More Signals at Hessle Haven & Scarborough

[Gallows Close]

Over a working railway ?

It is a listed structure. Moving it to Grosmont just does not do it for me. To do so entails shortening it, and completely changing the layout of the dolls. It would be akin to taking Anne Hathaway's Cottage, moving it to Moreton-in-Marsh, and rebuilding it as two flats. In short, it would cease to be the Falsgrave Gantry I know - Just a collection of recycled parts.

 

Cheers,

Chris.

[micknich2003]

Sorry to disolusion you, the Falsgrave signal bridge, as you see it today is indeed a collection of "Recovered Parts". It does not originate from the c1910 rebuilding of the station, it was put up "New" by the LNER c1933 using refettled parts. The tubular dolls are almost certainly British Railways alterations or replacements. Best Wishes, Mick Nicholson.

[Gallows Close]

Sorry to disolusion you,

 

No disillusion, I have studied the history of Scarborough Station in greater depth than many. The signal bridge at Falsgrave was not listed until 1990, and the listing is quite specific. It is my opinion that the structure should be kept like that, rather than reduced in stature up a Grosmont. But it is just that - my opinion.

 

Anyway, back to the subject. Mike, now that you have some drawings from Scarborough Borough Council, will you be using those when you build Falsgrave signal bridge?

 

Cheers,

Chris.

[Horsetan]

... disolusion...

 

The little-known subsidiary of Rediffusion. They supplied chemicals.

[mikemeg]

The first of the two lattice girders for the next signal bridge is now complete, except for the six additional 'L' angle verticals which form the supports for the outer edge of the decking.

 

I logged exactly how long this took to build, which was around four hours from start of assembly - cutting and bending the 'L' angle bottom horizontal - to this point, not including the time taken to build the jig.

 

Now it's straight onto the second girder while I'm in the frame of mind for building these things. It's very easy to lose the motivation to do these and carry on with one of the other ongoing projects, especially when building these lattices.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

A quick dummy set-up and photograph, just to ensure that everything is as it should be; seems ok

 

My previous career was in IT, in a variety of roles. One of the lessons which we all learned, and yet still has to be learned by some current IT developers, is that it is far easier and cheaper to amend a system specification - the written statement of what a computer system is designed to do - than to change the actual software of the system, once translated into hundreds of thousands or even millions of lines of program code. And this equation can easily involve a time and cost ratio of 1 : 100 i.e. it can be up to one hundred times more time consuming and costly to change the system during development and implementation, than at the design phase. This is the reason I make a very detailed 4mm drawing of the signal to be modelled; if I get the drawing wrong, then it is only one piece of paper and a few hours which is wasted.

 

Fine you might say, so what's the relevance to model making? Same thing, it's far easier to rectify something, or even re-do it, before it's fixed to everything else, hence the checking and the pictures.

 

It's strange how already, even though this is only the second of these signal bridges and the fourth of these 'largish' signal models I have built, this is now becoming 'business as usual'.

 

The bottom 5 mm of the posts on this one have been wrapped with .010" nickel silver to represent the plating on the bottom of the prototype posts.

 

Anyway, everything looks to line up and fit so onto the assembly of the lattice structure.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

No disillusion, I have studied the history of Scarborough Station in greater depth than many. The signal bridge at Falsgrave was not listed until 1990, and the listing is quite specific. It is my opinion that the structure should be kept like that, rather than reduced in stature up a Grosmont. But it is just that - my opinion.

 

Anyway, back to the subject. Mike, now that you have some drawings from Scarborough Borough Council, will you be using those when you build Falsgrave signal bridge?

 

Cheers,

Chris.

 

I guess, for me, this is all about context. There is an ex-GWR signal bridge complete with lower quadrants, in the National Railway Museum. It's impressive, but lost, amidst all of the other railwayana in there.

 

The context of these things was spanning a railway, with multiple tracks and various 'ways to go' each and all of which were controlled by the dolls and arms of the signals. I doubt that its being stood, in pristine but splendid isolation on Scarbrough Station, would provide that same context.

 

And will/would Network Rail or Scarborough Borough Council be prepared to spend money on its ongoing maintenance and upkeep (even if it is only a coat of paint every now and again) in these times of cost cutting and efficiency drives?

 

Again, as with Chris's comments, this is merely my opinion.

 

As an aside I've just discovered, and bought, some of the books of Robin Lidster and Mike Hitches covering the railways in and around Scarborough. Some wonderful photographs and details of this area, especially in the 1950's and even earlier, and what a place it was.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[The Stationmaster]

There is (or possibly 'was') a substantial preserved gantry at Ballarat in Australia. But although it's in its original position in photographs it does look somewhat out of place with crosses on the arms and a track layout under it which has, I understand, been partially rationalised.

 

No doubt the same would happen - and probably to an even greater extent of track rationalisation - at Scarborough, i.e the gantry would no longer be able to be seen in its proper context.

 

So perhaps the best way to preserve the true spirit of this particular 'bitsa' ('bitsa various eras of railway signalling' that is) is as a model set in its meaningful context above a track layout to which it actually relates?

[mikemeg]

 

So perhaps the best way to preserve the true spirit of this particular 'bitsa' ('bitsa various eras of railway signalling' that is) is as a model set in its meaningful context above a track layout to which it actually relates?[/i]

 

That's the plan, though still at the formulation stage. And it won't be just the Falsgrave signal bridge but all of them between Gasworks and Scarborough Central, and there were seven of them, as well as a number of gantries, brackets and single post signals. This will see my signal building activities through well into old age!

 

Don't you just love the way that threads, on here, wander off into all sorts of related areas? Isn't that the great joy of being part of this RMWeb site?

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

So how do I check that the two girders are both identical and symmetrical? Answer is that I put one on top of the other, back to back, and then take a photograph. This soon shows whether they are close enough to 'pass muster'.

 

What do I do if they're not? I swear and I swear a lot; in fact bloody, ....ing, ....ing, ....ing, profusely. Then I check the jig for symmetry, check the second girder for symmetry and then, after a good helping of the red thinking water, I do one of these girders again, though, as yet, this hasn't been necessary but contingency plans are in place.

 

More good luck than good management so far, methinks!

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

Both lattice girders are now made for this second signal bridge. Just a final check to ensure that they are exactly the same length between the posts and that the radii at each end correspond and I can move on to assembling the lattice bridge.

 

Apart from the end radius, which on this one is 2' 6", this lattice is exactly the same size and span as one of the Scarborough signal bridges - the one which stood against the straight shed in Scarborough MPD - and so this jig can be used to make that bridge, with the radius on the Scarborough bridge adjusted to 2' 3".

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

This photograph, along with a whole host of plans of the signalling arrangements and the track layouts from Scarborough Central to Gasworks has just landed in my inbox.

 

The photo is courtesy Mick Nicholson, though as to its original attribution, I don't know. But this is perhaps the best picture of this place that I have ever seen and shows just what an incredible array of signals and general railwayana there was here, right up into BR days. What a place this must have been!

 

Trying to date this photograph. As much of the stock is in maroon, it is clearly after 1957; and the locomotive 61447 was withdrawn in September 1961 after being stored for some time, so sometime in between those dates. Probably favourite would be the summer of 1959.

 

Lastly, just look at that signal bridge, in the middle distance; that must have spanned close on one hundred feet. And how neat and tidy everything is, no grass or weeds growing in the trackbed, nothing out of place. A far cry from the appearance of this place today, as evidenced by Chris's series of photos.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

 

Anyway, back to the subject. Mike, now that you have some drawings from Scarborough Borough Council, will you be using those when you build Falsgrave signal bridge?

 

Cheers,

Chris.

 

Back at the start of this thread, I described the process and some of the known datum measurements by which I try and establish (guess) the dimensions of these things. Making reference to the detailed plans drawn up by Scarborough Borough Council seems to compare quite favourably with the estimates on my 4mm drawing. I am indebted to Dolland for pointing me to these plans for the opportunity to check my estimates against the actual dimensions.

 

In summary, I overestimated the length over the decking by 1mm (259 mm estimate v 258 mm actual); The estimate for the depth of the lattice girder of 30" is spot on. The estimate for height of the main posts is around .5 mm in error.

 

As everything else - height of dolls, spacing of dolls, etc. - is a function of the estimates of the principal dimensions, then I can be reasonably certain that the error rate on the principal dimensions of around 0.4 % is the maximum which applies throughout.

 

I can live with that!

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[the penguin of doom]

Hi Mike.

 

I'm loving these pictures. When I first visited Scarborough, alot of this infrastructure was still there, but unfortunately, this was before I could afford a camera. Its nice to have my memories re-kindled, (also what this site is about....)

 

Just to add my fourpenneth to the relocation discussion, hmmmn, it would be nice to have it somewhere where it could actually still operate?..... Its never going to do that in a station car park. If that meant some minor alterations, then thats ok by me. It would look nice outside Grosmont box....... which I believe has been altered somewhat to preserve functionality?

 

Cheers.

 

Sean.

[mikemeg]

Hi Mike.

 

I'm loving these pictures. When I first visited Scarborough, alot of this infrastructure was still there, but unfortunately, this was before I could afford a camera. Its nice to have my memories re-kindled, (also what this site is about....)

 

Cheers.

 

Sean.

 

Sean,

 

Good to hear from you; another insomniac like me (posting at 00.56). Yes we used to go to Scarborough on weekend days out during the 1950's as well, though I never went by train. We would come into Scarborough down Seamer Road past the locoshed and some of this infrastructure, never really taking any account of it.

 

Unlike you I had a camera - Brownie 127; like you I could rarely afford the film or costs of development.

 

By the time the interest in railways had progressed beyond merely recording the number of the locomotive and into the much wider arena of the 1950's railway environment, and the demands of career, wife and family allowed the interest to be pursued, it had largely gone.

 

So for me these photographs are a revelation allowing, as they do, some reasonably accurate dimensions to be 'elicited' (now that's a euphamism for guessed) and drawings made. Equally importantly they give a vivid impression of a very different railway; one where pride in appearance, pride in tidiness and order was paramount, even if what they were so proud of was thirty, forty or fifty or more years old.

 

Mind you, even then this pride in appearance didn't always extend to the locomotives for they really could be in a hell of a state; witness this B16/1 in the picture.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

Back to the model and this is the bit I always enjoy most and always with an element of trepidation, when the first girder is fixed to the posts and the thing becomes a bridge. Get this wrong and the whole thing is wrong and bloody difficult to put right!

 

On this jig I added the facility to allow the assembled girder to be held level, while the posts are held vertical and square; saves all of those bits of blu-tac and burned fingers!.

 

So, having lined everything up and very lightly tinned the tops of the posts and the area where the radii will abut, then a quick flick over with the iron and the thing is now a bridge.

 

The second girder will use a different jig for its attachment to the posts. Anyway, a quick check with the set square and evrything seems ok. The gap between the crosses and the posts will be covered by the flitch plates which reinforce the join between the radiused lower horizontal and the post.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

Here's another of those old black and white photos of Falsgrave. Again I don't know the date of this picture but would guess at early 60's - yellow warning panel on the dmu?. Contrast the day here with that on the earlier colour photo, this looks like a really mucky old day.

 

Loads of atmosphere though.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[Gallows Close]

Here's another of those old black and white photos of Falsgrave. Again I don't know the date of this picture but would guess at early 60's - yellow warning panel on the dmu?.

 

Hi Mike,

 

It looks like Platform 1A is out of use, so I'm guessing that the Whitby line had closed by the time this photo was taken. If that guess is correct then that dates it after 6th March 1965. Also note that the distant arms are present on the up dolls, which means that Washbeck SB was still open - so dating the photo before 17th May 1970.

 

Cheers,

Chris .

[mikemeg]

I think I've covered the process whereby the second of the lattice girders is fixed to the posts, using a jig specially designed for this. The key things, when attaching the second girder are :-

 

1) The girders should line up laterally i.e. the various vertical and diagonal struts should be parallel on the two girders.

 

2) The gap between the two girders should be consistent along their length, though a certain amount of latitude is allowed by the slight flexibility of these girders in the plane perpendicular to the girder struts.

 

3) The top edges of each girder should be exactly parallel and the same level, so that the decking, when fitted, lies truly horizontal and does not lean to one side.

 

So this process is done with the bridge upside down and with the posts held vertical. Again, the acid test of how successful this has been can be very easily and quickly determined with the aid of the digital camera. So the whole structure should stand unsupported, upside down, with both posts absolutely vertical.

 

For testing the parallel and level of the tops of the girders, I balance a piece of any old etching, which is flat, on top of the girders just to see how it sits. On this there is a slight bit of splaying of the girders in the centre; this will be trued up when the decking and the cross lattices on the bottom are added.

 

In this instance, all seems ok.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

At this point I resort to the tenon saw and 2" x 3/4" lengths of wood; this to build the jig which will support the model through the remaining phases of construction and which will allow the model to be supported after removal from the layout, for whatever reason.

 

I have to confess that until I started to build these large signal models, I was a very indisciplined modeller in that I would often do things out of sequence simply to avoid the onset of boredom. These things changed all of that! On these I stick to the construction sequence, rigidly, and so the sequence now calls for this wooden jig to be made.

 

There is also always the temptation to do one side of something and then move on before the other side is done i.e. adding the flitch plates at each end. This is equally fatal, at least for me, for it can then become very difficult to motivate to return to 'catching up' on the second side. For that reason I always try to do both sides of any handed operation together, simply to avoid that motivation problem.

 

The construction is very straightforward and probably doesn't warrant describing other than the jig is drilled to allow the post fixings, which are 1/16" tube, to pass through without distortion. Later, holes will be drilled to allow the operating wires to drop through the jig.

 

So now the bridge can stand vertical. There is something almost elementally satisfying about shiny brass and nickel silver; sometimes seems a shame to cover it in paint!

 

It might also be worth mentioning that I often take photographs of the models which show the things larger than they are. On this photo, the thing is represented about 1.5 times its actual size - almost to 7mm scale, on the basis that if the model will stand being photographed at this size, then all is square and as accurate as I can achieve.

 

As an aside, the span of this bridge is 52' 3". There were at least two signal bridges at Scarborough, certainly in 1950, which had a span of double this distance i.e. over one hundred feet. Building those will represent a much bigger challenge than these bridges, especially in building very large jigs and lattice girders.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

Every signal I have so far made has had LNER square wooden dolls, approximately 7" square at their tops and between 8.0" and 9.5" square at the bottom, depending on the length of the doll.

 

This signal calls for NER slotted posts, which were of approximately the same dimensions but with fillets, either side of the doll approximately 1.5" wide where the slot in the post was situated.

 

In a previous thread, probably on the old RMWeb, I showed how these wooden dolls were made, not by laminating layers of plasticard but by assembling a box with each side of the doll being made from .030" plasticard and being cut approx. .030" undersize. This was to overcome the propensity of laminated layers of plasticard to warp and twist and also allowed a stengthening rod of .7 mm wire to be inserted into the full length of the doll to aid rigidity.

 

I wanted to use the same method for these slotted dolls but here the shape of the doll is quite different. So the front and back of the doll were cut to include the fillet. Then one side of the doll, up to the fillet, was reduced in width by .030" and the second side glued to it. This second side, which is perpendicular to the decking, obviously only extends up to the slot in the post.

 

Additionally, before this doll is finally assembled, two sides must be drilled to take the spindle of the arm(s) and these arms must be 'trapped' into the doll prior to its final assembly. Final positioning of the arms can be done with the bearing plates, once the doll is assembled and set.

 

Hopefully the photos show the details.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[the penguin of doom]

Hi Mike.

 

As part of my Pullman thread, I ended up buying a couple of back issues of Modeller's Back Track. As luck would have it, there's a colour picture on the back page of one of the issues, (I'll let you know which issue when I can get to the magazine if you're interested?), of an excursion leaving Scarborough in the 1930's. I think its passing Washbeck, but of interest to this thread is that the train is beneath an absolutely huge signal gantry, must be spanning six or seven tracks. It only seems to have signals on one half, (the west half?), and I believe they are all of the slotted post type.

 

I'd scan it and print it for you, but obviously, copyright prevents this. You're welcome to the magazine once I'm done with it though.

 

Cheers.

 

Sean.

[Rick White]

Hi there Mike :

 

A totally fascinating thread on signal construction as i am sure others would agree. I'm in awe at your perseverence and skill.

Thanks for sharing your well developed talents with us.

 

Best regards,

Rick

[mikemeg]

Hi Mike.

 

As part of my Pullman thread, I ended up buying a couple of back issues of Modeller's Back Track. As luck would have it, there's a colour picture on the back page of one of the issues, (I'll let you know which issue when I can get to the magazine if you're interested?), of an excursion leaving Scarborough in the 1930's. I think its passing Washbeck, but of interest to this thread is that the train is beneath an absolutely huge signal gantry, must be spanning six or seven tracks. It only seems to have signals on one half, (the west half?), and I believe they are all of the slotted post type.

 

I'd scan it and print it for you, but obviously, copyright prevents this. You're welcome to the magazine once I'm done with it though.

 

Cheers.

 

Sean.

 

Sean,

 

Many thanks for this. Clearly if the photo is reproduced in a magazine, then you can't post it for general appraisal, on here. I'll pm you about seeing the photo which would be very useful.

 

There was indeed a monster at Washbeck. I only have a single photo of this thing, dated sometime in the fifties or early sixties. Just doing the initial quick sizing calculation (depth of lattice girder, number of sections) then this thing could have been seventy five to eighty five feet in span; perhaps more if I've miscalculated.

 

Again, many thanks.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[mikemeg]

Hi there Mike :

 

A totally fascinating thread on signal construction as i am sure others would agree. I'm in awe at your perseverence and skill.

Thanks for sharing your well developed talents with us.

 

Best regards,

Rick

 

Rick,

 

Many thanks for the comments. If there is one word in your comment, which is most significant, it is 'developed', for I wasn't born with the ability to make these things, these techniques have been developed.

 

As Jim S-W (now there's a great model maker) constantly says, 'if he can do it, then others can do it', which are my sentiments too. The only things I do, which many others don't, are simply try and then persevere until it's right, as right as I can achieve; that's all I do.

 

Cheers

 

Mike