Signal position advice

[Izzy]

Could I ask for some advice/suggestions please regarding signal placement on a tiny layout I've made? It wasn't planned, but arose out of a few spare bits of track I had on my workbench, with the idea to put them together on a piece of board as a little test track rather than throw them away. And it sort of developed from there....as a base on which to try out various ideas for the construction of different bits and some scenery.

 

Originally I used the concept of a simple goods yard as the basis - well it's only a very small loop and one siding - with a single post Home signal at the point toe exit set back into a retaining wall. I had thought of adding a subsidiary shunt signal on this. I don't know if this would have been correct, or in the right place, but it was to try out my signal building skills using MSE parts. I made up a Ratio plastic Home signal I had and put it in place as a temporary measure, just to see if it all worked out. Then I got too clever and decided to add a platform so I could try building a station building and signal box and run a DMU.

 

Now I feel the current Home signal is no longer in the right place, or would have been used as such to allow passenger train movements from the platform, with or without a shunt signal arm. A starter at the platform end is I think now needed instead, which messes up the retaining wall and current Home signal position, unless they can be retained as well.

 

Here's a shot to show the current state. It's meant to be BR Eastern (GE) region early 1960's.

 

 

 

 

Any thoughts?

 

thanks,

 

Izzy  

 

 

[The Stationmaster]

Can we see the whole of the modelled track layout please  (as it stands thus far there appear to be several things missing ... but ... )

[vitalspark]

The signal inset at the bridge would only be in order if the extreme left track was a through line with the two others joining same..and then both would need signals to protect entry..a disc for the siding and shirt post starter on the platform if insufficient room is available in the 6 foot.

If as I suspect you use the platform track as the main line with the others as a run round or headhunt then there would need to be a signal protecting the train before it fouled any points.

A signal can be on the 'wrong' side in a situation like this as sighting and speed on approach is not a consideration so probably easiest would be for a starting signal to be on a short post on the platform with ground discs protecting the points from the other two loops/sidings.

As said a complete diagram would be helpful.

If the staiton was to represent a through line then also a catch point would be needed to protect same from careless shunting on the sidings adjacent and of course ground discs..but we are starting to get complicated now and before you know it the 'layout' will have grown to an 8' x 4'!

Signalling is an important visual addition to a small layout and it needs to be right ..generally if everything is protected it is probably right but as you can see there is nothing to stop a loco moving forward to the signal against the points.

Our train set is large (Alloa) and is hopefully correctly signalled with such diverse signal arms as the scissors type allowing wrong line running back from the platform etc.

We have researched it and it is run at exhibitions with all signals operating..even disc repeaters that the public never see..but even then every so often we still turn up 'impossible' movements which would have required signalling..that we seem to have missed!..thats the challenge of this hobby I suppose.

 

Great fun

 

Davy

[Izzy]

Can we see the whole of the modelled track layout please  (as it stands thus far there appear to be several things missing ... but ... )

 

Is this more helpful?

 

 

 

 

 

Izzy

[Londontram]

You know what I'v no idea about the signal but what a lovely little layout - dont put a bus on the bridge though. Steve

[RailWest]

Out of curiosity, what are the overall dimensions of that layout please and how much stock can you run-round in the platform?

[vitalspark]

You know what I'v no idea about the signal but what a lovely little layout - dont put a bus on the bridge though. Steve

….and wots wrong with a bus!!...

[Izzy]

Out of curiosity, what are the overall dimensions of that layout please and how much stock can you run-round in the platform?

It's 33"x6". A1 sheet length because the baseboard is my usual construction of layered mount board, (as is much of the rest of the layout). It's 2mm scale of course, and designed to accept my standard plug-in stock cassette system. The platform can take a diesel and a couple of mk 1's, or a 2/3 car DMU, but the loco release is only good for a smaller diesel such as a 15/20/24 etc. The run around is only capable of holding about 3 wagons, which makes shunting a real challenge and good fun, as has been making it.

 

Izzy

[PaulRhB]

The signal could be possibly on a bracket cantilevered out so the driver can see it, but on the end of the platform controlling the exit from the station rather than out beyond the point. There's nothing currently to tell the crew whether the signal applies to the loop or platform. You'd also probably need 2 ground signals to control the run round at either end facing for moves over the crossover. A third to control movements off the loop into the section where probably an advance starter beyond the bridge is the section signal. I'm assuming that rather than a limit of shunt board for moves out of the siding side of the loop. It could be a limit of shunt board but then anything picked up from the siding would have to shunt to the platform to depart into section.

Looks super

[Izzy]

The signal could be possibly on a bracket cantilevered out so the driver can see it, but on the end of the platform controlling the exit from the station rather than out beyond the point. There's nothing currently to tell the crew whether the signal applies to the loop or platform. You'd also probably need 2 ground signals to control the run round at either end facing for moves over the crossover. A third to control movements off the loop into the section where probably an advance starter beyond the bridge is the section signal. I'm assuming that rather than a limit of shunt board for moves out of the siding side of the loop. It could be a limit of shunt board but then anything picked up from the siding would have to shunt to the platform to depart into section.

Looks super

Thanks. I rather suspected that what you advise might be the case with regard to the starter. The ground signals are of course no real problem, although I doubt that I will make them work, unlike some of my more skilful 2mm colleagues. Pity about having to lose the current signal though. It might be wrongly placed but looks quite good where it is, and the wall will now need altering.

 

Thanks to all for the help and comments.

 

Izzy

[bécasse]

Sorry, with a layout as simple as this both the signal and the signal box are wrong, neither should be there. The three points would each be worked by a single lever locked by an Annett's Key which would either be attached to the train staff or would be kept in the safe keeping of the person in charge of the station (to facilitate shunting by pinch bar in the absence of a loco).

 

The only passenger (and non-tramway) terminal that was as simple as this on the former Great Eastern Railway was on the erstwhile Tollesbury branch - and that is exactly how that was worked. (The AK being attached to the train staff in GER days but later kept at the station - in the latter case special regulations prevented a train approaching the station while pinch bar shunting was happening.)

 

I was tempted to suggest that the signal might be converted to a distant for a level crossing down the line, but although there was a major gated level crossing on the Tollesbury branch (with the A12 London-Colchester trunk road) it wasn't protected by signals. The only signal actually on the branch was the fixed distant for the junction at Kelvedon.

[PaulRhB]

Not my area of (limited) knowledge but it looks small enough to be a glorified token hut with a signalman porter if that's at all appropriate for the region?

[phil-b259]

Thanks. I rather suspected that what you advise might be the case with regard to the starter. The ground signals are of course no real problem, although I doubt that I will make them work, unlike some of my more skilful 2mm colleagues. Pity about having to lose the current signal though. It might be wrongly placed but looks quite good where it is, and the wall will now need altering.

 

 

Ah but does it (the wall needing altering I mean). While yes the signal has to go, the resultant space could always be used for a hut of some kind / ballast bin /  handy store for p-way junk, etc. As to why the wall would have been built like that in the first place, that question will need some more thought but someone must be able to come up with a plausable suggestion (For example say a previous track layout was different needed something there but it was removed when the tracks were altered)

[The Stationmaster]

Not my area of (limited) knowledge but it looks small enough to be a glorified token hut with a signalman porter if that's at all appropriate for the region?

 

The signalbox is too large but it might of course have been constructed to that size to allow for future expansion - there you are, ready story to explain it unless you want to change it to something smaller (the small Wills 'Staverton Bridge' 'box is about the right size for the number of point ends and signals you would have).

 

Would it just be worked by a couple of ground frames?  Well possibly but there would have to be two of them - one where the siding/loop joins the running line and another for the engine release points - but then you wouldn't have any signals at all.  Up to you really whether or not you have signals and a signalbox but if you do it's all easily explained

[bécasse]

 

Would it just be worked by a couple of ground frames?  Well possibly but there would have to be two of them - one where the siding/loop joins the running line and another for the engine release points - but then you wouldn't have any signals at all.  Up to you really whether or not you have signals and a signalbox but if you do it's all easily explained

 

At Tollesbury, the only comparable GER example, each point was worked by its own lever which incorporated an Annett's lock*, there were no ground frames as such, see http://lowres-picturecabinet.com.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/43/main/59/374744.jpg. So yes, it was a Light Railway, but Izzy's layout has no space for a trap or traps coming off the back road, so it, like Tollesbury, must be a Light Railway as otherwise the layout would never have received BoT approval.

 

Of course, it's Izzy's model, but he has a choice, he can make it as close to the prototype as practical or he can have a toy railway that includes a signal box and signal because he thinks that they are fun, not because they would have existed on the real railway.

 

*​ I originally wrote "Annett's Lock" relying on what appeared to be an authoritative source, the Sectional Appendix just states "lock", but I now believe these were actually Hodgson's Locks - certainly they look the same as those installed on the Thaxted line which definitely had Hodgson's Locks.

[Londontram]

 

Of course, it's Izzy's model, but he has a choice, he can make it as close to the prototype as practical or he can have a toy railway that includes a signal box and signal because he thinks that they are fun, not because they would have existed on the real railway.

Harsh! just remember this is a fun hobby and Izzy has asked for help and advice not ridicule or derogatory comments 

[The Stationmaster]

At Tollesbury, the only comparable GER example, each point was worked by its own lever which incorporated an Annett's lock, there were no ground frames as such, see http://lowres-picturecabinet.com.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/43/main/59/374744.jpg. So yes, it was a Light Railway, but Izzy's layout has no space for a trap or traps coming off the back road, so it, like Tollesbury, must be a Light Railway as otherwise the layout would never have received BoT approval.

 

Of course, it's Izzy's model, but he has a choice, he can make it as close to the prototype as practical or he can have a toy railway that includes a signal box and signal because he thinks that they are fun, not because they would have existed on the real railway.

 

Actually it's a model railway and - like many modellers - he hasn't included a trap point (although there is room for a wheelstop block which was an acceptable substitute).  The level of scenic construction hardly suggests 'light railway' to me and the bloke wants some signals so let's help him get to where he wants to get by giving him the chance to create a reasonable impression without any major howlers.  

 

railway modelling is actually fun for some people

[bécasse]

Harsh! just remember this is a fun hobby and Izzy has asked for help and advice not ridicule or derogatory comments 

 

Oh dear, I didn't mean to come over as harsh, but simply to spell out that Izzy has alternatives:

 

1) He could try to model an ex-GE prototype as closely as possible as it might just have been in BR days immediately pre-Beeching (although Tollesbury went a decade earlier) in which case both the signal and the signal box would be inappropriate - although the station building isn't a bad representation of what the GE might have provided. It would make a nice micro-layout, though, and there is good trade support. A Heljan WuM rail bus would be very appropriate, Derby Lightweight and Cravens d.m.u.'s might have been seen, and the goods could be worked by an 05 (coming from Heljan - or an easy and excellent kit from Judith Edge) or possibly an 04 or even J15 steam (coming).

 

2) He could keep the signal box and a signal on the grounds that this is his model railway. That's fine by me too, but it ceases to be but a pastiche of the real railway - and that to me is a toy, albeit a grown-up's toy. It is better than in my youth when I used to have a Duchess of Montrose hauling two coaches round a 3-rail oval on a piece of 5x3 ply and a few Bilteezi kits for "scenery", but it is still a toy.

 

3) The alternative I forgot before, he could model the cut-short (for a new road?) terminus of a "preserved railway", virtually all of which are (for essential commercial reasons) full-size "toys" and which tend to glory in signals galore.

 

If it were me I would go for option one (and I have recently exhibited a micro-layout of a very different prototype which attempts to be "real" in exactly that way), but it is Izzy's model railway and so it is his choice. I have merely provided information on the prototype situation (and I would be quite happy to provide more if required).

 

Incidentally, mention has been made of the use of a "derailer" instead of a trap point. The LNER (alone of the big-four) was a significant user of derailers but mainly in tight urban settings and I think it unlikely that one would have been the favoured solution here. One might well have appeared, though, in a "preserved line" scenario.

[The Stationmaster]

 

Incidentally, mention has been made of the use of a "derailer" instead of a trap point. The LNER (alone of the big-four) was a significant user of derailers but mainly in tight urban settings and I think it unlikely that one would have been the favoured solution here. One might well have appeared, though, in a "preserved line" scenario.

 

No, actually I mentioned a wheelstop block, not a derailer - not quite the same thing

[beast66606]

No, actually I mentioned a wheelstop block, not a derailer - not quite the same thing

 

The urge to say something often prevents people reading whats actually written Mike - but then we've both been here many times before.

[Izzy]

Oh dear, I didn't mean to come over as harsh, but simply to spell out that Izzy has alternatives:

 

1) He could try to model an ex-GE prototype as closely as possible as it might just have been in BR days immediately pre-Beeching (although Tollesbury went a decade earlier) in which case both the signal and the signal box would be inappropriate - although the station building isn't a bad representation of what the GE might have provided. It would make a nice micro-layout, though, and there is good trade support. A Heljan WuM rail bus would be very appropriate, Derby Lightweight and Cravens d.m.u.'s might have been seen, and the goods could be worked by an 05 (coming from Heljan - or an easy and excellent kit from Judith Edge) or possibly an 04 or even J15 steam (coming).

 

2) He could keep the signal box and a signal on the grounds that this is his model railway. That's fine by me too, but it ceases to be but a pastiche of the real railway - and that to me is a toy, albeit a grown-up's toy. It is better than in my youth when I used to have a Duchess of Montrose hauling two coaches round a 3-rail oval on a piece of 5x3 ply and a few Bilteezi kits for "scenery", but it is still a toy.

 

3) The alternative I forgot before, he could model the cut-short (for a new road?) terminus of a "preserved railway", virtually all of which are (for essential commercial reasons) full-size "toys" and which tend to glory in signals galore.

 

If it were me I would go for option one (and I have recently exhibited a micro-layout of a very different prototype which attempts to be "real" in exactly that way), but it is Izzy's model railway and so it is his choice. I have merely provided information on the prototype situation (and I would be quite happy to provide more if required).

 

Incidentally, mention has been made of the use of a "derailer" instead of a trap point. The LNER (alone of the big-four) was a significant user of derailers but mainly in tight urban settings and I think it unlikely that one would have been the favoured solution here. One might well have appeared, though, in a "preserved line" scenario.

 

 

Thank you for explaining your earlier posts. On first reading they did seem a bit harsh, but after a few times I gained the impression that wasn't meant to be the nature of them.

 

As my main modelling thrust these days is the depiction of the early 1960's Green diesel era, in and around the area I have lived for virtually all of my life, that of the Tendring peninsula of North East Essex, your option one is the way I have been going since my current and future rolling stock suits it as well as my main layout.

 

However, you will appreciate that as this little layout came about purely by chance, has been built using spare bits and pieces, (I am calling it Odds End as it seems appropriate), and thus involved no pre-planning of any kind, it doesn't represent anywhere as such. It just developed as I tried out various ideas for how bits could be arranged and made to work. The test-bed aspect. You were right to describe it as a toy train layout as it stands because basically that's exactly what it is. If I am honest, I think all the layouts I have built have been of the pastiche type, whether they have meant to be or not!

 

But it has been fun/interesting/a challenge to make. You always seem to learn a lot with everything you do and make, and for me this particular layout has been no exception. It was within this context that I posted the original question re the signal position since my signalling knowledge is rather more limited than it really aught to be, and I thought with the forbearance and assistance of fellow RMweb members I might learn a bit more.

 

And thanks to you all I have, for which I am most grateful. The impact signalling has on layout/track design is far more profound that I have appreciated to date. I think in the past with other layouts a measure of luck with the track design has masked this.

 

Anyway, the new, shorter post starter for the platform is being made up and something will be found to fill the gap in the retaining wall.

 

As for motive power. Well, what could be better than a CL15.

 

 

 

Cheers,

 

Izzy

[PaulRhB]

The retaining wall recess could have some pipes coming up that have passed beneath the tracks or just be a refuge.

[bécasse]

 

 

As my main modelling thrust these days is the depiction of the early 1960's Green diesel era, in and around the area I have lived for virtually all of my life, that of the Tendring peninsula of North East Essex, your option one is the way I have been going since my current and future rolling stock suits it as well as my main layout.

 

 

As for motive power. Well, what could be better than a CL15.

 

 

 

Yes, I meant to include a Cl.15 in my post but forgot - a bit silly because I used to see them at Hither Green on freights which, having reversed in Liverpool Street Station, had come through the East London line tunnels, and I have one of the models in the store cupboard for "old times sake".

 

Noting your connection with the Tendring Hundred, if you are ever looking for inspiration for a through station layout with interesting possibilities, have a look at an OS map, preferably an older large scale one, and if you look closely you can find apparent traces of a railway curving south east of Mistley and heading eventually towards Thorpe-le-Soken. In fact, it never was a railway, but it was intended to be, and at one time there were quite a lot of earthworks to be seen. I have long thought that a station at Tendring on that line could make a splendid basis for a model with double track south to Thorpe (doubled in the 1930s as part of the Clacton improvement works), single track north to Mistley (with perhaps a passing loop at Bradfield Heath) and an agricultural "tramway" heading off to a canning plant. Passenger trains could include Clacton portions off Parkeston Quay trains from the north (with complete trains for "Butlins" traffic on summer Saturdays) and Harwich-Clacton "shift change" trips for railway workers at PQ/Harwich as well as more mundane locals. A lot of the domestic coal for Clacton and Walton would probably have come that way from Whitemoor, too.

[Izzy]

 

 

Yes, I meant to include a Cl.15 in my post but forgot - a bit silly because I used to see them at Hither Green on freights which, having reversed in Liverpool Street Station, had come through the East London line tunnels, and I have one of the models in the store cupboard for "old times sake".

 

Noting your connection with the Tendring Hundred, if you are ever looking for inspiration for a through station layout with interesting possibilities, have a look at an OS map, preferably an older large scale one, and if you look closely you can find apparent traces of a railway curving south east of Mistley and heading eventually towards Thorpe-le-Soken. In fact, it never was a railway, but it was intended to be, and at one time there were quite a lot of earthworks to be seen. I have long thought that a station at Tendring on that line could make a splendid basis for a model with double track south to Thorpe (doubled in the 1930s as part of the Clacton improvement works), single track north to Mistley (with perhaps a passing loop at Bradfield Heath) and an agricultural "tramway" heading off to a canning plant. Passenger trains could include Clacton portions off Parkeston Quay trains from the north (with complete trains for "Butlins" traffic on summer Saturdays) and Harwich-Clacton "shift change" trips for railway workers at PQ/Harwich as well as more mundane locals. A lot of the domestic coal for Clacton and Walton would probably have come that way from Whitemoor, too.

 

 

Funny you should suggest that............

 

 

Sorry for the poor quality of the shot. My main layout. Taken last summer at a little get together in a private residence. Probably the one and only time it will ever leave home. As you can see it's my normal pastiche standard, with a long way to go until it's halfway respectable. One main aim was to attempt to produce a model of what I have always called the typical Tendring lines station building, (although half the stations are unique designs at each location). I had always considered them, silly me, particular to the line, but discovered whilst making mine that the design was also used on the Waveney valley line and in other places, and in practice it would also appear that no two buildings are exactly alike.

 

Anyway, back to finishing the signal post.....

 

Izzy

[Izzy]

Just thought I would post a shot of the finished starter in it's new position. MSE arm and ladder, bits of brass tube/wire etc. All I have to do now is work out how to get it to work mechanically via the wire running to the signal box.....

 

 

The other challenge I have set myself is justifying the existence of the signal and box. Adding a FPL to the entrance point, appropriate ground signals - I think they are needed at both ends of the loop, by the starter, and where traps should be on the back road - please correct me if I am wrong. Then there are those traps. They could be added/spliced into the point for clearance, but whether this is possible on practical terms without wrecking the point is another matter altogether.

 

I think the box should cope with this, I fitted a 10 lever frame........but then again, maybe not. Ah well, what's life without a few little challenges along the way.....

 

Izzy