Help please new modern image layout.

[stevie_ruc]

That looks good, I like the new "industry" sidings (steel came to mind when I looked, but could easily be anything) and the TMD.  The P/Way yard looks ideal for posing things like tampers, an MPV, etc.  Just make sure there's enough room for a loco to get between the depot buildings and the fuel spur without having to go onto the running lines!  

 

Experience with my own fiddle yard says you might fins a couple of crossovers mid-way along useful.  Most of my sidings can hold between one and 3 2-car DMUs, but being end to end one tended to block in another, so crossovers half way down some of the longer sidings allow things in and out easier.  That empty space at the bottom might be good for a few short sidings too, for locos, DMUs, etc.

 

If I were you I'd keep the programming track completely separate from the layout rather than have it connected to the fiddle yard, to prevent embarrassing mistakes that I've never made such as accidentally reprogramming multiple decoders at the same time...  I do quite like your fiddle yard design, it is unusual and presents certain limitations on trains not being able to pass on their way in and out at the same time if using certain roads, but gives more flexibility with modern double ended trains than the traditional separate "up" and "down" yards.

I like the idea of steel industry to, or concrete... the P/Way yard is exactly as you described. Ill definitely  put crossovers between loops 2 and 3 in the fuddle yard, great idea thanks. most of my trains will be double ended with there odd loco hauled train. will make for fun time shuffling in the fiddle yard !

 

Cheers

[imt]

I like the idea of steel industry to, or concrete... the P/Way yard is exactly as you described. Ill definitely  put crossovers between loops 2 and 3 in the fuddle yard, great idea thanks. most of my trains will be double ended with there odd loco hauled train. will make for fun time shuffling in the fiddle yard !

 

Cheers

 

Love the typo - fuddle yard - just what mine turns into at times!  Get some Peco Loco Lifts for picking up locos and moving them around.  Absolutely hands off - saves my detailng from being wiped out! As for ballast handling, I am not an expert I just assumed that some sort of over the track hopper system with trucks tipping into a conveyor at the bottom would be what was used.  Same kind of thing for mass concrete making.

[stevie_ruc]

I have literally just got 3 loco lifts arrived in the post today. Great minds and all that. Fuddle yard- could be a new thing.

[imt]

I have literally just got 3 loco lifts arrived in the post today. Great minds and all that. Fuddle yard- could be a new thing.

 

I think they are great.  However I throw out the rubbish sides and buy 45mm by 3mm (I think check the sizes) strip wood which is a force fir in to the aluminium but make the whole thing rigid - not my idea but I cannot remember where I first saw it.  I also put pairs together to help move carriages - that is expensive BUT the advantage is that you can run trains through them without problems.  They would particularly fit into your through running yard.

[St. Simon]

Hi Stevie,

 

Here are my thoughts:

 

ORANMORE.pdf

 

The main point from my view is that you would have a trap point at the ends of the 'Goods Loop' lines in real life (shown using red / green track), whether you want to add those in is up to you.

 

If you have any questions, just ask!

 

Simon

Edited November 23, 2017 by St. Simon

[5BarVT]

The main point from my view is that you would have a trap point at the ends of the 'Goods Loop' lines in real life (shown using red / green track).

Ah, the trap point trap! You’ve missed one Simon. ;-) On your diagram, 306 points are passenger (exit from the loop platform) so another trap point is needed opposite 306B.

Having criticised Simon, I need to say what a good job he has done in drawing this up for you. I know the package that is used for signalling plans and it is not the quickest to use. Simon knows what I do for the day job, and may well have been told that one of my frequent questions is “What is the layout required to do? What train movements does it need to support?”

The distances on this layout are much shorter than apparent on the pdf signal plan and so the signalling suggested will look too much on the model. I think quite a bit can be taken out which will make it look more realistic (and cheaper!).

Stevie, would you be open to a minor layout change which I think might improve both the signalling and the way the layout works?

I have printed out the plan in bits and once I have scribbled all over it I will try to put more detail on my summary above.

Paul.

[Clive Mortimore]

Hi Steve and Simon

 

I have a few questions about the TMD.

 

Simon, why have you put all those shunt signals in a shed? Normally there would be an exit signal, all other movements would be hand signals by the shed staff as they moved locos around.

 

Steve, once your locos have been refueled they need to reverse on to the running lines to then reverse again to enter the shed. Have a look at a few prototype locations and see if you can squeeze one into your layout.

[imt]

Ah, the trap point trap! You’ve missed one Simon. ;-) On your diagram, 306 points are passenger (exit from the loop platform) so another trap point is needed opposite 306B.

Having criticised Simon, I need to say what a good job he has done in drawing this up for you. I know the package that is used for signalling plans and it is not the quickest to use. Simon knows what I do for the day job, and may well have been told that one of my frequent questions is “What is the layout required to do? What train movements does it need to support?”

The distances on this layout are much shorter than apparent on the pdf signal plan and so the signalling suggested will look too much on the model. I think quite a bit can be taken out which will make it look more realistic (and cheaper!).

Stevie, would you be open to a minor layout change which I think might improve both the signalling and the way the layout works?

I have printed out the plan in bits and once I have scribbled all over it I will try to put more detail on my summary above.

Paul.

 

Simon might have missed the need for a trap left of 306A BUT I don't think the OP wants it anyway because the loop is not a platform face (see posts above) but a goods loop.  So Platform 3 is Goods Loop 1 and the Goods Loop is Goods Loop 2.  As you say an excellent job by a professional.  I am impressed by the huge amount of detailed work.  I could spend - no doubt will - hours reading and understanding it all.

[imt]

Hi Steve and Simon

 

I have a few questions about the TMD.

 

Simon, why have you put all those shunt signals in a shed? Normally there would be an exit signal, all other movements would be hand signals by the shed staff as they moved locos around.

 

Steve, once your locos have been refueled they need to reverse on to the running lines to then reverse again to enter the shed. Have a look at a few prototype locations and see if you can squeeze one into your layout.

 

1) It's Christmas - lots of lights?

2) I'd read the fuelling depot on his plan to be the storage and tanker road, and the headshunt to be refuelling and headshunt - there would seem to be space.  Wouldn't that work?  There are problems with his TMD anyway so maybe some suggestions would help him improve it.

[stevie_ruc]

Hi Stevie,

 

Here are my thoughts:

 

ORANMORE.pdf

 

The main point from my view is that you would have a trap point at the ends of the 'Goods Loop' lines in real life (shown using red / green track), whether you want to add those in is up to you.

 

If you have any questions, just ask!

 

Simon

 

Oh my goodness is all I can say. That looks amazing. Ill get it printed out and have it adorn the layout. I appreciate that there has been a lot of work went it to it Simon.Ill def add the trap points think they will add to the realism of the layout. As for questions ill have plenty as I go along.

 

Thanks 

[stevie_ruc]

Ah, the trap point trap! You’ve missed one Simon. ;-) On your diagram, 306 points are passenger (exit from the loop platform) so another trap point is needed opposite 306B.

Having criticised Simon, I need to say what a good job he has done in drawing this up for you. I know the package that is used for signalling plans and it is not the quickest to use. Simon knows what I do for the day job, and may well have been told that one of my frequent questions is “What is the layout required to do? What train movements does it need to support?”

The distances on this layout are much shorter than apparent on the pdf signal plan and so the signalling suggested will look too much on the model. I think quite a bit can be taken out which will make it look more realistic (and cheaper!).

Stevie, would you be open to a minor layout change which I think might improve both the signalling and the way the layout works?

I have printed out the plan in bits and once I have scribbled all over it I will try to put more detail on my summary above.

Paul.

Yes Paul always open to new ideas . Hope it doesn't give Simon much work if he would be kind enough to implement changes at this stage?

[stevie_ruc]

1) It's Christmas - lots of lights?

2) I'd read the fuelling depot on his plan to be the storage and tanker road, and the headshunt to be refuelling and headshunt - there would seem to be space.  Wouldn't that work?  There are problems with his TMD anyway so maybe some suggestions would help him improve it.

Yes refuelling and head-shunt done on the same road and the other was for the tankers to come in. But as always open to suggestions.

 

Cheers

[St. Simon]

Ah, the trap point trap! You’ve missed one Simon. ;-) On your diagram, 306 points are passenger (exit from the loop platform) so another trap point is needed opposite 306B.

Having criticised Simon, I need to say what a good job he has done in drawing this up for you. I know the package that is used for signalling plans and it is not the quickest to use. Simon knows what I do for the day job, and may well have been told that one of my frequent questions is “What is the layout required to do? What train movements does it need to support?”

The distances on this layout are much shorter than apparent on the pdf signal plan and so the signalling suggested will look too much on the model. I think quite a bit can be taken out which will make it look more realistic (and cheaper!).

Stevie, would you be open to a minor layout change which I think might improve both the signalling and the way the layout works?

I have printed out the plan in bits and once I have scribbled all over it I will try to put more detail on my summary above.

Paul.

 

Hi,

 

Paul, yes you are quite correct, I'm not sure exactly why I missed that.

 

Yes, the problem with models is the space compression, and also, I was in my professional mind-set of 'get the freight out of the way quickly', hence all the main signals, a lot of which could be replaced by ground / shunts and as I didn't know the all the movement requirements (which a lot of people don't think about when asking for signalling, which I can understand), I try to guess and add stuff to accommodate!

 

But please tell me it would be right in the real world!

 

Simon might have missed the need for a trap left of 306A BUT I don't think the OP wants it anyway because the loop is not a platform face (see posts above) but a goods loop.  So Platform 3 is Goods Loop 1 and the Goods Loop is Goods Loop 2.  As you say an excellent job by a professional.  I am impressed by the huge amount of detailed work.  I could spend - no doubt will - hours reading and understanding it all.

 

Ah, I missed that bit of the spec! (don't kill me Paul! ), I hadn't realised that the passenger loop was a goods loop!

I have a few questions about the TMD.

 

Simon, why have you put all those shunt signals in a shed? Normally there would be an exit signal, all other movements would be hand signals by the shed staff as they moved locos around.

 

Clive, I was working on more modern practices, modern TMD and depots have internal signalling systems (see Reading or Three Bridges for instance), which are now mainly for staff protection reasons and so you don't tie yourself up in notes. You are right in that a lot of depots still use Hand Signals, but some sheds (Aylesbury I know is one, as is Wembley Chiltern) have shunt signals reading in and out of shed roads. 

 

Also, an internal signalling system in a depot adds a new dimension to operating a depot.

Simon

[cal.n]

That diagram really does look amazing and whenever I get round to getting started with my layout ans start signaling it, I would happily pay for something similar to go with it.

[Clive Mortimore]

1) It's Christmas - lots of lights?

2) I'd read the fuelling depot on his plan to be the storage and tanker road, and the headshunt to be refuelling and headshunt - there would seem to be space.  Wouldn't that work?  There are problems with his TMD anyway so maybe some suggestions would help him improve it.

I did suggest look at some prototype locations, that is how I designed my shed layouts.

[Clive Mortimore]

Hi,

 

 

Clive, I was working on more modern practices, modern TMD and depots have internal signalling systems (see Reading or Three Bridges for instance), which are now mainly for staff protection reasons and so you don't tie yourself up in notes. You are right in that a lot of depots still use Hand Signals, but some sheds (Aylesbury I know is one, as is Wembley Chiltern) have shunt signals reading in and out of shed roads. 

 

Also, an internal signalling system in a depot adds a new dimension to operating a depot.

Simon

Hi Simon

 

Thank you for an update on modern depots. Modern Image covers from 1955 onward, or so I have been told many times. So I was working on observing diesel locomotive depots not modern carriage sidings. This photo shows the signalling at Ipswich depot.

[stevie_ruc]

I did suggest look at some prototype locations, that is how I designed my shed layouts.

 

Hi Clive.Thanks for ur suggestions. Im really restricted with space don't you think? Any ideas would be welcomed...

 

Stevie

[stevie_ruc]

Hi,

 

Paul, yes you are quite correct, I'm not sure exactly why I missed that.

 

Yes, the problem with models is the space compression, and also, I was in my professional mind-set of 'get the freight out of the way quickly', hence all the main signals, a lot of which could be replaced by ground / shunts and as I didn't know the all the movement requirements (which a lot of people don't think about when asking for signalling, which I can understand), I try to guess and add stuff to accommodate!

 

But please tell me it would be right in the real world!

 

 

Ah, I missed that bit of the spec! (don't kill me Paul! ), I hadn't realised that the passenger loop was a goods loop!

 

Clive, I was working on more modern practices, modern TMD and depots have internal signalling systems (see Reading or Three Bridges for instance), which are now mainly for staff protection reasons and so you don't tie yourself up in notes. You are right in that a lot of depots still use Hand Signals, but some sheds (Aylesbury I know is one, as is Wembley Chiltern) have shunt signals reading in and out of shed roads. 

 

Also, an internal signalling system in a depot adds a new dimension to operating a depot.

Simon

I love the idea of a operate singling susie,t for the TMD area. Will definitely add operational interest....and another switch Panel.

 

Do you have such a thing as a key for the symbols?

 

I'm planning to run all this with a NCE system and computer control. Though now I see that tremendous digram I'm wondering could I use it as a mimc panel too?

[stevie_ruc]

Hi Clive.Thanks for ur suggestions. Im really restricted with space don't you think? Any ideas would be welcomed...

 

Stevie

This is the layout I was basing mine on....http://www.rmweb.co....305-dallam-tmd/

[St. Simon]

Do you have such a thing as a key for the symbols?

 

I'm planning to run all this with a NCE system and computer control. Though now I see that tremendous digram I'm wondering could I use it as a mimc panel too?

 

Hi,

 

Try here for symbols (its a bit old, but its still fairly right): http://rdt.ergotools.co.uk/Content/Documents/signalscheme-legend.pdf 

 

Just remember that Mimic Panels in Signalling Boxes use straight lines rather than the curve ones on my diagram! I'm not the one to ask how to connect a panel to a computer, but if you wanted to have a fully interlocked signalling system, I would defiantly say go computer control.

 

Simon

[5BarVT]

I'm not the one to ask how to connect a panel to a computer.

But someone in your office is; and I know who!

Paul.

[5BarVT]

But please tell me it would be right in the real world!

Do I go to a Scheme Plan review and say “I have no comments.”? ! ! Some typos, some things I would do differently and a lot to talk about, but also, lots of good stuff. Well done. Your immediate task is to see what you might do if I gave you some extra characters e.g. UMJ and OE204.

DEPOT PROTECTION and a Depot Signalling

In 1975 Old Oak still had the Loco Yard box but by late 1979 it had been put on a mini panel inside Old Oak Panel, mind you, it controlled access to carriage sidings and a lot of other stuff too. So Depot control systems are not new, but they are different to what OO Loco did. My first awareness of Depot protection was late 80’s early 90’s at Haymarket Depot where they had shunt signal head mounted on top of short lamp post structures. I can’t remember whether this was because car park type traffic lights had caused signal sighting issues, or whether it was to prevent same. “Drivers know what a shunt signal means” was a phrase used at the time. That system was completely separate from any signalling (E&P installed and owned) and operated by the fitters I imagine. The Depot protection signals would be located just by the doors of the shed - to protect fitters working inside. Modern Depot control systems need someone to operate them - shunter etc so come with a staffing cost. If you do have signals protecting the points in the Depot they would be at the clearance point in the sidings so not back to back with the door signals. I.e. you could leave the shed just under shunter’s instruction.

So on to the layout, I would just have OE104 (possibly only a shunt signal) and hand points inside that. Having said that, getting locos on and off a Depot is best done with separate arrival and departure lines so that the signalman can let a Loco in without having to contact the shunter first and the shunter can let a loco out to the departure signal under his own authority. That would require a layout alteration (as mentioned in earlier posts) which may or may not fit the space available.

POINT NUMBERING

I think you have numbered 301/-/304 as if there were a switch diamond. What you actually have is two crossovers where the toes are overlapped, so coming from the UM you would have 301C, 302B/C, 301A/B, 302A. (This is a known ‘professional’ mistake too, so you’re in good company!). That gives me 2 spare numbers, one of which I might use later.

GOODS LOOP

This is where operational use comes in. The passenger loop can only be used in the down direction as the only up direction route is through the Goods Loop (Oxford 1975). I suggest that you make the loop a passenger loop so that trains can turn back without blocking the Up Main. That then moves the trap points (your 304) to trap the Depot (305A/B) and means you don’t need the set you missed! Then I would move OE105 up to th3 toes of 305 points and let the overlap turn through to opposite OE103 ‘cos you need any loop length you can get. Let’s assume the speed in the loop is slow enough to avoid banners (Derby pilot line is equally as sharp a corner).

GROUND FRAME

Ground Frames in the middle of signalled areas can be a pain! Also, not often provided immediately outside a box (alright, there was one on the Up Relief immediately opposite the door to Reading Panel). Also, think what it might be used for. I think that it would be better power worked with a turn back signal on the end of the platform: you have cleverly left OE107 spare for that! (Professional hat on: if the GF is OE501 and the points worked by lever 2 then you don’t need them numbered as 307: professional hat off.)

JUNCTION INDICATORS

I want a POS1 on OE108 and OE111 (the perils of only looking at the signalling plan - Stevie’s layout plan shows LH turnouts for 306A and 308B.

SIDINGS

I take your point about clearing the line and wanting a Stop Board in the freight terminal: I would say that in the loop is clear of the main line and that a main route into the terminal is not needed. If you do keep the stop board you need an extra signal to protect it, otherwise the signalman gets a phone call for every shunt move in the terminal, hence why I want the siding access under shunter control as it is the headshunt.

Operational question now: do you need to be able to depart direct from the terminal or is the exit route via OE105 sufficient? What I would suggest is that 308B moves parallel with 306B you lose a small amount of flexibility but get extra length on the passenger platform loop (I would also move OE120 opposite 310A and push the overlap through 310B points, slightly more operationally restrictive but gives extra useable platform length). It means you can loop a long freight without blocking the passenger platform in the down direction. You could then add a signal on the DM between OE106 and OE108 to give access to the platform loop in the Up too. But then you don’t need to loop by the Depot to be a passenger loop so it could remain a Goods loop (although that would require 306 and 308 to be renumbered to maintain the trapping (see earlier when I might need a spare number!).

Another alternative (real life example Peterborough Independent Line) is to timetable long freights to be in the platform only when not needed for passenger use. Then the platform Goods loop could be part of the sidings: shunt signals at 308A and 310A. 309 become hand points. You also probably want Last Wheel on OE108 B/C for propelling into the terminal or back into the Goods loop (and call-on).

Professional comment on: You have said that OE111 is MAF on both routes, that would probably result in SI not PLJI. Professional comment off. Since JI are easier to get as models I would go for POS1 as mentioned earlier.

So . . . Very little actually wrong, just a lot to sort out on the operational side before you know how to signal it. JLTRT. (Ask your Weaver Wavertree colleagues!)

 

Edited to put right iOS 11 induced typos.

And to add my thanks to Simon and Stevie for giving me a most enjoyable evening thinking about this.

 

Paul.

Edited November 24, 2017 by 5BarVT

[5BarVT]

I'm planning to run all this with a NCE system and computer control.

Stevie,

Have you got a DCC system yet? There are far more independent signalling interface systems based on digitrax Loco net than NCE which is why I went Digitrax. That said, it is possible to run the signalling on a separate Loconet system to the DCC system driving the trains. Look up JMRI if you want freeware for the computer control system, but be prepared for a lot of work yourself. JMRI will also drive trains from a computer, but that (I think) needs a loconet based system. Alternatively MERG do kits for home build DCC and bus system signalling interfaces - cheaper than buying but you need to be confident in electronics.

Paul.

[The Stationmaster]

Hi Simon

 

Thank you for an update on modern depots. Modern Image covers from 1955 onward, or so I have been told many times. So I was working on observing diesel locomotive depots not modern carriage sidings. This photo shows the signalling at Ipswich depot.

  100_0338.JPG

 

DPS (Depot Protection Systems) - i.e. ground or elevated position light signals protecting the entrance to a depot building area relatively recent idea and would have appeared at very few locations built prior to the 1990s although they were certainly added at some older depots.  Full internal depot signalling is also fairly recent and while it saves staff, especially in a depot dealing with unit trains, it can be something of a nuisance requiring manning and suitable training of those manning it although more flexible ideas than depot control centres have been proposed over the years (I don't know if any of them actually happened though).

[JDW]

Lots of interesting comments, if i may just add 2 more:

- Regardless of whether the refuelling line on the plan is for loco fuelling, tankers delivering fuel or both, regardless of lack of space to move from there to the shed without going onto the running line, would it be OK to be accessed directly from a main line (or loop) like that?  A wrongly set set of points could lead to disaster!

- I can't see any reason for the crossover between UM and DM in the station other that for a train to arrive on the UM, terminate in Platform 1 and then reverse.  Should there be a signal at the left hand end of Platform 1 to facilitate this?