Help with Levernumbering

[The Stationmaster]

>>>The three way signal reads , Up main to UP main , UpLoop to UpMain ( via X-Over) , Uploop to Headhunt, IN Badminton , this signal was split into two , With a single post single on the UP main to UPmain , but I  cant fit a post between the tracks so  they are combined here.....

 

In which case, I would suggest that the 2 RH dolls need (a) to be of the same height and (b) more widely spaced than the 2 LH ones.

 

You may not want, or have room for, distants, but I would suggest that - if you want to do the numbering 'properly' - then you should at least take them into account, likewise FPLs (of which at least 3 are needed).

 

The dead-end spurs at the entry end of the loops at Badminton were not used for traffic purposes, so unless you propose to find a use for them on your layout then the traps and dummies at their exits are not needed.

 

The through Main Line signals at Badminton were all separate straight post signals as there was plenty of room for them between the Mains and Platform Loops.  A three doll bracket as shown in the original sketch is rather unusual for the Western in that situation (although there were a few examples, which generally seemed to date from the pre-tubular steel post era).  And as 'RailWest' has said the Main Line and Loop Line dolls need to be properly separated by a greater distance than would be the case at a splitting signal.

 

Incidentally a Badminton diagram is included in Volume 18 of George Pryer's series of 'Signal Box Diagrams of the Great Western & Southern Railways' and there has been a copy advertised on Abebooks recently  - but it isn't cheap!

[RailWest]

>>>>The through Main Line signals at Badminton were all separate straight post signals as there was plenty of room for them between the Mains and Platform Loops....
 
I have seen published photos showing that at least one was a centre-pivot arm, no doubt to provide better clearance in the 6-foot.

[Junctionmad]

The through Main Line signals at Badminton were all separate straight post signals as there was plenty of room for them between the Mains and Platform Loops.  A three doll bracket as shown in the original sketch is rather unusual for the Western in that situation (although there were a few examples, which generally seemed to date from the pre-tubular steel post era).  And as 'RailWest' has said the Main Line and Loop Line dolls need to be properly separated by a greater distance than would be the case at a splitting signal.

 

Incidentally a Badminton diagram is included in Volume 18 of George Pryer's series of 'Signal Box Diagrams of the Great Western & Southern Railways' and there has been a copy advertised on Abebooks recently  - but it isn't cheap!

 

at worst case I will get the dead tree diagram from the SRS

 

 

dave

>>>>The through Main Line signals at Badminton were all separate straight post signals as there was plenty of room for them between the Mains and Platform Loops....

 

I have seen published photos showing that at least one was a centre-pivot arm, no doubt to provide better clearance in the 6-foot.

intersting , I havent seen that 

[The Stationmaster]

>>>>The through Main Line signals at Badminton were all separate straight post signals as there was plenty of room for them between the Mains and Platform Loops....

 

I have seen published photos showing that at least one was a centre-pivot arm, no doubt to provide better clearance in the 6-foot.

 

Yes, definitely the Down Main Starting Signal (and possibly the Up Main Intermediate Starting Signal but I'm not too sure about that one as I can't readily find a photo showing it);  the Up Main Starting Signal was a full length arm according to what can be seen in one photo).  Regrettably the only signal at Badminton which I took a photo of was the ground disc from the dock siding!

[RailWest]

Yes, definitely the Down Main Starting Signal (and possibly the Up Main Intermediate Starting Signal but I'm not too sure about that one as I can't readily find a photo showing it);  the Up Main Starting Signal was a full length arm according to what can be seen in one photo).  Regrettably the only signal at Badminton which I took a photo of was the ground disc from the dock siding!

Looking at the photos on pp 103 and 110 of "GWR The Badminton Line - A portrait of a railway" (Robertson & Abbott, Sutton 1988), there were centre-pivot arms on the Up Main Starting (the signal roughly in line with the east end of the Up platform), the Down Main Inner Home and the Down Platform Line Inner Home (although why that one needed on baffles me).

 

Curiously, there is a photo on p109 of the same book claiming to show a train waiting in the Down Goods Loop at Badminton in 1963. Apart from the fact that Badminton had no Down goods loop anyway, it can't be the the Up Goods Loop as the pointwork is mechanically worked with a FPL, not can it be the Down platform loop as that had no facing trap at its exit. So I wonder where it is ?

[Junctionmad]

Looking at the photos on pp 103 and 110 of "GWR The Badminton Line - A portrait of a railway" (Robertson & Abbott, Sutton 1988), there were centre-pivot arms on the Up Main Starting (the signal roughly in line with the east end of the Up platform), the Down Main Inner Home and the Down Platform Line Inner Home (although why that one needed on baffles me).

 

Curiously, there is a photo on p109 of the same book claiming to show a train waiting in the Down Goods Loop at Badminton in 1963. Apart from the fact that Badminton had no Down goods loop anyway, it can't be the the Up Goods Loop as the pointwork is mechanically worked with a FPL, not can it be the Down platform loop as that had no facing trap at its exit. So I wonder where it is ?

 

thanks , I have ordered that book , the challenge for the layout is that we laid ( and this is an error ) the Loops the same distance apart ( using standard PECO geometry ) as the main lines, which I think will preclude us from siting signals in the 4 foot 

 

dave

Edited September 5, 2018 by Junctionmad

[iands]

thanks , I have ordered that book , the challenge for the layout is that we laid ( and this is an error ) the Loops the same distance apart ( using standard PECO geometry ) as the main lines, which I think will preclude us from siting signals in the 4 foot 

 

dave

 

I presume you meant to say "6 foot"?

 

Regards, Ian.

[Oldddudders]

I presume you meant to say "6 foot"?

 

Regards, Ian.

 

Oh, I don't know. The concept does add a certain something to the expression "over-running signals", does it not?

[iands]

Oh, I don't know. The concept does add a certain something to the expression "over-running signals", does it not?

 

Or even a new interpretation of SPAD - "Signal Pranged And Destroyed"?

 

Regards, Ian.

[Junctionmad]

err yes slip of the keyboard , the 6 foot 

 

I do like the new SPAD however, would be great for model signal suppliers anyway 

[iands]

err yes slip of the keyboard , the 6 foot 

 

I do like the new SPAD however, would be great for model signal suppliers anyway 

 

Or then again, a new interpretation of SPAR - "Signal Pranged And Run-over".

 

Regards, Ian.

[Harlequin]

If it helps, Peco Streamline geometry gives you roughly 1ft 7in more scale space between tracks than the prototype...?

[martin_wynne]

If it helps, Peco Streamline geometry gives you roughly 1ft 7in more scale space between tracks than the prototype...?

 

Not in 0 Gauge.

[Harlequin]

Not in 0 Gauge.

Whoops. I assumed OO. Sorry.

[Junctionmad]

Looking at the photos on pp 103 and 110 of "GWR The Badminton Line - A portrait of a railway" (Robertson & Abbott, Sutton 1988), there were centre-pivot arms on the Up Main Starting (the signal roughly in line with the east end of the Up platform), the Down Main Inner Home and the Down Platform Line Inner Home (although why that one needed on baffles me).

 

Curiously, there is a photo on p109 of the same book claiming to show a train waiting in the Down Goods Loop at Badminton in 1963. Apart from the fact that Badminton had no Down goods loop anyway, it can't be the the Up Goods Loop as the pointwork is mechanically worked with a FPL, not can it be the Down platform loop as that had no facing trap at its exit. So I wonder where it is ?

Having now read through the whole book, I believe that picture is at chipping sodbury not badminton

[Junctionmad]

I now have my hands on a numbered diagram of Badminton.

 

Whats interesting , Railwest, is that the levers were grouped by road , then by physical location , hence the UP road signal levers were together and the down road grouped together , rather then being at the requisite end of the frame 

 

was that a common GWR thing !

[RailWest]

I now have my hands on a numbered diagram of Badminton.

 

Whats interesting , Railwest, is that the levers were grouped by road , then by physical location , hence the UP road signal levers were together and the down road grouped together , rather then being at the requisite end of the frame 

 

was that a common GWR thing !

Err...that sounds exactly like the usual arrangement if I've understand your description correctly. We knew already that 1,2,3,4,9 were the Up Main signals and 59,58,57 the Down Platform, with the Down Main assumed as 61,60,59,58,54, but not entirely sure about the Up Platform ones. Was the 'ladder' pointwork 26,28,33 by any chance?

[Junctionmad]

Err...that sounds exactly like the usual arrangement if I've understand your description correctly. We knew already that 1,2,3,4,9 were the Up Main signals and 59,58,57 the Down Platform, with the Down Main assumed as 61,60,59,58,54, but not entirely sure about the Up Platform ones. Was the 'ladder' pointwork 26,28,33 by any chance?

What I meant was , that the up road , for example has both home and starters grouped to low numbers on the frame

 

The ladder was 25, 26, 30, 32 with some discs in between

 

Not dissimilar to your drawing ,

 

but I had thought levers were arranged grouped more by reference to physical location ie up homes and down starters at one end of the frame

Seemingly not

Edited September 14, 2018 by Junctionmad

[RailWest]

>>>that the up road , for example has both home and starters grouped to low numbers on the frame...

 

Which is what one would expect, namely a (roughly) contiguous series 1,2,3,4 etc from Up Distant to Up Advanced Starting, with the converse at the RH end in descending order for the Down signals (60,59,58,57 etc). In BR days some new frames had both Up and Down put together in the middle of the frame to minimise walking about for the signalman.

 

>>>I had thought levers were arranged grouped more by reference to physical location ie up homes and down starters at one end of the frame .....

 

That's more the case for the points and shunt signals, although I have encountered a few odd examples on single-line passing loops where home and starting signals for the opposing directions were together at the same end of the frame.

[The Stationmaster]

Err...that sounds exactly like the usual arrangement if I've understand your description correctly. We knew already that 1,2,3,4,9 were the Up Main signals and 59,58,57 the Down Platform, with the Down Main assumed as 61,60,59,58,54, but not entirely sure about the Up Platform ones. Was the 'ladder' pointwork 26,28,33 by any chance?

 

Using George Pryer's drawing -

The Up Passenger Loop signals were 6 (splitting Home). 7, & 8.

 

The ladder was 26, 28, 30, & 32 with 25 the disc at 26; 27 the disc at 28 (from Down Main); 29 the disc at 28 (from Up Main); 31 the disc at 30 (from Up Passenger Loop); and 33 the disc at 32 (from Up Siding).

 

The hand drawn locking table on the SRS site appears to contain errors (and might possibly only reflect some alterations/additions made in 1940?).  The locking table (on the SRS site but looking much more reliable) for the similar ladder at Chipping Sodbury shows the locking I would expect to find at Badminton (eg. on the hand drawn table for Badminton 25 is not shown to be released by 26 which in reality it should have been - and was so released at Chipping Sodbury).

 

Incidentally according to George's drawing the Down Passenger Loop signals were 57 (splitting Home), 56, and 55.  The Down Main signals were 61 (Distant), 60, 59, 58, & 54.

 

However having said all that using information from George's drawing I see that he has incorrectly labelled the Passenger (?platform?) Loops as 'Passenger Lines'.

[RailWest]

>>>The hand drawn locking table on the SRS site appears to contain errors.....
 
I would agree. For example, the lever leads list gives 30 as released by 28, but this does not appear in the table.

 

>>>I see that he has incorrectly labelled the Passenger (?platform?) Loops as 'Passenger Lines'.

 

The relevant high-end lever leads talk about 'Down Platform'.

[The Stationmaster]

 

>>>The hand drawn locking table on the SRS site appears to contain errors.....

 

I would agree. For example, the lever leads list gives 30 as released by 28, but this does not appear in the table.

 

>>>I see that he has incorrectly labelled the Passenger (?platform?) Loops as 'Passenger Lines'.

 

The relevant high-end lever leads talk about 'Down Platform'.

 

 

Which, in respect of the latter,  might not necessarily agree with the designation of the line although it could well be Platform Line; it would definitely have been classified as a Passenger Loop in later years, these things changed over time.  The Sectional Appendix is of no help as it simply refers to UPL and DPL and there are no Local Instruction entries to offer any clarity at either Badminton of Chipping Sodbury.  Reading might give us a lead (sorry) where the line serving Platform 5 was the Up Main Platform Line (adjacent to the Up Main Through Line) but amusingly the Sectional Appendix refers to it by two different names in a single entry although one of them is 'Platform Line'.

 

We certainly found - in the 1980s - discrepancies between the S&T Dept and Operations Dept names for the same place with some signalbox names on the 'box diagrams being subtly different from the names included in the Sectional Appendix and we also found occasional discrepancies/differences in the naming of particular lines (albeit not running lines).   But then of course the GWR also had the amusing habit of giving some of its stations etc slightly different spellings from those of adjacent villages including those the station in question was meant to serve (even when the station was right next to the village).

[Junctionmad]

Which, in respect of the latter,  might not necessarily agree with the designation of the line although it could well be Platform Line; it would definitely have been classified as a Passenger Loop in later years, these things changed over time.  The Sectional Appendix is of no help as it simply refers to UPL and DPL and there are no Local Instruction entries to offer any clarity at either Badminton of Chipping Sodbury.  Reading might give us a lead (sorry) where the line serving Platform 5 was the Up Main Platform Line (adjacent to the Up Main Through Line) but amusingly the Sectional Appendix refers to it by two different names in a single entry although one of them is 'Platform Line'.

 

We certainly found - in the 1980s - discrepancies between the S&T Dept and Operations Dept names for the same place with some signalbox names on the 'box diagrams being subtly different from the names included in the Sectional Appendix and we also found occasional discrepancies/differences in the naming of particular lines (albeit not running lines).   But then of course the GWR also had the amusing habit of giving some of its stations etc slightly different spellings from those of adjacent villages including those the station in question was meant to serve (even when the station was right next to the village).

 

I have the 1940 SRS locking table ,  how do I read it , there are  four columns , the first contains the levers and then three ( unheeded ) columns of locking info , can you help me decode it 

 

for example  lever 7  ( blank next column ) (20w 23R)(44w 41N) ( blank last column ) 

 

( the brackets around 20w 23R) are on the table 

 

obviously N & R are normal and reversed  whats W  , is it both ways , and whats the significance of the ( ) around sets of locks , and what are the three columns of lock information 

 

 

( sorry I cant publish the table itself ) 

 

 

dave 

Edited September 17, 2018 by Junctionmad

[Junctionmad]

 

 

However having said all that using information from George's drawing I see that he has incorrectly labelled the Passenger (?platform?) Loops as 'Passenger Lines'.

the SRS drawing initialled " JPM" dated 15-11-74 , describes them as " Up & Down Platform lines " to distinguish them from  the UP Goods Loop , ( Badminton having no down goods loop ) 

 

 

by the way , since I cant tell from the diagram , would any of the ground disks have been yellow  as opposed to red  on that diagram ? 

 

thanks 

 

Dave 

[iands]

I have the 1940 SRS locking table ,  how do I read it , there are  four columns , the first contains the levers and then three ( unheeded ) columns of locking info , can you help me decode it 

 

for example  lever 7  ( blank next column ) (20w 23R)(44w 41N) ( blank last column ) 

 

( the brackets around 20w 23R) are on the table 

 

obviously N & R are normal and reversed  whats W  , is it both ways , and whats the significance of the ( ) around sets of locks , and what are the three columns of lock information 

 

 

( sorry I cant publish the table itself ) 

 

 

dave

 

The columns of lock information will be the number of "locking trays". "7 (21w 23R)(44w 41N)" will mean "7 locks 21 with 23 reversed and 44 with 41 normal", if I remember correctly my basic signalling course from 40-odd years ago (however, I may have made a slight error, but I'm sure someone will correct me if I have).

 

Regards, Ian.