Assistance Required for Signalling a Branch Terminus

[scottystitch]

As the title suggests, am I close with the signalling for the attached track plan?

 

Set in the mid 1960s. Passenger traffic is 2 or three coaches and a small steam locomotive or a type 2 diesel, or a 2-/3-car DMU.  There would maybe be 4 or 5 passenger departures per day.

 

Goods traffic would be probably one mixed goods per day plus one or two mine related trains per day.

 

It is not based on any particular region's operations, it is intended to be largely generic, but it needs to be plausible and the signals will be operating (where possible).

 

The layout is N Gauge.

 

The station and goods yard area is based on St Cyrus, albeit in terminus form.  The line to/from the clay/coal mine is a dead end, so loaded wagons come out and empties go in.  If it is coal (still undecided) maybe 5 or 6 wagons once or twice a day.  The mine branch is worked by railway locomotives, rather than private/industrial.

 

I've split the illustrations into inbound signals....:

 

 

Would the home from the junction be a single arm or would there be a second arm for signalling into the goods yard? Or would that be handled by ground signals instead?

 

If so/not would the same then apply for the home from the mine?

 

...and outbound signals:

 

 

Again, would the platform starter be a junction signal, or would the advance starters preclude that?

 

 

Based on the idea that the branch line is single line, and not on e engine in steam, is it safe to assume that in general terms the line would be worked with tokens?

 

 

I would say that I have consulted a number of texts in my book collection, and whilst I think I grasp the very basic fundamentals of signalling, the details for any particular given situation elude me...

 

any help would therefore be greatly appreciated.

 

Best

 

Scott.

[scottystitch]

No-one?...

[Nick C]

It's one of those sitations that depends on the company that signalled it - as you're freelance you've got more flexibility!

 

I'd suggest a bracket home signal, with the arm reading into the yard being either a ringed or smaller arm (signifying a freight-only route). The signal reading from the mine would also be a ringed/smaller arm, I doubt they'd bother to signal the route from there into the platform as I'd presume there isn't going to be any passenger traffic along it?

 

Outbound, again platform only to the running line I'd suspect.

 

I'd be tempted to flip the station round so that the goods yard was at the bottom, then you could bring the mine route straight in without it having to cross the passenger route - saving on a facing point there. I'd also have a headshunt on the good yard so that you could shunt without interfering with the passenger services. Then you'd probably not need any signalling at all for the mine branch, it effecitvely being treated as a long siding from the goods yard.

 

The branch itself would certainly be operated by tokens, where that could be either a key token, a tablet, an electric train staff or a staff and ticket - the first three are all effectively the same, just a different shape object & machine, with staff & ticket being a bit simpler, using bits of paper instead of electrical circuits to control the flow of trains.

 

Edited June 24, 2020 by Nick C

[scottystitch]

35 minutes ago, Nick C said:

It's one of those sitations that depends on the company that signalled it - as you're freelance you've got more flexibility!

 

I'd suggest a bracket home signal, with the arm reading into the yard being either a ringed or smaller arm (signifying a freight-only route). The signal reading from the mine would also be a ringed/smaller arm, I doubt they'd bother to signal the route from there into the platform as I'd presume there isn't going to be any passenger traffic along it?

 

Outbound, again platform only to the running line I'd suspect.

 

I'd be tempted to flip the station round so that the goods yard was at the bottom, then you could bring the mine route straight in without it having to cross the passenger route - saving on a facing point there. I'd also have a headshunt on the good yard so that you could shunt without interfering with the passenger services. Then you'd probably not need any signalling at all for the mine branch, it effecitvely being treated as a long siding from the goods yard.

 

The branch itself would certainly be operated by tokens, where that could be either a key token, a tablet, an electric train staff or a staff and ticket - the first three are all effectively the same, just a different shape object & machine, with staff & ticket being a bit simpler, using bits of paper instead of electrical circuits to control the flow of trains.

 

 

Thanks, that's very helpful.  Since posting the above drawing I have indeed added a headshunt to the yard.

 

And yes it is freelance, although operated by BR.

 

Thanks again

 

Best

Scott.

Edited June 24, 2020 by scottystitch

[Flying Pig]

59 minutes ago, scottystitch said:

Thanks, that's very helpful.  Since posting the above drawing I have indeed added a headshunt to the yard.

 

And yes it is freelance, although operated by BR.

 

 

I think you have possibly misunderstood the goods yard at St Cyrus as although maps show a short loop as part of the layout, it's very unlikely that this was used for terminating and running round goods trains.  At your station, goods trains would terminate in the platform and run round using the same loop as the passenger before shunting to the sidings. The sidings (like the white zone*) were for loading and unloading only.

 

A single connection from the running line to the goods yard would be simpler than the two shown on your plan: remember that a trap and facing point lock would be needed for each one and the railway would not multiply expense unnecessarily.

 

The goods shed would look better as part of tbe goods yard rather then isolated on the mineral branch where it will be inconvenient to shunt and probably require separate road access from the rest of the yard.

 

I'm not sure about the mineral line but I've a feeling that it would have a trap point and be signalled as a siding, certainly by the 1960s.  An alternative arrangement for the junction would be to bring it into the runround loop, when I don't think it would need any signalling at all.

 

A headshunt for the goods yard is not particularly common at a small station like this, as the running line would often be used for shunting and your imagined level of traffic doesn't seem to be heavy enough that this would be a problem.

 

For signalling, Clayton West (see thread below) would be a possible prototype example  (it's BR(E), formerly LMS, formerly L&Ý).  Imagine that the trap siding on the loop is the mineral line and it's almost a mirror image of your plan, slightly rearranged as I've suggested.  The sidings at the time represented by the diagram are actually a colliery, but when the goods yard was open it was also behind the platform.

 

 

*or possibly the red zone.

Edited June 24, 2020 by Flying Pig
Zonal uncertainty

[PaulRhB]

1. Home, single arm, if a train is going into the yard or loop it would maybe have a subsidiary smaller arm on a bracket or a ground signal to indicate line clear only to no.7

main arm would only clear if 7 already off and route set into the platform. 
2. Advance starter. 
3. advance starter

4. as no.1

5. Goods shed exit, ground signal,  note trap point to protect mainline. To be honest I’d expect the goods shed to be in the yard and this a more likely loco shed location

6. Shed entry, ground signal, also has to be off with route set for branch before 9 can be cleared. 
7. Yard entry, loop entry & to signal loco onto train in platform, ground signal 

8. Yard exit, ground signal, note trap to protect mainline. 

9. bracket with one main arm for branch and subsidiary small arm for quarry. 

10. Loop exit, ground signal. 
 

There also may be dummies both ends of the platform crossover to control moves over it. The crossover would have to be normal before a train could be signalled in. Exit from the headshunt could be by a stop board with call Signalman to pass board. 

Edited June 24, 2020 by PaulRhB

[scottystitch]

A big thank you to everyone, that's all a huge help.

 

@Flyingpig the passenger platform at St Cyrus didn't have a passing loop, the nearest loop being at Lauriston a couple of miles down the line.  I appreciate however, that since I've turned it into a terminus and added a passenger run round loop, the one in the yard is superfluous.  With that in mind I've changed the set up to two sidings in the yard rather than the loop.

 

I'm now in two minds about the headshunt as both here and elsewhere there has been almost equal calls for and against.  That said, it is a simple way of providing a trap for the yard (particularly in N gauge) so I may just include it after all.

 

Thank you again to everyone; that's given me plenty to think about and work with.

 

Best

Scott.

[PaulRhB]

The headshunt would really be used only if there was enough other traffic to justify not using the main. A trap is cheaper than a full point to install and maintain so it makes sense to save a bit of money if it’s a quiet line. 

[aardvark]

I'm not smart enough to know, but maybe a look at the prototype signalling for a couple of BR termini may assist.

 

Here's one for an ex-GNoSR terminus in Banff Scotland in BR days.