Signalling for modellers who don't know much about signalling

[TheSignalEngineer]

but was formaly known as "Ensaldo " but thats a whole nuther story 

I remember the Ansaldo fiasco very well. The first I heard was at a meeting about resignalling from Cheadle Hulme through Stockport to Slade Lane. Railtrack told us that they intended to commission it starting on Christmas Eve 1999, reopening on the first working day in January 2000. Given that it was just over a year away I expressed my doubts as to whether it could be done in the time, and how did they intend to get several hundred staff required to work through the Millennium Bank Holiday? They told me no worries, if we weren't interested then they had an overseas company willing to do it to their dates. Railtrack committed themselves to a system that had, I understand, only been used up to then on a terminal station with DC electrification and tried to install it on a 25KV ac through line with proposed speeds up to 100MPH.

Stockport is still being operated using Victorian lever frames, so I think our offer of commissioning during 2001 looks good in hindsight, although the equipment we intended to install would now be beyond the product support period being specified by Railtrack at the time.

Edited September 4, 2017 by TheSignalEngineer

[peanuts]

I remember the Ansaldo fiasco very well. The first I heard was at a meeting about resignalling from Cheadle Hulme through Stockport to Slade Lane. Railtrack told us that they intended to commission it starting on Christmas Eve 1999, reopening on the first working day in January 2000. Given that it was just over a year away I expressed my doubts as to whether it could be done in the time, and how did they intend to get several hundred staff required to work through the Millennium Bank Holiday? They told me no worries, if we weren't interested then they had an overseas company willing to do it to their dates. Railtrack committed themselves to a system that had, I understand, only been used up to then on a terminal station with DC electrification and tried to install it on a 25KV ac through line with proposed speeds up to 100MPH.

Stockport is still being operated using Victorian lever frames, so I think our offer of commissioning during 2001 looks good in hindsight, although the equipment we intended to install would now be beyond the product support period being specified by Railtrack at the time.

as a former signaller at heaton norris and edgeleyno2 at the time i had a front row seat to all that went on and believe me its was a litteral traincrash from start to finnish . the best way i heard the whole fiasco described was railtarck thought they were buying windows 2000 when in fact they were buying windows 3 :1 without the correct floppy discs 

[The Johnster]

as a former signaller at heaton norris and edgeleyno2 at the time i had a front row seat to all that went on and believe me its was a litteral traincrash from start to finnish . the best way i heard the whole fiasco described was railtarck thought they were buying windows 2000 when in fact they were buying windows 3 :1 without the correct floppy discs 

 

 

I get worried when signalmen say something is a literal traincrash...

[TheSignalEngineer]

This nice example of an 0-6-0 with the empty vans for Cadbury's waiting at the Home signal on Lifford Curve while an express passes on the Up Main at Lifford West Junction

Lifford West Junction (pjs,0681) by geoff7918, on Flickr

If I may, I will continue to drift on the subject of this picture and layout.

The Lifford West Junction used to have its own signalbox which was just off the bottom right corner of the picture.  Some time before WW2, possibly as early as 1926 when Kings Norton Station was quadrupled, the junction became controlled by Bournville Station Junction SB.

 

Given the various running times the freight would not normally have been allowed to run onto the Lifford Curve if the express had passed Blackwell due to the time needed to ensure it was at a stand and give Line Clear to Kings Norton. The Cadbury Vans was an important traffic, so the empties usually overtook all freights waiting in the queue for the Camp Hill line at Duddeston Road. The loaded train at about 1.20pm from Cadbury's Siding, part if Trip 49,  ran as a Class E, later Class 6 non-stop through to Water Orton for the vans to be marshalled onto various express freight services throughout the country. It was the only booked train of the day to get a clear run straight through New Street station.

Back to the picture, given the amount of traffic on the Camp Hill line in those days it wouldn't be clever to have a trip coming to a stand at Lifford Station Junction to wait for the road, so when possible it would be dropped straight round to Lifford West Junction and held there for sufficient margin to get to Cadbury's and be shunted back inside.

[big jim]

there used to be a really good section in the rulebook explaining semaphore signalling and things like station limits, home, section etc but im jiggered if i can find it now in the new on line book

 

this may be of some use though, the current RSSB 'handbook' which has some useful info in it

 

https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/rulebooks/RS521%20Iss%203.pdf

[PaulRhB]

there used to be a really good section in the rulebook explaining semaphore signalling and things like station limits, home, section etc but im jiggered if i can find it now in the new on line book

 

this may be of some use though, the current RSSB 'handbook' which has some useful info in it

 

https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/rulebooks/RS521%20Iss%203.pdf

Are you thinking of TS3? (Absolute Block)

[big jim]

Are you thinking of TS3? (Absolute Block)

thats the one, not in the drivers rulebook anymore and i cant find it covered in any other section of the drivers rulebook only 'dumbed down' in that handbook

 

edit: found the module but its aimed at signallers regards regulations rather than the principles of absolute block and for that reason the handy 'this is absolute block' diagrams are missing, still useful though if you like reading!

 

https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/rulebooks/GERT8000-TS3%20Iss%206.pdf

Edited September 4, 2017 by big jim

[PaulRhB]

Go to the RSSB site, find the search section, and put in the module number then choose an old version by scrolling down the list, in this case the 2007 edition has what you want, not sure why they culled those diagrams from AB

https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/rulebooks/gert8000-ts3%20iss%203.pdf

Edited September 4, 2017 by PaulRhB

[big jim]

Go to the RSSB site, find the search section, and put in the module number then choose an old version by scrolling down the list, in this case the 2007 edition has what you want, not sure why they culled those diagrams from AB https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/rulebooks/gert8000-ts3%20iss%203.pdf

spot on, thats the one i was thinking of, that SHOULD prove useful to a lot on here, proper back to basics stuff in plain english

[The Stationmaster]

I remember the Ansaldo fiasco very well. The first I heard was at a meeting about resignalling from Cheadle Hulme through Stockport to Slade Lane. Railtrack told us that they intended to commission it starting on Christmas Eve 1999, reopening on the first working day in January 2000. Given that it was just over a year away I expressed my doubts as to whether it could be done in the time, and how did they intend to get several hundred staff required to work through the Millennium Bank Holiday? They told me no worries, if we weren't interested then they had an overseas company willing to do it to their dates. Railtrack committed themselves to a system that had, I understand, only been used up to then on a terminal station with DC electrification and tried to install it on a 25KV ac through line with proposed speeds up to 100MPH.

Stockport is still being operated using Victorian lever frames, so I think our offer of commissioning during 2001 looks good in hindsight, although the equipment we intended to install would now be beyond the product support period being specified by Railtrack at the time.

 

A nice little earner I found due to the problems with the colours of the Ansaldo aspects which were probably best described as 'not exactly matching the BR spec'.  I went as an ISA on what was, I think, the third trial and assessment of the colours displayed by the signals and it was one that confirmed they had made little progress since the first assessment.  Most worrying was that if saw the yellow through a bit of lineside foliage waving about in the wind it turned into a very good imitation of a green aspect - no problem if there was no lineside foliage, but ...

 

And of course we're back to that 'literal traincrash' possibly

[Chimer]

This nice example of an 0-6-0 with the empty vans for Cadbury's waiting at the Home signal on Lifford Curve while an express passes on the Up Main at Lifford West Junction

Lifford West Junction (pjs,0681) by geoff7918, on Flickr

 

Pictures like this go a long way towards addressing the issue the OP raises at the level many people need.  It shows the junction, it shows the two stop signals needed to safeguard it, and it shows without any words why they're needed.  To people who just want to get things a bit more right, that's all they need.  Whether those signals are homes, starters, or section signals isn't really that important (imho) - if a model junction has those two signals, plus a splitter for traffic going the other way, it'll look better than if it doesn't.  Add more stop signals (which I always thought were called starters before reading this thread, but now I'm not so sure) at the departure end of each platform, and you'll be more or less there, more often than not.  Ground signals are, I suspect, something that most (?) of us feel we can do without, until we seek to enter the top ten per cent club.

 

Ducking for cover, but pragmatic at all times ...

 

Cheers

 

Chris

[RailWest]

>>>It shows the junction, it shows the two stop signals needed to safeguard it, and it shows without any words why they're needed.  To people who just want to get things a bit more right, that's all they need. 

 

That would depend upon what it was that people wanted to get right, and how far they wanted to go towards being correct. For example, the picture as shown IMHO would not stop a modeller committing the faux pas of having trains approaching the signals on both lines at the same time, even if both arms were 'on'. (S)he would need to understand about accepting trains under Regulation 4, not fouling the Clearing Points, possible provision of Outer Homes etc.

[Flying Pig]

Pictures like this go a long way towards addressing the issue the OP raises at the level many people need. It shows the junction, it shows the two stop signals needed to safeguard it, and it shows without any words why they're needed. To people who just want to get things a bit more right, that's all they need.

 

Cheers

 

Chris

Except that looking at the picture without also reading TheSignalEngineer's posts could be misleading and lead to incorrect operation, even though the fixed signals were correctly placed.

 

Edit: put better by RailWest

Edited September 6, 2017 by Flying Pig

[Colin_McLeod]

The last two posts illustrate the failure of the experts to understand that it does not matter. Getting the signals in the right looking place is what the OP is all about. Not Regulation 4 (or 5), clearing points, overlaps, absolute block working or any of the other details that are not relevant to the modeller who is only glad to have a couple of signals that look right.

Edited September 6, 2017 by Colin_McLeod

[beast66606]

>>>It shows the junction, it shows the two stop signals needed to safeguard it, and it shows without any words why they're needed.  To people who just want to get things a bit more right, that's all they need. 

 

That would depend upon what it was that people wanted to get right, and how far they wanted to go towards being correct. For example, the picture as shown IMHO would not stop a modeller committing the faux pas of having trains approaching the signals on both lines at the same time, even if both arms were 'on'. (S)he would need to understand about accepting trains under Regulation 4, not fouling the Clearing Points, possible provision of Outer Homes etc.

 

Unless they were freight and they were accepted under Reg 5 ...

[Reorte]

The last two posts fall back to the problem that it does not matter. Getting the signals in the right looking place is what the OP is all about. Not Regulation 4, overlaps, block working or any of the other details that not relevant to the modeller who is only glad to have a couple of signals that look right.

Quite. It's got the basics. It's a long way short of being full knowledge but is a step in the right direction, and a model with such signals is going to be more accurate than one without, even if it is not operated in a fully prototypical matter. The modeller is not a real-world signal engineer and doesn't need to know everything before being let loose on his railway. He's now got some idea about what signals are for and the general idea behind them, and will be aware that that isn't the whole picture. Later on he'll learn more (if he wants) and add more to the layout, or start operating it more realistically, or will apply that to the next layout, but the important thing is "Ah, I see what they're there for" without being thrown in the deep end.

[RailWest]

>>> It's a long way short of being full knowledge but is a step in the right direction, and a model with such signals is going to be more accurate than one without,.......

 

I would not disagree with that view. As a 'starting point', then no doubt perhaps it does achieve what the OP was seeking. However, I do not think that negates my point that it depends how far you want to go towards being 'correct'.

 

If a modeller is just happy to have signals that look the right sort and are in the right place, then fine. But if he also wants to operate his layout with prototypical correctness (is that PC in another form - eek!), then I would argue that he does need to understand at least the basics of block working etc as well.

 

Clearly there are many differing views on this matter - I'm not suggesting that anyone is better or worse than any other, merely offering my own perspective. 

[Reorte]

>>> It's a long way short of being full knowledge but is a step in the right direction, and a model with such signals is going to be more accurate than one without,.......

 

I would not disagree with that view. As a 'starting point', then no doubt perhaps it does achieve what the OP was seeking. However, I do not think that negates my point that it depends how far you want to go towards being 'correct'.

 

If a modeller is just happy to have signals that look the right sort and are in the right place, then fine. But if he also wants to operate his layout with prototypical correctness (is that PC in another form - eek!), then I would argue that he does need to understand at least the basics of block working etc as well.

 

Clearly there are many differing views on this matter - I'm not suggesting that anyone is better or worse than any other, merely offering my own perspective. 

Sure, but even the modeller who wants everything to be as accurate as is technically possible in model form needs to start somewhere. Learn a few simple bits, understand what they're for, but not absolutely everything, then when you're happy with that move on to the next level of detail. Personally speaking I do want to get my model as accurate as I can. There's still an awful lot I don't know, rather a lot of stuff in this thread that I didn't know, and some of it I still haven't wrapped my head around. If I'd had all of it thrown at me at the start I'd have run off in panic. So it's not really just about how accurate the modeller wants to be, but getting the understanding to be accurate in a manageable way.

 

So going back to the picture, it shows why the signals are there. Lesson one learned. Those who want more can then move on to the next lesson - maybe that'll be the role the out of sight distants played. And so on.

Edited September 6, 2017 by Reorte

[bike2steam]

There's always this;- 

[Talltim]

Think I'll stick to train orders (or ERTMS)!

[Junctionmad]

Sure, but even the modeller who wants everything to be as accurate as is technically possible in model form needs to start somewhere. Learn a few simple bits, understand what they're for, but not absolutely everything, then when you're happy with that move on to the next level of detail. Personally speaking I do want to get my model as accurate as I can. There's still an awful lot I don't know, rather a lot of stuff in this thread that I didn't know, and some of it I still haven't wrapped my head around. If I'd had all of it thrown at me at the start I'd have run off in panic. So it's not really just about how accurate the modeller wants to be, but getting the understanding to be accurate in a manageable way.

 

So going back to the picture, it shows why the signals are there. Lesson one learned. Those who want more can then move on to the next lesson - maybe that'll be the role the out of sight distants played. And so on.

 

+1

[big jim]

Think I'll stick to train orders (or ERTMS)!

ERTMS is a minefield too!

[St. Simon]

or ERTMS

No such thing as ERTMS being actively used in the UK yet, only ETCS, the traffic management software to make it into ERTMS (although only ever in a control centre and not in the cab, a train driver never uses ERTMS) is only just about to be put on trial

 

Simon

[St. Simon]

Hi,

 

The problem with modelling colour light signalling is that the books produced, and the video linked to further up the page, are very basic, they are so many combinations and ways of doing it in different situations.

 

No source material that I have come across in the modelling world, or in the public domain, actually gives the definitive guide on signalling, whilst I hope to change that somewhat with my proposed book, I can never actually cover every situation and every layout in one book, as there's so many of them!

 

Simon

[Talltim]

No such thing as ERTMS being actively used in the UK yet, only ETCS, the traffic management software to make it into ERTMS (although only ever in a control centre and not in the cab, a train driver never uses ERTMS) is only just about to be put on trial

 

Simon

Not many train orders either