Signalling

[ForeverAutumn]

1 minute ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

It would be separate sheds (or more likely no loco shed or carriage shed for the LMS). And where are these quarrymen's trains going? Not along the main branch. We need to add another line, disappearing off-scene to the quarries themselves.

 

Two locations occur to me that you could work from as a basis: Wirksworth (ex-Midland) and Coniston (ex-Furness).

 

 

The quarrymen trains head up the branch to the mainline junction then then they head back down, past the sheds and disappear behind some buildings, the line is the at the top and goes to the right

[ForeverAutumn]

7 minutes ago, Il Grifone said:

Do you have access to both sides of the station as it's a bit too wide to reach over from one side?

 

Being GWR orientated I'm no expert on Furness Railway signalling, but by the late LMS era they could well have been replaced by the standard LMS upper quadrant. Contrary to American practice, a home or starter means stop. (I understand that it can be passed at slow speed on sme roads at least.)

 

It's unlikely likely that the shed would serve both quarry locos (presumably owned by the quarry company) and LMS locomotives. (Ignore this, of course, if the quarry locomotives are LMS stock.)

 

Four feet is rather generous for a pair of coaches, even if it includes a third strengthener for market day.

I do have access to both sides and the sheds are a bit big as I do not have experience with the metric system, it is meant to be around 2 and a half feet

[ForeverAutumn]

7 minutes ago, Il Grifone said:

Do you have access to both sides of the station as it's a bit too wide to reach over from one side?

 

Being GWR orientated I'm no expert on Furness Railway signalling, but by the late LMS era they could well have been replaced by the standard LMS upper quadrant. Contrary to American practice, a home or starter means stop. (I understand that it can be passed at slow speed on sme roads at least.)

 

It's unlikely likely that the shed would serve both quarry locos (presumably owned by the quarry company) and LMS locomotives. (Ignore this, of course, if the quarry locomotives are LMS stock.)

 

Four feet is rather generous for a pair of coaches, even if it includes a third strengthener for market day.

I do have access to both sides and the sheds are a bit big as I do not have experience with the metric system, it is meant to be around 2 and a half feet

[Il Grifone]

For layout planning, 1 foot = 30 centimetres/ 40 inches = 1 metre is near enough. Otherwise 4mm = 1 foot is very convenient.

Sorry, I forgot to welcome you to RMweb!

[ForeverAutumn]

12 minutes ago, Il Grifone said:

For layout planning, 1 foot = 30 centimetres/ 40 inches = 1 metre is near enough. Otherwise 4mm = 1 foot is very convenient.

Sorry, I forgot to welcome you to RMweb!

Yes thank you, I do use the 4mm to 1 foot system and I do use it

[ForeverAutumn]

The layout baseboard was constructed awhile ago, I am simply just getting around to using it, it is 8x4 foot, I am definitely gonna expand the board and connect them to the next board as well

[The Johnster]

Not helping much with the signalling I know, but a comment about the UK approach to engine sheds and carriage sheds on branch lines.  Much depends on the timetable and the first train of the day.  This may originate at the branch terminus as a commuter service to the main line junction, in which case the loco needs to be kept in light steam overnight at a shed at the terminus, and a carriage shed, or at least a siding with an access platform, will be provided at the terminus as well for local cleaning ladies to get at it before the first trip.  If, however, the first train brings the London newspapers, it will originate at the junction, and the loco facilities and carriage shed will be there.

 

Personally, I would not have a loco and carriage shed if I were modelling a BLT unless there was one there in real life or at a real life location that I am using as an 'inspiration' for an imagined place.  They stand empty for most of the operating day, dead space that could be better used for a small industry, or a wharf, or in this case the exchange sidings.  If there is traffic brought to the site by a quarry loco you need exchange sidings beyond which the LMS loco cannot go in one direction and the quarry loco cannot go in the other; they are not allowed on each others' metals.

 

Your quarrymen's trains are what we call workmen's trains, in the working timetable but not advertised to the public; the public can use them if they are aware of them though.  Usually older stock and in the case of miner's or quarrymen's, in the days before washing facilities were provided for the men at the mine or quarry, with the upholstery removed leaving bare wooden benches that were easier to clean.  They are subject to the same regulations as any passenger train and will come to the passenger station.  There may be a 'paddy' train on the quarry railway to take the men the rest of the way, and these could be very basic and rough affairs, but not allowed on the main line railway, only within the quarry system.

 

An 8x4' board will need access all the way around it or there will be parts difficult to reach for cleaning or rescuing derailments.

Edited March 26, 2020 by The Johnster

[ForeverAutumn]

21 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Not helping much with the signalling I know, but a comment about the UK approach to engine sheds and carriage sheds on branch lines.  Much depends on the timetable and the first train of the day.  This may originate at the branch terminus as a commuter service to the main line junction, in which case the loco needs to be kept in light steam overnight at a shed at the terminus, and a carriage shed, or at least a siding with an access platform, will be provided at the terminus as well for local cleaning ladies to get at it before the first trip.  If, however, the first train brings the London newspapers, it will originate at the junction, and the loco facilities and carriage shed will be there.

 

Personally, I would not have a loco and carriage shed if I were modelling a BLT unless there was one there in real life or at a real life location that I am using as an 'inspiration' for an imagined place.  They stand empty for most of the operating day, dead space that could be better used for a small industry, or a wharf, or in this case the exchange sidings.  If there is traffic brought to the site by a quarry loco you need exchange sidings beyond which the LMS loco cannot go in one direction and the quarry loco cannot go in the other; they are not allowed on each others' metals.

 

Your quarrymen's trains are what we call workmen's trains, in the working timetable but not advertised to the public; the public can use them if they are aware of them though.  Usually older stock and in the case of miner's or quarrymen's, in the days before washing facilities were provided for the men at the mine or quarry, with the upholstery removed leaving bare wooden benches that were easier to clean.  They are subject to the same regulations as any passenger train and will come to the passenger station.  There may be a 'paddy' train on the quarry railway to take the men the rest of the way, and these could be very basic and rough affairs, but not allowed on the main line railway, only within the quarry system.

 

An 8x4' board will need access all the way around it or there will be parts difficult to reach for cleaning or rescuing derailments.

The first train of the day is a commuter to the junction, a train that carries the London papers as you say, keeps its coaches in a siding at the junction, the engine will head up from the terminus with a goods presumably, to the junction where it acquires the London papers. The quarry trains will culminate at the stonecutters wharf, they run around and head back up the quarry tramway, an LMS engine then takes the train and heads up the branch to a harbour.

[The Johnster]

No it doesn't, sorry.  Quarry is quarry and LMS is LMS; LMS locos and passenger stock not allowed on quarry railway and vice versa.  No through running between quarry and LMS except for the mineral wagons, LMS loco and brake van come off at the exchange sidings.

 

All subject to Rule 1 of course....

[ForeverAutumn]

3 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

No it doesn't, sorry.  Quarry is quarry and LMS is LMS; LMS locos and passenger stock not allowed on quarry railway and vice versa.  No through running between quarry and LMS except for the mineral wagons, LMS loco and brake van come off at the exchange sidings.

 

All subject to Rule 1 of course....

That makes sense, this I all new to me I don't know how a lot of this works, perhaps the quarry engine will leave trucks in an enchange siding at the quarry then a LMS engine acquires the rolling stock and brings it to a stone cutting facility at the terminus, then it will take it down to the harbor.

[The Johnster]

That sounds more like it, but the stone cutting is usually (not always, but usually) done on site at the quarry.  OTOH cutting needs water for cooling the saw blades, and if there's no water at the quarry...

[Happy Hippo]

2 hours ago, ForeverAutumn said:

I do have access to both sides and the sheds are a bit big as I do not have experience with the metric system, it is meant to be around 2 and a half feet

So draw them in imperial measurements if you are more comfortable with it!

 

As the Johnster has said previously, draw the plan at 1" = 1'.

 

Most of the old codgers on here still probably work in imperial measurements, the youths in metric.

 

When tryingring to convert rolling stock or guilding dimentions then instead of 4mm to the foot (assuming this will be a OO gauge line), use  5/32 (3.9mm) to the foot, which is slightly under, or if you want to go oversize very slightly, plan on using 11/64 (4.3 mm).

 

But you should find that converting sizes in mm to the foot pretty easy as it's just the length in feet multiplied by the scale you are using:

 

 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2020 by Happy Hippo

[ForeverAutumn]

24 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

That sounds more like it, but the stone cutting is usually (not always, but usually) done on site at the quarry.  OTOH cutting needs water for cooling the saw blades, and if there's no water at the quarry...

Yes there is water in the quarry, it flows south and flows beside the station.

[ForeverAutumn]

2 minutes ago, Happy Hippo said:

So draw them in imperial measurements if you are more comfortable with it!

 

As the Johnster has said previously, draw the plan at 1" = 1'.

 

Most of the old codgers on here still probably work in imperial measurements, the youths in metric.

 

Instead of 4mm to the foot, use  5/32 (3.9mm) to the foot, which is slightly under, or if you want to go oversize very slightly, plan on using 11/64 (4.3 mm).

 

 

I will likely do that these are just rough outlines in templots sketchpad that I made

[Joseph_Pestell]

Good Morning,

Refreshed with sleep and coffee, I would suggest a new approach. A 4' wide baseboard would be better split down the centre into two scenes. The LMS branchline/terminus on one side with exchange sidings, the quarry complex on the other side with the quarry company line running between them via a 180 degree curve, probably through a short tunnel. LMS sub-shed, if any, at the terminus. Shed for the quarry company at the quarry. 

[Il Grifone]

At present living in a metric country (Italy due to coronavirus lockdown) I tend to use metric, but often switch to imperial as sometimes it's more convenient. (I always convert fuel consumption of the car to mpg (British gallons rather than U.S.). I can follow km/l, but the usual litres/100 km means nothing until I do the maths - likewise gradients are still 1 in something rather than something per cent.

I struggle with inches in 3.5mm/foot, but 4mm/foot is a doddle. Things in Italy are further confused by the major maker using 1/80 - at least for the Italian stock I have. They changed to 1/87 about 25 years ago just before becoming part of the Hornby empire.

[The Johnster]

I am definitely in the 'old. codger' camp, and think in imperial measurments and '1in' gradients.  I settled on 1" to the foot for planning back in my early teens, when I would spend time I should have been doing homework in drawing out incredibly complex fantasy layouts, largely because there was a ready supply of inch square divided into 10ths graph paper, but I found it a very good size to visualise the finished trackplan with.  You can make a series of stiff card or sheet plastic template curves of different radii to draw around and other aids.  I used the then current symbols I saw on magazine plans, for wiring purposes, this being in the Silurian Era before DCC, and for signal cabins, station buildings and so on, and hatched or shaded areas for platforms.  Symbols for embankments or cuttings were pinched from Ordnance Survey maps, along with others.  

 

I still do this occasionally, if I want to visualise a project that only exists in my mind and see how it fits to a space, but did not use it to plan my current layout, which is probably going to be my last.  For this layout check out 'South Wales Valleys in the 1950s' on Layout Topics if you are interested; the first pages will delineate the basic philosophy behind it.  I have never been able to build any of my plans completely accurately, and mostly it hasn't mattered much, but for this I simply laid the track where it fell in an attempt to get a natural 'flow' to the layout, which has been successful IMHO.  The important measurement is the loco release shunt (it's a BLT) which must be long enough to clear the longest loco you plan to use plus an inch so it doesn't look forced.  In your case this will likely be an 0-6-0 tender loco or 2-6-4T.  The next measurement to consider is the longest train, with loco and brake van (caboose), which must clear inside the run around loop and at least one fiddle yard (staging area) road. These measurements need to be established before the track is laid, which means you have to decide at that planning stage the overall proportions of the track plan, in the sense of how much of the layout is devoted to the station loop, how much to the 'throat' area and any plain running line before the scenic break, and how much is fiddle yard.  A point about fiddle yards is that any pointwork at the their 'throat' must be at least the length of your longest coach beyond the scenic break, or coaches will assume different directions on the visible, scenic, area of the layout, destroying the illusion.  

 

I try to work to a rule of thirds for this, perhaps the result of learning it for photography.  The running length of the layout, station buffer stop to the far end of the fy, is divided into thirds; a third for the station and it's associated goods yard and other facilities, a third for the throat pointwork and as much plain line as I have room for, and a third fy.  This means that your longest train can clear the station before it starts to disappear into the fy off stage, which prevents the whole thing looking too cramped for realism.  We all know that Ventnor starts straight out of the tunnel mouth but it's hard to find other examples of termini that do this, at least in the UK.

 

My scenic break isn't a tunnel mouth, btw; I find them cliched and like to avoid cliches.  It is a road bridge angled 'away' from the viewing side, preceded by a pipe bridge to draw attention and the thing it draws attention from, a sheet of card painted matt black with an arch in it which is the actual break divider.  Lighting is arranged so that the bridges and general feel of the place suggest that the railway just sort of goes off in that direction without specifying exactly how, and my imagination fills in the details.

 

We've (by which I mean I've) drifted OT a bit but I'm self isolating and filling time.  But I've not really addressed your original query which is about signalling.  I am not up on the Furness' methods, being a GW type, and could only tell you how the GW might have done it.  The GW would probably not have laid that exact track plan, and would have provided a trap point interlocked so that it can only be set for the running line when the running line point is set for the sidings or headshunt at the exit to the goods sidings; in fact wherever sidings come out onto a running line used by passenger trains, so the loop back from the goods shed needs one as well.  

[ForeverAutumn]

12 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

Good Morning,

Refreshed with sleep and coffee, I would suggest a new approach. A 4' wide baseboard would be better split down the centre into two scenes. The LMS branchline/terminus on one side with exchange sidings, the quarry complex on the other side with the quarry company line running between them via a 180 degree curve, probably through a short tunnel. LMS sub-shed, if any, at the terminus. Shed for the quarry company at the quarry. 

This is a good idea, however the baseboard was built months ago, the polystyrene was already glued down, and a river was cut on the side area long ways on the board this plan I found used the most space and still had room for some roads and houses.

[ForeverAutumn]

A somewhat revised version has been made so that it makes sense, signalbox (on the left) and signals added as suggested by a user in the thread, the quarry line disappears behind some houses, and the line to the left will connect to another baseboard leading to halt, (off the top of my head the halt sorta resembles Newtondale Halt, despite that being an LNER station if I'm not mistaken) knowing me I definitely put the signals in the wrong places, (lack of ever going to the UK will do that to ya)

Edited March 27, 2020 by ForeverAutumn

[Happy Hippo]

Looking at the latest track plan, you seem to have a lot hinging on the line running up to the quarry.

 

Quarry access, Goods shed access, loco then the loco shed and carriage shed access as well.

 

One derailment from an errant goods wagon (not uncommon in real life) and the whole lot is going to come to a grinding halt.

 

You have a massive shed and carriage complex which are totally out of proportion to the the branch line it serves.

 

At most the shed might house two locos and the carriages,  probably only two, would probably get stored in the platform road overnight.

 

If you want to see how a set of exchange sidings could be laid out then I'd direct you to this thread by Brian Rolley.

 

Everything has been planned out before you get to the track plan.

 

It might give you more of a feel for British railway operation.

 

It just covers the exchange sidings side of the operation but you can see how Brian has separated the colliery line from the BR line even if they are parallel.

 

t

 

 

 

[ForeverAutumn]

12 minutes ago, Happy Hippo said:

Looking at the latest track plan, you seem to have a lot hinging on the line running up to the quarry.

 

Quarry access, Goods shed access, loco then the loco shed and carriage shed access as well.

 

One derailment from an errant goods wagon (not uncommon in real life) and the whole lot is going to come to a grinding halt.

 

You have a massive shed and carriage complex which are totally out of proportion to the the branch line it serves.

 

At most the shed might house two locos and the carriages,  probably only two, would probably get stored in the platform road overnight.

 

If you want to see how a set of exchange sidings could be laid out then I'd direct you to this thread by Brian Rolley.

 

Everything has been planned out before you get to the track plan.

 

It might give you more of a feel for British railway operation.

 

It just covers the exchange sidings side of the operation but you can see how Brian has separated the colliery line from the BR line even if they are parallel.

 

t

 

 

 

Yes the turnouts will likely end up in different areas this is not final, but is definitely a design I am attempting to go for, the turnouts will probably have a wide radius to prevent derailment and the carriage shed should be about 17-18 inches, the loco shed being about 6-7 inches

[ForeverAutumn]

Another question of mine would be if that the Lms wouldn't design a terminus like this would there be any of the big 4 that would be likely to design a station like this? If there is one I could shove this project aside and use the space for an LMS layout or go with this design and change the company, my decision can be swayed as I don't have any British inventory apart from a Hornby Flying Scotsman, an E2, and a couple teaks and trucks

[Rowsley17D]

I could be totally wrong but I doubt any of the big 4 built a terminus from new. They would have been built by the pre-grouping companies.

[Corbs]

Hello ForeverAutumn

 

Is it a rendition of Ffarquhar on the fictional NWR you are wanting to model, or an LMS variant of same?

[Joseph_Pestell]

7 hours ago, ForeverAutumn said:

Another question of mine would be if that the Lms wouldn't design a terminus like this would there be any of the big 4 that would be likely to design a station like this? If there is one I could shove this project aside and use the space for an LMS layout or go with this design and change the company, my decision can be swayed as I don't have any British inventory apart from a Hornby Flying Scotsman, an E2, and a couple teaks and trucks

 

It's not the terminus itself that is the problem. That's OK if perhaps a little bit less interesting than you could do in the space.

 

The real difficulty is the interface between the main line company's railway and the quarry company's line. It needs some workable exchange sidings. If you don't want to make major changes because of the bits that you have already done, it would be better to put the exchange sidings where you have the sheds and the quarry company's loco sheds top left where you have the sidings.

 

Just for fun, while we are all in lockdown, I might spend a couple of hours drawing the arrangement that I wrote about (both for your 16' x 4' space and for a more typical UK space 11'6 x 7'6 (interior dimensions of a 12' x 8' garden shed).