Mid-Cornwall Lines - 1950s Western Region in 00

[St Enodoc]

Hi John,

 

Rather fortuitous, I've just taken delivery ( literally ) of these ( please excuse the pic quality )

 

image.jpeg

 

I've not tried them before but would like to give them a go for some turnouts I'm planning to make.

I thought they may be an alternative to cutting up copper clad and as they're pre etched it could save me some time !

Know what you mean about the fingers !!!

Yours is coming on a treat matey

They look good don't they Grahame. Let us know how you get on.

[St Enodoc]

Have you thought about using a hardish block of rubber ( pencil eraser) to hold the rail in place whilst filing ?

That's a good thought Stu. I've tried blocks of wood, which don't work very well, but something a bit more resilient might. I'll have a go.

[Stubby47]

That's a good thought Stu. I've tried blocks of wood, which don't work very well, but something a bit more resilient might. I'll have a go.

 

I can now see you in your local branch equivalent of W H Smiths, picking up all the pencil erasers and testing them...

[Andrew P]

Excellent work on the V's / Rail John.

[bgman]

They look good don't they Grahame. Let us know how you get on.

Hi John,

Worth a try so if / when I get something worth showing you I'll be back matey

 

Cheers for now

Grahame

[sp1]

I filed up five 1:5 vees this evening. I start with a length of rail twice as long as the crossing rails need to be - about 150 mm - and file one half of the vee on each end. Only when I'm ready to solder it up do I cut the rail in half. This way it is easy to make sure that the two halves of each vee are of opposite hand.

 

20160920 001 1 in 5 vee straight side.JPG

First I scribe a mark in the web about 3 mm from each end of the rail. Then I file this at the 1:5 angle until the mark is reached, when about half the thickness of the web remains untouched. Next, I bend the filed end of the rail gently towards the filed face so that it is flat along the length of the rail.

 

20160920 002 1 in 5 vee angle side.JPG

Now I turn the rail over and scribe a mark in the web about 5 mm from each end. I file each end of the rail at the same 1:5 angle until I reach the mark. This results in a nice sharp point at the tip of the vee.

 

Finally I draw-file all the edges to remove the burrs and just take the edge off the top of the vee, to give a smoother run into the crossing.

 

Until I get some S4 jigs (watch this space - a kind soul has ordered me a set to pick up next time I visit my daughters in Sussex) I have to hold the rail down by hand while all this filing is going on. As a result, five vees is about as much as I can manage in one go. When life has returned to my fingertips later in the week I will have a crack at some blades, although one set per session is about par for the course with them.

I use one of those little bench vices with a rotating head - they are available from various places here in the UK for between £10-20 (don't know if they are available over there) - they even come with rubber faces for the jaws. Simply clamp it to a table, rotate the head/ jaws, and put the rail on a thin (about 2 x 1'') strip of wood and file away - saves a lot of wear and tear on the fingers! Edited September 20, 2016 by sp1

[St Enodoc]

I use one of those little bench vices with a rotating head - they are available from various places here in the UK for between £10-20 (don't know if they are available over there) - they even come with rubber faces for the jaws. Simply clamp it to a table, rotate the head/ jaws, and put the rail on a thin (about 2 x 1'') strip of wood and file away - saves a lot of wear and tear on the fingers!

Thanks sp1. I've got a small vice - although not one with a rotating head - but it's on the bench in the workshop. Evening work is done indoors at the study room desk and fitting a vice to that isn't practicable unfortunately, as there is a deep lip at the front edge - yes, I've tried!

[Mallard60022]

Aybody building their own points (and track) should have a look at the Right Track DVD with Norman Soloman performing. I have a copy and loan for postage costs is available.

Phil

[St Enodoc]

I can now see you in your local branch equivalent of W H Smiths, picking up all the pencil erasers and testing them...

I resisted the temptation to ask the girl at the counter for a large rubber and found this one on the shelf myself.

 

It has a nice feel to it, being made of real rubber as far as I can tell and not the shiny white plastic that is the usual stuff these days.

 

I'll report back after trials.

[St Enodoc]

On 21/09/2016 at 20:51, St Enodoc said:

I resisted the temptation to ask the girl at the counter for a large rubber and found this one on the shelf myself.

 

IMG_0001.JPG

It has a nice feel to it, being made of real rubber as far as I can tell and not the shiny white plastic that is the usual stuff these days.

 

I'll report back after trials.

Well, that worked an absolute treat. I filed up three sets of blades tonight with no drama at all - thanks Stu, I owe you a pint.

 

Oh, I forgot, you already owe me one so I suppose we are quits now.

 

Anyway, here is the result:

 

I filed the inside of the blade first, only filing the head of the rail so that the foot retained its strength. When I reached about half way through the web, I stopped and bent the rail gently towards the filed face so that the running edge was straight again. The cross-section of the rail at the end is now L-shaped.

 

I then turned the rail over and rested the unfiled foot of the rail in a narrow slot cut into the edge of the building board. This let the other side of the blade lie nice and flat while I filed the outside, not to a knife edge but fine enough to sit nicely against the stock rail inside the joggle. The last job, as with the vees, was to take the edge off the top corner to provide a smooth run in to the point.

Edited July 21, 2023 by St Enodoc
images restored

[St Enodoc]

I assembled three A5Y points yesterday, which together with an A5R I had already built will make up the Penzance throat.

 

I laid them out on the bench to make sure that there were no obvious problems, then prepared the layout so that I could install them.

 

I lifted the track in the Up and Down Mains where the new points go, then drilled the holes for the point motor operating wires. The area below the narrow baseboard here is quite tight for space, as the L-girders are very close together, so I spent a bit of time working out the best position for the motors on the two points nearest to Porthmellyn Road. Consequently, the throat is about 30 mm further to the left than originally designed, but this won't be a problem as everything will still be behind the backscene when it is fitted eventually.

 

I laid the points in my usual way, fixing them down with water-based impact adhesive and holding them down with the vee blocks.

 

Finally I "clipped and padlocked" the points in position for the main lines (using Blu-Tak this time rather than pins, as the tiebars are a bit shorter and pins would have fouled passing trains) and bridged across the frogs with temporary jumpers.

 

A quick test with a loco or two and some rolling stock and that was that for today.

Edited July 21, 2023 by St Enodoc
images restored

[bgman]

They look good don't they Grahame. Let us know how you get on.

Hi John,

 

As promised, I've had a trial with the DCC Concepts track bases and made a 1:7 crossover from the two I purchased.

I'm uncertain about the final product as it's lacking the chair detail which naturally occurs using the copper clad method or as with these solder pads.

I may use the crossover somewhere but as yet undecided, that said its been an interesting exercise.

 

 

 

I've also tried something different too. I found some Scaleway OO gauge thin sleepered track which I cut around the chairs and made up sleepers from 1mm ply. The rail + chairs were then stuck onto the ply sleepers to produce this small trial piece....

 

 

 

 

 

Usual cruel enlargements, but worth spending an hour or so to see what it looks like. Not perfect but it's was a very quick exercise.

It's my take on using the C & L chairs for scratch building the track which I might trial a turnout.

Sleepers were quickly weathered with Humbrol dark brown wash, weathering powders and acrylic paints.

Any comments welcomed.

 

Grahame

[St Enodoc]

Hi John,

 

As promised, I've had a trial with the DCC Concepts track bases and made a 1:7 crossover from the two I purchased.

I'm uncertain about the final product as it's lacking the chair detail which naturally occurs using the copper clad method or as with these solder pads.

I may use the crossover somewhere but as yet undecided, that said its been an interesting exercise.

 

image.jpeg

 

image.jpeg

 

I've also tried something different too. I found some Scaleway OO gauge thin sleepered track which I cut around the chairs and made up sleepers from 1mm ply. The rail + chairs were then stuck onto the ply sleepers to produce this small trial piece....

 

image.jpeg

 

image.jpeg

 

image.jpeg

 

image.jpeg

 

Usual cruel enlargements, but worth spending an hour or so to see what it looks like. Not perfect but it's was a very quick exercise.

It's my take on using the C & L chairs for scratch building the track which I might trial a turnout.

Sleepers were quickly weathered with Humbrol dark brown wash, weathering powders and acrylic paints.

Any comments welcomed.

 

Grahame

Very interesting Grahame. Yes, copperclad in any of its forms doesn't really look like chaired track but I can put up with that for the sake of the ease and speed of construction (and adjustment!).

 

As for slicing the chairs off Scaleway track and gluing them to plywood sleepers - hmm, you're a better man than I am, Gunga Din.

[St Enodoc]

Having had success with Stubby's Rubber, I realised that I had one of these stashed away so I will see if that makes the job easier/harder/the same.

 

Edited July 21, 2023 by St Enodoc
images restored

[St Enodoc]

I had a go with the Jumbo rubber tonight and as a result the General (post #560) has, sad to say, been reduced to the ranks. The Jumbo is bigger, so it's easier to hold; it's heavier, so it doesn't need so much force to hold it down; and as well as having the abrasive surface it's more rigid, so there's no tendency at all for the rail to move under the force of the file. Having filed up two pairs of blades, I won't go so far as to say that I thoroughly enjoyed the experience but the prospect of doing about 80 more pairs no longer fills me with a sense of foreboding.

 

So, until I get the jigs this method will do for the next few rounds of point building. Having said that, I've found that I've got enough ready-made parts for about nine-and-a-half (don't ask) B8s, so progress over the next few weeks should be more rapid than of late.

[Stubby47]

I think the phrase 'Stubby's Rubber' is one best forgotten as quickly as possible...

[St Enodoc]

I think the phrase 'Stubby's Rubber' is one best forgotten as quickly as possible...

Fair enough - it's been superseded by the Jumbo anyway so how about Stubby's Jumbo?...

Edited September 29, 2016 by St Enodoc

[Stubby47]

Fair enough - it's been superseded by the Jumbo anyway so how about Stubby's Jumbo?...

 

[St Enodoc]

This is our Labor Day long weekend and I am happy to say that it has consisted largely of playing trains.

 

On Saturday we had another session on the 0 gauge Midland layout I mentioned a back in July. This time there were six of us meaning that we had enough operators to run a sequence, which added a new dimension to the afternoon.

 

Today I was invited to visit a huge shed – 75 ft x 55 ft in old money. Inside the shed is another 0 gauge layout, this time a model of the New York Central West Shore Route. Although it is still under construction, we were able to run a few trains and I can say truly that when it is complete it will be one of the most magnificent layouts it has been my privilege to see.

 

There are some photos of the layout at an earlier stage of construction at http://www.nmra.org.au/Layout_Tours/Howarth%20NYC/index.html.

 

And now for something completely different.

 

I have decided to use a Modratec interlocking lever frame for Porthmellyn Road and have, with the help and support of a good friend who has built one or two of these already (see this link on the Modratec website: http://modratec.com/article16.php), started the task of designing the interlocking using Modratec’s SigScribe software.

 

The first step in all of this was to draw up the signalling diagram for the layout. As Porthmellyn Road is based on Par, this was the place to start so I bought the Signalling Record Society’s CD containing the relevant signal box diagrams (a low-resolution version is available free on their website at http://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/gwf/S1061.htm).

 

Porthmellyn Road’s track layout is not quite the same as the real Par and some of the detailed arrangements are different in model form (such as the connections to the double slips). I therefore made a few changes to come up with the Porthmellyn Road signal box diagram.

 

It is quite a complicated layout, so to simplify the interlocking we are probably going to reduce the length of some of the overlaps (we are not usually dealing with safety of life when operating a 00 gauge model railway) and to eliminate some of the conditional locks as these seem to increase the complexity of the locking disproportionately. We also want to keep the number of levers to 54 or less as the Modratec frames come in multiples of six levers.

 

I’d be very interested in any constructive comments on the signal box diagram before we finalise it, finalise the interlocking and I order the frame. With this in mind, let me point out some detail that is not shown on the diagram:

 

-         10 disc reads to the Loop and Up Sidings.

-         11 disc reads to the Up Main (possibly – not sure if this is necessary), Branch, Loop and Up Sidings.

-         16 disc reads to the Down Main and Down Goods Loop.

-         18 points were motor-operated without a separate facing point lock.

-         21 disc reads to the Branch and Loop.

-         24 disc reads to No 1 Spur and the Down Main.

-         25 disc reads to No 1 Spur, the Up Main and Down Main. To proceed to No 2 Spur, it can be passed when On.

-         26 disc reads to the Down Main and Chapel Sidings. To proceed to the Up Branch, it can be passed when On.

-         32 disc reads to the Down Main only.

-         34 disc reads to the Up Main only.

-         35 disc reads to the Down Main, Chapel Sidings and the Up Branch.

-         44 disc reads to the Loop.

-         49 signal reads to the Loop and Branch.

-         The levers for hand-worked points A, B and C will not be part of the frame.

 

Separately, I’ve now got all the bits ready to build another three points. When these are laid I will be able to connect up one end of the first three Penzance loops.

Edited July 21, 2023 by St Enodoc
images restored

[The Stationmaster]

First of all as it's a mechanical layout with Absolute Block there are no such things as overlaps - they simply do not exist in Absolute Block signalling.  The critical things are the Clearing Point - which is part of the working of the block system and might or might not have an influence on signal placing in order to add flexibility (i.e. providing an additional Home Signal in order to create a Clearing Point clear - in rear - of pointwork) and making sure stop signals are the correct distance in rear of fouling points where they are protecting trailing points.  

 

There are two signals where Clearing Point distance plays any part.  The first  is the Down Main Home Signal (2/17) which is more than 440 yds in rear of the Down Main Inner Home Signal (3/7 - you have two Number 2s I see) in order to create a Clearing Point thus allowing trains needing to cross to the branch to be accepted without the road being set towards the branch platform.  The second is the Up Main Home Signal (55) which is exactly 440 yards in rear of the Up Main Starting Signal (54) which allows an Up train to be accepted while a movement is taking place between the Main lines and the Branch platform line/yard - an obvious aid to smooth working and keeping trains on the move.  Obviously it will be a major problem to reproduce 440yds in 4mm scale but you might still consider setting the Home Signals back what looks like a 'reasonable visual distance' to make operation look a bit more realistic (if there's room to do so of course).  

 

Otherwise as far as the signals are concerned I have no comments at all except the positive 'it's right'.

 

As far as interlocking is concerned the choice is yours.  The biggest visual problem on a model railway with accurately placed signals is to have signal indications which blatantly disagree with the setting of points so that would always be my first concern in respect of interlocking function.  Sequential locking of successive stop signals would obviously be a 'nice to have' although it is far from essential and could be 'enforced' by operator discipline; interlinking between block instruments (if you are going to have them) and signals isn't really relevant in the model world unless you're going ultra safety conscious realistic.  The big problem, especially with all those single disc signals, is going to be conditional locking as the consequences of not having it might reflect in disagreement between point setting and signal indication - but that's your choice.

 

Incidentally if you've looked at the locking chart for Par you will have seen that the GW/WR principle of locking not only a signal immediately in rear of a point but the one in rear of that is applied in most instances (in some cases conditionally) thus, for example 19 points not only lock signal 54 (as one would obviously expect) but also lock signal 55 - over 440 yards in rear of them.

[St Enodoc]

First of all as it's a mechanical layout with Absolute Block there are no such things as overlaps - they simply do not exist in Absolute Block signalling.  The critical things are the Clearing Point - which is part of the working of the block system and might or might not have an influence on signal placing in order to add flexibility (i.e. providing an additional Home Signal in order to create a Clearing Point clear - in rear - of pointwork) and making sure stop signals are the correct distance in rear of fouling points where they are protecting trailing points.  

 

There are two signals where Clearing Point distance plays any part.  The first  is the Down Main Home Signal (2/17) which is more than 440 yds in rear of the Down Main Inner Home Signal (3/7 - you have two Number 2s I see) in order to create a Clearing Point thus allowing trains needing to cross to the branch to be accepted without the road being set towards the branch platform.  The second is the Up Main Home Signal (55) which is exactly 440 yards in rear of the Up Main Starting Signal (54) which allows an Up train to be accepted while a movement is taking place between the Main lines and the Branch platform line/yard - an obvious aid to smooth working and keeping trains on the move.  Obviously it will be a major problem to reproduce 440yds in 4mm scale but you might still consider setting the Home Signals back what looks like a 'reasonable visual distance' to make operation look a bit more realistic (if there's room to do so of course).  

 

Otherwise as far as the signals are concerned I have no comments at all except the positive 'it's right'.

 

As far as interlocking is concerned the choice is yours.  The biggest visual problem on a model railway with accurately placed signals is to have signal indications which blatantly disagree with the setting of points so that would always be my first concern in respect of interlocking function.  Sequential locking of successive stop signals would obviously be a 'nice to have' although it is far from essential and could be 'enforced' by operator discipline; interlinking between block instruments (if you are going to have them) and signals isn't really relevant in the model world unless you're going ultra safety conscious realistic.  The big problem, especially with all those single disc signals, is going to be conditional locking as the consequences of not having it might reflect in disagreement between point setting and signal indication - but that's your choice.

 

Incidentally if you've looked at the locking chart for Par you will have seen that the GW/WR principle of locking not only a signal immediately in rear of a point but the one in rear of that is applied in most instances (in some cases conditionally) thus, for example 19 points not only lock signal 54 (as one would obviously expect) but also lock signal 55 - over 440 yards in rear of them.

Mike, I was rather hoping you would be able to respond. Many, many thanks for doing so so swiftly and comprehensively.

 

Thinking about your comments in order:

 

- Thanks for putting me right on overlaps/clearing points/fouling points. Based on your comments, we can simplify our earlier thoughts somewhat. You are of course right that the Down Main Inner Home is lever 3 not 2 - oops.

 

- Neither the Down Main Home nor the Up Main Home are a full (scale) 440 yards (17 ft) from the next signals in rear. The Down Main Home is about 10 ft in advance of the Down Main Inner Home, round a 90 degree curve, so I think that will work. The Up Main Home is also about 10 ft in advance of the Up Main Starting, more or less in a straight line. Unfortunately, I can't move it further away without it disappearing behind the scenic break but I think I will pretend that the full 440 yards is available.

 

- Thanks for the overall endorsement that we haven't made any real howlers. That is really encouraging.

 

- I agree with your comment on signals and points that conflict visually with each other. That is the main reason I like to interlock my layouts. If no points can be moved against a signal that is Off and if no signal can be pulled Off when the points aren't set correctly, then that is as far as I need to go. Beyond that, I'm happy to simplify - for example, I don't think that Modratec can do sequential locking (but I will double check). We won't be using bells/block instruments under the present plans and, in case anybody is wondering, we won't have any track circuits either and the FPLs will be dummies, as will the trap points.

 

- All the ground signals will be single discs, as I have tried and failed in the past to make double discs work (I take off my hat to those who can do this). I can avoid conditional locking for most of them by accepting some minor limitations on parallel moves, but for a couple (24 and 26 I think and possibly 25, although if 25 doesn't have to lock 2 (which I don't think it does) we might be OK) that would be too restrictive, so I will stick with conditional locking on those.

 

- Yes, I have looked at the locking chart. I think I understand about 75% of it but the rest, especially the entries in brackets, is a bit beyond me I'm afraid. I did pick up the specific situation that you have highlighted but again, on the basis that we are not dealing with matters of life or death, I will probably simplify things in that regard too.

 

Overall then Mike, lots of useful stuff which we will feed into SigScribe and see how it turns out.

 

Thanks again and I'll bring things up to date as we make progress.

[The Stationmaster]

1.  Sort out you 'in advance' and 'in rear' - 2 is in rear of 3 not in advance of it.  Imagine you area standing in the four foot of the Down Main looking at No3 - it will be in advance of of you, don't turn round - keep facing in the direction of travel and thus 2 is in rear of you, if you aren't sure of this just reach down and tap your own rear to remind you where it is    I reckon the 10 feet is more than adequate visually to regard as 440yards - just an example of selective compression.

 

2. A simple fiddle for 26 is to treat it as a white light disc (incorrect for period if it's newish locking but you can't have everything and you can regard your model as not having been brought up to full postwar standards locking wise - which was quite common into the 1960s/early '70s anyway) so you make 26 released by 27, locks 48 both ways (another fiddle) leaving you with (released by 29 with 48 normal).  

 

3. Take  this white light business a bit further and you can do what the GWR did and simplify a lot of locking - goes back to the days when conditional locking was a major problem on GWR designed locking.  Thus 34 can also become a white light disc released by 53, locks 29 both ways leaving a conditional (locks 48 with 29 reverse), and a fiddle, also conditional  (locks 27 both ways with 29 reverse).

 

11 (white light) released by 19 locks 22 BW (both ways) and of course locks 23, 24, 25, 45 and 52.   And conditional (locks 46 and with 22 normal)

 

All the other discs have to be red light signals as they don't read to any other stop signal with points in advance of them standing normal.

 

You can take away some of the locking between conflicting signals by using points - e.g 11 doesn't lock 21 because it locks 23 (and vice versa of course) which isn't necessarily prototypical for fully tied up locking but you're not working to full scale safety standards.

 

Hope all that helps more than it confuses.

[St Enodoc]

1.  Sort out you 'in advance' and 'in rear' - 2 is in rear of 3 not in advance of it.  Imagine you area standing in the four foot of the Down Main looking at No3 - it will be in advance of of you, don't turn round - keep facing in the direction of travel and thus 2 is in rear of you, if you aren't sure of this just reach down and tap your own rear to remind you where it is    I reckon the 10 feet is more than adequate visually to regard as 440yards - just an example of selective compression.

 

2. A simple fiddle for 26 is to treat it as a white light disc (incorrect for period if it's newish locking but you can't have everything and you can regard your model as not having been brought up to full postwar standards locking wise - which was quite common into the 1960s/early '70s anyway) so you make 26 released by 27, locks 48 both ways (another fiddle) leaving you with (released by 29 with 48 normal).  

 

3. Take  this white light business a bit further and you can do what the GWR did and simplify a lot of locking - goes back to the days when conditional locking was a major problem on GWR designed locking.  Thus 34 can also become a white light disc released by 53, locks 29 both ways leaving a conditional (locks 48 with 29 reverse), and a fiddle, also conditional  (locks 27 both ways with 29 reverse).

 

11 (white light) released by 19 locks 22 BW (both ways) and of course locks 23, 24, 25, 45 and 52.   And conditional (locks 46 and with 22 normal)

 

All the other discs have to be red light signals as they don't read to any other stop signal with points in advance of them standing normal.

 

You can take away some of the locking between conflicting signals by using points - e.g 11 doesn't lock 21 because it locks 23 (and vice versa of course) which isn't necessarily prototypical for fully tied up locking but you're not working to full scale safety standards.

 

Hope all that helps more than it confuses.

Damn, I always get advance and rear mixed up. Must try harder...

 

Yes, based on comments elsewhere on RMWeb about white lights and/or yellow discs both 25 and 26 will be white light discs. I'll work through your suggestions for 11 and 34 as well.

 

I'll try what you suggest with the points as well. I think that 23 is released by 19 and 41 is released by 42 but I'll look at the others too.

 

Thanks again.

[The Stationmaster]

Damn, I always get advance and rear mixed up. Must try harder...

 

Yes, based on comments elsewhere on RMWeb about white lights and/or yellow discs both 25 and 26 will be white light discs. I'll work through your suggestions for 11 and 34 as well.

 

I'll try what you suggest with the points as well. I think that 23 is released by 19 and 41 is released by 42 but I'll look at the others too.

 

Thanks again.

 

25 should be either a red disc or, if altered post 1950, a yellow arm/light disc  (yellow arm/light discs are very different from red arm/white light discs.

 

One thing you might find handy - especially for a model railway where we can ignore some normally basic safety criteria - is to start by dealing with the locks and releases among the pointwork then move on from there to locking/releases between points and signals.  E>G 19 will release 13 (and you could then use 13 to lock 22 BW to get round providing some other locks on 22).  The basic principle is that you use locks and releases between point levers to prevent conflicting routes being set up or to ensure that a route can only be set once another point has had to be set in order to create a usable route.

 

Incidentally one thing which might be worth looking at is some alterations to the lie of 48 A end (i,e the end nearest the signalbox.  It would make things simpler locking wise if the A end of 48 had the normal position reversed and was made to work in conjunction with 29B - renumber as 48 and use one of the spare levers to work the now separate B end of 48 (we'll use 39 for that in the example below).  That would give better flank locking in any case - a good thing.

 

The locking could then be as follows 27 locks 29;  33 releases 48;  39 locks 27BW and 48.  And if you wanted to save a bit of locking 27 could lock 48BW (which in effect is the converse of 48 releases 26 from either position [with 27 reverse] ).  Note too that you can get the leads in the right order as well so you'd pull 27 or 29 then 33 then 48 to go out onto the Down Main; or 27 or 29 then 39 to go into the siding (and then walk back down the frame to clear the relevant signal of course - can't win 'em all).

[St Enodoc]

25 should be either a red disc or, if altered post 1950, a yellow arm/light disc  (yellow arm/light discs are very different from red arm/white light discs.

 

One thing you might find handy - especially for a model railway where we can ignore some normally basic safety criteria - is to start by dealing with the locks and releases among the pointwork then move on from there to locking/releases between points and signals.  E>G 19 will release 13 (and you could then use 13 to lock 22 BW to get round providing some other locks on 22).  The basic principle is that you use locks and releases between point levers to prevent conflicting routes being set up or to ensure that a route can only be set once another point has had to be set in order to create a usable route.

 

Incidentally one thing which might be worth looking at is some alterations to the lie of 48 A end (i,e the end nearest the signalbox.  It would make things simpler locking wise if the A end of 48 had the normal position reversed and was made to work in conjunction with 29B - renumber as 48 and use one of the spare levers to work the now separate B end of 48 (we'll use 39 for that in the example below).  That would give better flank locking in any case - a good thing.

 

The locking could then be as follows 27 locks 29;  33 releases 48;  39 locks 27BW and 48.  And if you wanted to save a bit of locking 27 could lock 48BW (which in effect is the converse of 48 releases 26 from either position [with 27 reverse] ).  Note too that you can get the leads in the right order as well so you'd pull 27 or 29 then 33 then 48 to go out onto the Down Main; or 27 or 29 then 39 to go into the siding (and then walk back down the frame to clear the relevant signal of course - can't win 'em all).

Lots more food for thought there Mike, which I will digest in due course.

 

I actually looked at the arrangement you suggest for the Chapel Sidings, as this is how it is shown on a later (1979) SRS diagram and also on George Pryer's 1992 diagram. We decided to stick with the earlier arrangement but in the light of your comment I will have another look.