Signals for a single line junction

[Halton Boy]

Hello everyone

I am helping my friend June with her late husbands layout.

The layout in the garage is mostly complete except for the signals which he made from brass and are unpainted.

Here is a plan of the layout:

 

The other night I was watching a You Tube video of a drivers eye view of the Looe to Coombe Junction line.

The layout above looks very similar.

I have added signals to the plan based on the diagram for Coombe Junction.

On the plan 4 and 18 are detection bars.

Signals 1 and 21 are goods siding signals. We have two of them.

We have more signals than needed to signal the layout based on the plan above.

The problem is at position A, point number 17 and yard position B.

How would this point be signaled and operated.

Thank you for your help.

Ken

 

[Halton Boy]

Hello Everyone

Here is more information on the layout:

My friend lives in Birmingham so I do not have any photos of the layout.

The track is complete with ballast and the buildings are complete.

There is no static grass or trees etc.

The roads, bridge and yard are in place.

The signals will not be operational.

The lady wants to fit the painted signals in place and complete all the scenic work.

Thank you for your help.

Ken 

[Ray H]

I've no knowledge of the area concerned but am a little confused about the plan.

 

Is there a passenger service to/from the part of the layout where the two warehouses are shown or do passenger services terminate at the halt?

 

Are the two tracks at the bottom both for passenger services because you wouldn't normally have facing point locks on a purely goods line.

 

I'm not clear about the purpose of signals 1 & 21, especially if there is no passenger service past them.

[Cwmtwrch]

It would help to know what period the layout is set in [is it evident from the signals and structures?] as this may affect the answers. 

To control this track plan as shown, with token and staff for the two lines, a signal box is essential [Coombe Junction had one roughly where the G/F is shown until the line became one train operated between Liskeard and Looe], as a ground frame can't exercise the necessary functions. Is it actually a ground frame or a signal box?

There should be a trap point between the terminal yard and the halt, assuming no passenger service [which is presumably why ringed arms are used for 1 and 21?], perhaps the other side of the bridge, with signal 1 before the trap. Quite where 21 belongs I don't know, but it's not really needed where it is. There should be signals [possibly ground signals] to permit entry to and exit from siding A-B, which should also be trapped. However, with the track laid and ballasted the alterations to add the trap points may not be worthwhile now.

The layout implies that passenger services are worked by autotrains, as there is no loop at the halt; if passenger trains work into the yard beyond for the loco to run round then the signalling becomes much more complicated, unless the two lines are worked separately, so that only empty stock goes into the yard, unlike the reversal of trains at Coombe Junction [which had a loop at the station].

Edited April 27 by Cwmtwrch

[RailWest]

I would agree that, if you are using the Coombe Junction - Moorswater section as a basis for the 'top' part of the layout, then there should be a trap-point between 1 and 21 facing to train coming OUT from the goods area in order to protect the passenger line.

 

IMHO you do need 21, in order to limit passengers moves coming into the platfrom from the RH end, as unlike Combe Jcn the platform is on a through line rather than a dead end.

 

[Halton Boy]

Hello everyone

Thank you for your replies.

The engines that he has in his collection are all steam GWR and LMS and one GWR railcar.

There is no platform by the warehouses.

Passenger services terminate at the halt.

I assumed it was goods only from the bridge to the warehouses.

The rest of the line is passenger trains. 

I thought that it was a ground frame but it may be a small signal box.

The lady has two goods signals so I put them where I thought they would go.

I think the reason there is no trap point is because of the curved rail.

If there was more room it could be put into the middle of the curve.

I have remade the plan inline with your answers:

 

I have added the trap points to the plan, but we cannot change the track.

June wants yard B to be a small local coal yard.

 

Shunting yard B will be awkward.

Would the train travel to the warehouses, run around the wagons , then go back up the track and reverse into the yard?

I do not know if the numbering of the signals and points are correct?

Thank you for your help.

Ken

 

 

[Ray H]

Signal 1 would probably be a lot closer to the trap points and those trap points would probably be a little further back from the Halt.

 

Likewise, signal 2 & 3 would be closer to the point (in practice), more or less on their end of the facing point locking bar.

 

Signals 15 & 19 would probably be co-located where signal 19 is shown.

 

You may find the need for a trap point between signal 14 and point 16 or signal 14 may need to be moved further back from the junction point.

 

The loco off arriving trains at the warehouses would run round its train and shunt as required wherever needed on the warehouse side of signal 1.

 

You can always add a dummy trap point, with a single rail attached to the outer side of one of the (track) rails and pointing away from those track rails.

[Jeremy Cumberland]

15 and 19 should be together, where 19 is.

 

If the level crossing is closed against the railway while a passenger train is in the platform, then 2 and 3 should be just before the crossing gates. If the gates are always left closed against the road, then it can go on the other side of the level crossing, just before the junction.

 

21 and the trap are now rather close to the halt. There's nothing wrong with this if the longest passenger train fits in the halt without passing the signal, but if there isn't enough room, move the signal and trap further away.

 

Here's the Coombe Junction signal box diagram (from Wikipedia), which I think you must have already taken a look at:

I see no reason why you shouldn't more or less copy the lever numbers, removing the ones you don't have, and adding in your 19 and 20, and closing up gaps to have a more reasonable number of spares. Some of the numbering of the original surprises me, such as 25 being to the right of 22 rather than to its left, and 11, 13 and 14 being in the middle of the frame (with points 12 in between). I think your 19 and 20 should go to the left of the "Liskeard" line points (in between 14 and 15 in the prototype numbering scheme). Personally, I'd keep your 2 and 3 where they are on the left and not move them to the middle of the frame.

 

53 minutes ago, Halton Boy said:

Shunting yard B will be awkward.

Would the train travel to the warehouses, run around the wagons , then go back up the track and reverse into the yard?

Not particularly. It would have to run round at the warehouses, because there is no other option. The locomotive will then shunt siding B leaving at least the brake van on the main line. I imagine that the reformed train will then depart for "Liskeard", so it will all be done with engine having the token, but if the whole train is put away in B, or if the loco, perhaps with some wagons, returns to the warehouses, it would be done by blocking back.

[RailWest]

That diagram of course is for the BR period replacement frame. Maybe the earlier GWR-period  installation might be more appropriate?

[Cwmtwrch]

2 hours ago, RailWest said:

IMHO you do need 21, in order to limit passengers moves coming into the platfrom from the RH end, as unlike Combe Jcn the platform is on a through line rather than a dead end.

Actually, beyond Combe Junct for much of its life was Moorswater Yard, but there were two lines there as Jeremy C has just posted. The layout looks like a composite of Combe Junction and Looe, where the platform is on a single line without a loop, because in steam days the empty passenger stock was run round in the goods yard/quayside area beyond the station. That could be done here, but realistically only with a different operating pattern to Combe Junct. as running occupied passenger trains to the yard to reverse would require quite different signalling.

 

So far as 21 is concerned, I have thought a bit more about the possibilities of, for example, crossing a freight with a passenger train, and have come to agree with you.

[Railpassion]

Trains arriving from Liskeard (top) would need siding B free in order to be accepted would they not? 

[Jeremy Cumberland]

22 minutes ago, RailWest said:

That diagram of course is for the BR period replacement frame. Maybe the earlier GWR-period  installation might be more appropriate?

I don't think it is. The numbering seems to me something of a giveaway that this is a Victorian box, and it matches the 1950 SRS diagram. The box was replaced in February 1956, and the 1956 SRS diagram shows some simplification and more conventional numbering. For example, @Halton Boy's 2 and 3 (now positioned where 11 is in the Wikipedia diagram) become 1 and 2 in the 1956 diagram, and @Halton Boy's 1 becomes 3.

 

You can find small thumbnails of the SRS diagrams here: https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/cdgwef.htm

 

There is a lovely hand drawn diagram matching the SRS 1950 diagram (and quite likely the basis for the Wikipedia one) on the signalbox.org site here: https://signalbox.org/~SBdiagram.php/?id= 372

 

10 minutes ago, Railpassion said:

Trains arriving from Liskeard (top) would need siding B free in order to be accepted would they not? 

I suspect there were special instructions at Coombe Junction since the only purpose of points 16 in the Wikipedia diagram appears to be in case of runaway. However, in @Halton Boy's plan there presumably isn't a 2 mile long 1 in 40 gradient on the left hand line from the halt, and siding B has ordinary points and a trap set normal for the main line. In this situation, the points would need to be set for the main line and the FPL engaged before a train could be accepted. There is no reason why wagons (or even an engine) couldn't be left in the siding.

[Halton Boy]

Hello everyone

This is a lot of useful information. 

I will study what you have said.

Thank you for your help.

Ken

[Michael Hodgson]

T

51 minutes ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

The box was replaced in February 1956, and the 1956 SRS diagram shows some simplification and more conventional numbering. For example, @Halton Boy's 2 and 3 (now positioned where 11 is in the Wikipedia diagram) become 1 and 2 in the 1956 diagram, and @Halton Boy's 1 becomes 3.

 

 

This all agrees with Vol 14 of Pryer, diagram dated 1957.

It also says the Moorswater line was worked by wooden train staff until 1921 then worked as a siding.

Looe & Liskeard lines both worked by electric train staff, later change to Electric Key Token until 1964 when the section to Looe became wooden train staff,

3 signal (1 on Wikipedia diagram) was replaced by a disc in 1958

Spring points removed 1963

Box closed 1981

[RailWest]

1 hour ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

I don't think it is. ....

Yes, you're right there :-) What confused me, when looking at the Wikepedia diagram, is that the two signals on the Moorswater line had no rings, which was certainly the case with the later frame but not the earlier layout (as photographs will show).

[Halton Boy]

Hello everyone

I have re drawn the plan:

On the layout the crossing gates are made of brass, but I think they are left open for the railway. Lever 22 should be brown.

I have put in the lever frame.

It looks like the numbering is wrong.

There is a big gap between 4 and 14.

 

Do I need to add a lever for each trap point?

I like the idea of gluing bent rail to the sleepers to model a trap point.

 

I think I am getting confused as I used Coombe Junction to work out where to put the signals.

As far as I know this not Coombe Junction. The layout does not have a name.

It looks a bit like it.

I should number everything as per the plan and forget about Coombe Junction.

Thank you for help. 

Ken

[RailWest]

26 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

.....

Looe & Liskeard lines both worked by electric train staff, later change to Electric Key Token until 1964....

When the line to Looe was opened in 1901 the Liskeard Branch-Coombe Jcn-Looe sections were worked by Electric Train Tablet (as mentioned in the BoT Inspection Report and later operating instructions). Whether it was changed to ETS before eventually becoming EKT is unknown, but I've not come across any mention of it.

[RailWest]

10 minutes ago, Halton Boy said:

Hello everyone

I have re drawn the plan:

On the layout the crossing gates are made of brass, but I think they are left open for the railway. Lever 22 should be brown.

I have put in the lever frame.

It looks like the numbering is wrong.

There is a big gap between 4 and 14.

 

Do I need to add a lever for each trap point?

I like the idea of gluing bent rail to the sleepers to model a trap point.

 

I think I am getting confused as I used Coombe Junction to work out where to put the signals.

As far as I know this not Coombe Junction. The layout does not have a name.

It looks a bit like it.

I should number everything as per the plan and forget about Coombe Junction.

Thank you for help. 

Ken

1. Lever 22 would only have become brown in BR(WR) days. In the GWR period it would have been  blue.

2. The original layout at Coombe Junction was even more complex with an extra crossover and signals, When these were abolished at any early date that left quite a number of spaces in the frame, hence the gap to which you refer. You might think of renumbering the layout to eliminate those spares perhaps?

3. The trap-point on the line to the warehouses will need its own lever.

4. Whether the trap-point adjacent to disc 20 will need its own lever, or be worked as a pair with 17, depends on which way you assume points 17 lie when 'normal'. Also, given the lack of any serious gradient, will you work 16 and 17 separately, and put both of them on one lever?

 

Ah, the perils of trying to take a signalling installation designed for one location and mapping it onto something diffferent...:-)

[Jeremy Cumberland]

I wouldn't forget about Coombe Junction entirely. It provides a very rare prototype for a junction where passenger trains reverse but goods trains can continue.

 

Easy question first:

13 minutes ago, Halton Boy said:

Do I need to add a lever for each trap point?

Not for siding B (it is worked off lever 17), but you do need one for the Warehouses branch.

 

16 minutes ago, Halton Boy said:

There is a big gap between 4 and 14.

In itself this isn't a problem, but it does suggest that the box was intended for a bigger installation that was either never put in or else has since been removed.

 

18 minutes ago, Halton Boy said:

I should number everything as per the plan and forget about Coombe Junction.

You would need to decide on a numbering policy. You could easily adopt the 1956 Coombe Junction numbering. Here is a summary:

 

 

You have two signals not on the Coombe Junction plan, for entry and exit from siding B. These could be 13 (siding exit) and 14 (siding entry). You can then squeeze things up a bit and use a smaller frame (will the model have a signal box? How big is it?).

 

This is fairly conventional "modern" numbering, with the main running signals at opposite ends of the box, on the side that trains approach from, with only the level crossing bolt outside them. Point levers are more or less in order as viewed from the box and FPLs are immediately next to the points they lock. Shunting signals are placed where they fit, again more or less in order as viewed from the box.

 

I have no idea when this became a more or less standard numbering convention, but in times past, things used to be different, with signals, point levers and FPLs all interspersed, generally grouped according to direction of travel. FPLs were often a long way from the lever working the points. Note in the Wikipedia diagram that for a train leaving the platform for Liskeard, that the points are 12, 15 and 16; the FPLs are 6 and 7 and the signals are 11 and 14. Approaching the station from Liskeard, the points are the same (12, 15 and 16); the FPLs are 18 and 19 and the signals are 20 and 21.

[Halton Boy]

Hello everyone

We have a name for the junction, Union Junction, and the warehouses Union Mills.

I do not know why.

I promised June that I would make a framed signal box diagram for her to put on the wall.

Here is the latest plan:

The layout is 00 gauge and the signal box is quite small.

The idea is to place the signals correctly and produce a signal box diagram that is correct.

 

Passenger trains from line A run into the halt at C. They then run out to line B.

Passenger trains from line B run into the halt at C. They then run out to line A.

There is a railcar for this.

Goods trains run from line A to Union Mills. They also shunt the yard via point 12.

Goods trains run from line B to Union Mills. They shunt the Mills then travel to line A.

Line A connects to the main line.

Line B is a branch terminus.

 

I am not sure if the diagram is correct.

Thank you for your help.

Ken

 

[RailWest]

12 minutes ago, Halton Boy said:

>>>> The idea is to place the signals correctly and produce a signal box diagram that is correct....

 

 

Just make sure then that all the signal arms point to the left :-)

[Halton Boy]

Hello everyone

Thank you Chris.

Lever 12 would normally be set pulled in the frame, which would set the trap points.

Here is a layout plan which shows the shunting of the coal yard:

Can an engine take a full coal wagon from Union Mills to line A.

Then back into the coal siding and pick up the empty coal wagon.

The engine would reverse the wagons over point 12 and leave the empty wagon between point 12 and 10.

The engine would back the full coal wagon into the coal yard.

Then shunt the empty coal wagon to Union Mills.

Does that sound correct?

Thank you for your help.

Ken

[Michael Hodgson]

4 hours ago, Halton Boy said:

Hello everyone

We have a name for the junction, Union Junction, and the warehouses Union Mills.

I do not know why.

I promised June that I would make a framed signal box diagram for her to put on the wall.

 

Union Mills was a real station - on the 3' gauge IoM Railway, a crossing point on the Douglas to Peel line.

[Halton Boy]

Thank you Michael

I will ask June if that is where she got the name from.

Ken

 

[Halton Boy]

Hello everyone

I like June's railway plan, so I have made a plan that is based on hers.

I did not like yard B so I have moved it.

I have added a kick back siding to the warehouse area.

This is my plan:

Please could you tell me if I have got the signalling correct.

Thank you for your help.

Ken