Is Signaling one of the most overlooked or at least intentionally simplified parts of the layout?

[F-UnitMad]

The simple fact is that model railway layouts don't really need signals to be operated without danger of collisions, etc, whereas for the real railways signals are essential for safe working. 

 

[Flying Pig]

15 minutes ago, F-UnitMad said:

The simple fact is that model railway layouts don't really need signals to be operated without danger of collisions, etc, whereas for the real railways signals are essential for safe working. 

 

 

If we start listing the things that model railway layouts don't really need, we'll be here till bedtime and end up with a very bare and uninteresting layout.  The simple fact is that many model railway layouts (though certainly not all) do need signals in order to represent the prototype.

[johnofwessex]

It seems to me that on a steam era railway signalling is a major feature and not attempting to replicate it in some way is rather sad.

[RailWest]

Picking up on an earlier comment, I am reminded of one well-known and well-regarded layout seen on the exhibition circuit some years ago. It was based on a prototype that had been a junction station with two signal-boxes, one at each end, but at some stage those had been replaced by one central box and the actual junction remodelled. Unfortunately....the group building it had used the track layout from one era and the signalling from the other :-( As a result there were signals on the layout which served absolutely no function at all because they were incompatible with the points layout.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Might another reason re-lack of signals be is they get in the way of things and are generally not all that robust; hence prone to damage?

[Dagworth]

5 minutes ago, Peter Kazmierczak said:

Might another reason re-lack of signals be is they get in the way of things and are generally not all that robust; hence prone to damage?

Signals are remarkably robust...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...compared to OLE!

 

Andi

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Some of those plastic "Ratio" signals of the 1960s/70s would lean over if you looked at 'em. Unlike the battleproof (but over-scale) metal Tri-ang ones...

[Dave John]

Signals can be fragile, but the simple solution is to make ones which can be unplugged and stored safely when you are working near them on the layout. They also have a small base area.

 

 

[Phil Bullock]

Is another factor that in order to accommodate as much scenery as possible on the other side of the fence then insufficient room is left for all the railway infrastructure? 

[PaulRhB]

12 hours ago, whart57 said:

None of us have room to do signalling justice. Just a simple Distant  - Home - Starter sequence needs about twenty foot of track in 00

But if you haven’t modelled that track then you don’t need to model the signals off scene either 😉

I think people don’t because they think it’s more complicated than it is. You can model signals and do them justice on any size layout, they don’t all need to work to give the right impression so I don’t make the ground signals work, the point rodding is delicate, wire runs for signals almost impossibly so but you can model them if you want. 

Lulworth had a starter and several ground signals. It even had a home signal inside the fiddleyard to get operators to shuntvout behind it rather than stop on scene with no signal 😉

 

On our Freem009 modules we have most of the main signals although Home signals are more of a challenge with swapping modules around!

We even have all the junction signals. 
 

On my Swiss layout the signals showed routes and correct interlocked sequences too with the next signal and points. The distant for the starting signals is on the home signal post. 
 

I signal as a job and a basic representation is possible without going mad as seen above, none of mine are comprehensively signalled but what’s there is correct. Much like my stock I’m not worried about every river, a broad impression is enough for me. There are several on here who help people signal their layouts by suggesting schemes if people supply a track diagram, type of line and traffic, company and era. All people need to do is ask and provide those basic details and a good representation can be done in any size, even a box file 😉

Edited February 27, 2023 by PaulRhB

[F-UnitMad]

2 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

If we start listing the things that model railway layouts don't really need, we'll be here till bedtime and end up with a very bare and uninteresting layout.  The simple fact is that many model railway layouts (though certainly not all) do need signals in order to represent the prototype.

You're changing what I wrote, which was that a model railway doesn't need signals in order to be operated. Turn the control knob & the train will go. A layout that doesn't have all the things 'needed' is called a train set.

Representing the real thing realistically is another question entirely, and I agree - for most layouts at least some representation of signalling is needed. But even on larger, more complex layouts (in a UK context), how many of them have a designated operator who works as a Signalman, rather than Driver? On the real thing, they are seperate jobs, for very obvious reasons. On a layout, they are not - the operator of a train will set the route, & signals if present, then drive the train.

I'm just thinking about the reasons why signalling is so overlooked, as the OP asks. Not saying that it doesn't matter if it is.

Edited February 27, 2023 by F-UnitMad

[SZ]

Signalling a layout requires a lot of assumptions as to what lies off scene, so is somewhat more abstract than track layout.

[St. Simon]

3 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

The simple fact is that model railway layouts don't really need signals to be operated without danger of collisions, etc, whereas for the real railways signals are essential for safe working. 

 

Hi,

 

You are correct that the need for a model signalling system is different to that of real life, but actually, having your signalling interlocked and then driving to them does prevent your expensive and delicate models from bashing into each other and damaging them, and prevents shorts which could potentially cause damage to the models electronics.

 

This is an interesting topic that I’m very interested in for obvious reasons, and I’ll prepare more thoughts on it tomorrow.

 

Simon

[F-UnitMad]

5 minutes ago, St. Simon said:

but actually, having your signalling interlocked and then driving to them does prevent your expensive and delicate models from bashing into each other and damaging them, and prevents shorts which could potentially cause damage to the models electronics.

But... those issues can be avoided by watching your model train & setting the route correctly - interlocking signalling is not an absolute neccesity to avoid such problems, although probably desirable on really big, multi-track layouts.

[melmerby]

14 hours ago, Vecchio said:

May be computer control could help, but then the feeling that you drive a train is gone - it is the computer doing it, and you are just struggling in getting the software right....

You can set up correctly interlocked block working and drive the trains yourself with computer control.

This is no different to the signaller setting a route based on the mechanical interlocking allowing it, and the driver obeying the signals

 

 

[BR traction instructor]

The usual issue that I’ve found when trying to help others with signalling queries stems from their attempting to fit too much into a small space and then struggling with such operating considerations. Where a prototypical signalling system is considered at the outset, track layouts tend to be simpler.

 

BeRTIe

Edited February 27, 2023 by BR traction instructor

[PaulRhB]

On my Harz layout we simply use tokens to stop head on meets on the single line. 
See the sign for the section bottom right. 

 

That’ on top of the actual signals on the front but the shape makes the token a much better way of the operators knowing if a train is just shunting or departing 😉

 

 

[dave55uk]

4 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

You're changing what I wrote, which was that a model railway doesn't need signals in order to be operated. Turn the control knob & the train will go. A layout that doesn't have all the things 'needed' is called a train set.

Representing the real thing realistically is another question entirely, and I agree - for most layouts at least some representation of signalling is needed. But even on larger, more complex layouts (in a UK context), how many of them have a designated operator who works as a Signalman, rather than Driver? On the real thing, they are seperate jobs, for very obvious reasons. On a layout, they are not - the operator of a train will set the route, & signals if present, then drive the train.

I'm just thinking about the reasons why signalling is so overlooked, as the OP asks. Not saying that it doesn't matter if it is.

Whitedown Jn has a designated signalman - me!

[Dagworth]

4 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

But even on larger, more complex layouts (in a UK context), how many of them have a designated operator who works as a Signalman, rather than Driver?

Dagworth, Ravensclyffe and Ipswich all need a dedicated signaller

 

Andi

[whart57]

12 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

But if you haven’t modelled that track then you don’t need to model the signals off scene either 😉

 

 

True, but if you want to operate the signals prototypically then the switches need to be there even if the signals aren't.

[Michael Hodgson]

10 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

But... those issues can be avoided by watching your model train & setting the route correctly - interlocking signalling is not an absolute neccesity to avoid such problems, although probably desirable on really big, multi-track layouts.

Interlocking doesn't actually do anything - it only prevents the operator from doing some things he shouldn't, mainly preventing trains from being routed into potential collision situations.  A signalman should only ever authorise movements over routes which are correctly set and when it is safe to do so - he therefore never tries to set up a situation which it would prevent,.  Consequently a good signalman doesn't encounter the interlocking in his routine work.  A signalman is made aware of the functioning of interlocking in three situations:

• when he carries out specific tests to confirm that it is fact working correctly (eg try to pull Distant lever when Home is still at Danger)
• when there is a technical fault (eg a point not going fully into position in response to its lever)
• if he inadvertently tries to do something in an unsafe or incorrect manne

So it is perfectly possible to model working signalling without interlocking, and to work the layout in a prototypical manner.  Indeed not that unusual on a model; the lack of interlocking merely means that the operator is not protected against his own human error. 

[Michael Hodgson]

12 minutes ago, whart57 said:

 

True, but if you want to operate the signals prototypically then the switches need to be there even if the signals aren't.

 

I sometimes work a fully signalled layout where some of the signals don't physically exist.  If the operator panel has an illuminated diagram, the hypothetical Distant signal can be shown on it, and an indication given on the diagram of the aspect it would be showing, or alternatively the lever can be wired to operate an indicator as fitted in signal boxes.  Indicators salvaged from demolished boxes are available within railwayana circles and come up from time to time on ebay.

 

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Whilst I include point rodding, I must admit it's more for show and the positioning of cranks (the signalling type, not trainspotters) and expansion stuff wouldn't merit close inspection. I even included some signal wires on one layout, but I've got over that now... 🤪

 

Though, as I think someone mentioned above, some moves might be "signalled" by an appropriate chat with the "bobby" and maybe some flag waving from the signalbox.

 

I think some folks over-complicate it all...

Edited February 28, 2023 by Peter Kazmierczak

[Michael Hodgson]

1 minute ago, Peter Kazmierczak said:

Whilst I include point rodding, I must admit it's more for show and the positioning of cranks (the signalling type, not trainspotters) and expansion stuff wouldn't merit close inspection. I even included some signal wires on one layout, but I've got over that now... 🤪

It's fiddly.  I assume you're not working in N gauge 😵

[Peter Kazmierczak]

4mm Michael, and that's bad enough. I just make it myself from thin plastic strips - I'm too stingy to buy ready-made stuff. I even included a facing point lock...

 

Of course, this was in the days before one could buy it.

Edited February 28, 2023 by Peter Kazmierczak