil, you get a chance to specify the RGBs of the main colours as I don't have a colour corrected monitor so I can never be sure, exactly what I am seeing, is correct thanks again , I love the drawings , as I am redoing Little Siddingtons panel , I am trying to emulate the style Edited December 12, 2019 by Junctionmad Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted December 12, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Harlequin said: "GWR Signalling Practice" covers the subject briefly on Pages 258-259 (with photos of two different styles on 257 and 258). It suggests that the change in the representation of TCs was not coincident with the introduction of illuminated digrams. For some period the style of showing black track sections was used with the TC indicators on the shelf amongst all the other instruments. So the sequence for showing TC on box diagrams was: Thin red lines, non-illuminated Thick black lines, non-illuminated Thick black lines, illuminated (mid 1930s onwards starting at larger installations) Thanks Phil - I was obviously looking in the wrong place (I blame the index, again). The interesting question of course is when did TC indications first begin to appear on diagrams? The earliest I can trace with any certainty are in the 1930s when it appears that the original single white light to indicate an occupied track circuit was first used - it could possibly have been used even earlier than that. The two red lights in a single lozenge shaped cut out would seem to have come some time later. I suspect that Wolvercote Jcn might not be a very good example as it was a wartime job being altered in 1942 when the Down Loop from Oxford North Jcn was added. Incidentally the change of style would not have depended on the size of the installation but would have been governed by the date on which the Drawing Office Instruction was issued. One of the biggest losses to the student of GWR signalling is that a comprehensive list of Drawing Office Instructions - let alone example of them - never seems to have come to light where they're accessible the enthusiast world. They were the GWR, and subsequently WR, equivalent of Signalling Principles and also covered such things as interlocking standards but over the years I have only learnt a few oddments from the people who used them and have never seen any of the written versions. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted December 12, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2019 1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said: Incidentally the change of style would not have depended on the size of the installation but would have been governed by the date on which the Drawing Office Instruction was issued. One of the biggest losses to the student of GWR signalling is that a comprehensive list of Drawing Office Instructions - let alone example of them - never seems to have come to light where they're accessible the enthusiast world. They were the GWR, and subsequently WR, equivalent of Signalling Principles and also covered such things as interlocking standards but over the years I have only learnt a few oddments from the people who used them and have never seen any of the written versions. Do you think that information might be locked away at STEAM or at Kew, maybe? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bécasse Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 4 hours ago, Harlequin said: Do you think that information might be locked away at STEAM or at Kew, maybe? I rather suspect that they ended up in a skip when Reading signal works was cleared out ready for subsequent occupation by BR computing. There was certainly a period in the 1970s when Porchester Row was actively discouraging the acquisition of more material no matter how interesting, and, unless an individual expressed an interest, a skip was the only answer. I was given the task of clearing out the historical archives on international train services when the SISD moved from 50 Liverpool Street to Eversholt House in the mid 1970s, they were full of interesting items, some SECR files dating back well before the Great War, but, apart from a handful of choice items, they all went in a skip. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted December 12, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2019 6 minutes ago, bécasse said: I rather suspect that they ended up in a skip when Reading signal works was cleared out ready for subsequent occupation by BR computing. There was certainly a period in the 1970s when Porchester Row was actively discouraging the acquisition of more material no matter how interesting, and, unless an individual expressed an interest, a skip was the only answer. I was given the task of clearing out the historical archives on international train services when the SISD moved from 50 Liverpool Street to Eversholt House in the mid 1970s, they were full of interesting items, some SECR files dating back well before the Great War, but, apart from a handful of choice items, they all went in a skip. That’s a very sad story... 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junctionmad Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 (edited) I have the “ gwr signalling practice “ the bit on signalling diagrams is very light on detail Edited December 12, 2019 by Junctionmad 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted December 12, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2019 Hi @Junctionmad The track and platfom colours I used on Sproston are not solid. I gave them a bit of variation to simulate an ink wash and I gave them a smaller scale transparency variation to give a slightly grainy effect. So their final appearance depends on the colour behind them. Here they are in close up over the light buff paper colour that I used for the drawing and also over pure white: I can't claim that these colours are accurate to the prototype drawings. The photographs that you can find on the net usually show very old drawings that are yellowed with age and/or bleached by exposure to sunlight. So I made best guesses to the original colours without going too saturated. The convention I'm using for track colours is: grey for primary running lines, blue for sidings and orange for secondary running lines (such as goods relief lines). The secondary orange is a slightly stronger version of the platform orange shown above but I didn't have to use it on Sproston. Sample RGB values over buff paper colour: Platform orange = #ecceb3 Primary grey = #c6c1bb Siding blue = #a4c5d7 Sample RGB values over white: Platform orange = #f6e1d3 Primary grey = #c5c0bd Siding blue = #abcbde The track outlines are 60% black (#666666) - they should possibly be a bit darker. 1 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