LNERGE Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I have had the pleasure of running over this behind an A4.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
£1.38 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Where is this located, please? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNERGE Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 Peterborough Eastfield. 48 points. http://www.flickr.com/photos/32297024@N08/7508724960/in/photostream Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBill Posted July 8, 2012 Share Posted July 8, 2012 Nice... Any idea when this was installed? Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNERGE Posted July 9, 2012 Author Share Posted July 9, 2012 The crossing is dated 1962. I have no idea if it is secondhand at this location. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 The crossing looks almost American. Is it loose-heeled too? Best, Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNERGE Posted July 9, 2012 Author Share Posted July 9, 2012 It has conventional switch anchors. I suspect the location may contain some GNR pointwork. The crossing was made by Allen Imperial Manganese in 1962. A search of that found.. http://trove.nla.gov...sion=NBD9580254 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBill Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Sorry LNERGE, do you mean 1962 or 1926 (the date of the pamphlet in the Australian library?) Thanks again, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Holt Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Can anyone advise if the lock bar shown in the 1st photo is in the locked or unlocked position? I'm intrigued by the purpose of the joggle in the locking bar (might not be the correct terminology) - it looks as if it engages with the angled tabs on the lock detector and would move the detector to the right if the lock bar was moved forward towards the stretcher - which I would assume is the locked condition? If this is not how it works, what is the purpose of the joggle? I need one of these for my layout and have the Ambis etch, which looks to make up the exact arrangement illustrated. No cover plate to hide it all away, so I'd like to get it right! Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 9, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 9, 2012 Can anyone advise if the lock bar shown in the 1st photo is in the locked or unlocked position? I'm intrigued by the purpose of the joggle in the locking bar (might not be the correct terminology) - it looks as if it engages with the angled tabs on the lock detector and would move the detector to the right if the lock bar was moved forward towards the stretcher - which I would assume is the locked condition? If this is not how it works, what is the purpose of the joggle? I need one of these for my layout and have the Ambis etch, which looks to make up the exact arrangement illustrated. No cover plate to hide it all away, so I'd like to get it right! Dave. The Facing Point Lock bolt (it is not a point locking bar, that is a different component which is fixed to the rail edge) is in the unbolted/not locked position. Although it can't be clearly seen at the other end it is not engaged with the notch in the FPL stretcher which is how it actually locks the switch rails and you can see - as you have noticed - that it has a lot of travel available in its position in the picture. As you surmise the forward movement of the bolt to engage with the notch in the stretcher bar will result in the FPL detector rod being driven to the right which will in turn align the FPL detector blade with the port/notch in the detector. Each switch rail drives its own detector rod giving a total of three blades in the detector. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNERGE Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 I've just had the rare privilege of installing a completely new facing point with lock and mechanical detection on NR. I'll see if i can shoot a movie the the facing point lock in operation in the possession later. I'm not sure how successful it will be in the dark but i'll give it a go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNERGE Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 Sorry LNERGE, do you mean 1962 or 1926 (the date of the pamphlet in the Australian library?) Thanks again, Bill The crossing in my picture is dated 1962. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Holt Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 LNERGE - I'd like to see you video if it turns out OK. Mike - Thanks for the clear explanation & correct terminology. That now creates a dilemma. As working FPL's are probably not very practical in 4 mm scale, is it better to model the mechanism fixed in the locked or un-locked position? If the former, the point shouldn't be able to move and if the latter, then the signal(s) can't be cleared! My leaning is towards the locked position as I assume that is the default position (lever normal in the frame?). With reference to switch blade detector rods, in the case of a double slip (with all 4 blades at each end moving together), would there be 4 rods connected to the detector or two separate detectors with two each? Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 10, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 10, 2012 Mike - Thanks for the clear explanation & correct terminology. That now creates a dilemma. As working FPL's are probably not very practical in 4 mm scale, is it better to model the mechanism fixed in the locked or un-locked position? If the former, the point shouldn't be able to move and if the latter, then the signal(s) can't be cleared! My leaning is towards the locked position as I assume that is the default position (lever normal in the frame?). The answer depends on the Company/Region you are modelling and the period you have in mind. The reason for saying that is that facing Point Lock (FPL) covers were a distinctive and common feature for many years and their removal is a relatively recent phenomenon and generally a feature of the post-steam railway. So if there's a cover )of the correct pattern for the Company/Region you are modelling of course ) you won't see whether or not the bolt is engaged from above and most viewing angles. If there isn't a cover I think the logical think is to model it bolted (or appearing to be bolted!) as you can then run trains over the points in the facing direction. The lever position also varies - for instance on the Western FPL (blue) levers usually stood/stand reverse when the FPL is bolted but some others did in the opposite way while if there was an Economical FPL (one lever works both point switches and the FPL - very common on the Midland) the points are bolted when the lever stands normal and when it stands reverse! Oh and are you modelling a place or period when there would have been a Facing Point Lock Bar as well as the FPL bolt? The set up will then be a bit different as usually the bolt was driven off the bar and the bar was worked by the lever - just different and more of, but not necessarily harder if you want to model an FPL in the first place. With reference to switch blade detector rods, in the case of a double slip (with all 4 blades at each end moving together), would there be 4 rods connected to the detector or two separate detectors with two each? Dave. It depends how the switches are worked and what is being detected but normally any particular detector will only be relevant to the switches through which the facing movement will be made so that means no need to detect any more than in any other facing point, just that the second set of switches will be detected separately (don't forget that in the real world the two sets of switches at one end of a double slip might be worked by two different levers). Incidentally detector connection methods varied - on a facing point there would always be a minimum of three rods - one for each switch and one for the FPL. In some situations on some Railways/Regions a fourth rod would be added to 'anchor' the detector firmly to the stock rail to ensure that adjustment wasn't lost. Depending on Region and period I do have some detailed photos which might help. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNERGE Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 The blades at the near end of this slip are operated by levers 57 and 58 and one side is locked by 56(BR mk2 fpl casting). It has a three slide detector on the right (SGE style HH) and a two slide on the left (SGE style HJ).. Edit to add note... What looks like an AWS ramp in the Shunt Line is another HJ detector Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 That piece of trackwork looks like it was designed by committee.... Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
£1.38 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 That is indeed a fascinating photograph. All the subtle changes in colour alone make it worthy of prolonged study, never mind the fittings etc.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNERGE Posted July 11, 2012 Author Share Posted July 11, 2012 LNERGE - I'd like to see you video if it turns out OK. Dave. Said video. The best i could do under the lighting conditions/noise. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4Z8K4X4lA4&feature=youtu.be Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Holt Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Thanks, LNERGE, that's interesting and amplifies The Stationmaster's explanation. It's all very clear now. Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Holt Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 The answer depends on the Company/Region you are modelling and the period you have in mind. The reason for saying that is that facing Point Lock (FPL) covers were a distinctive and common feature for many years and their removal is a relatively recent phenomenon and generally a feature of the post-steam railway. So if there's a cover )of the correct pattern for the Company/Region you are modelling of course ) you won't see whether or not the bolt is engaged from above and most viewing angles. If there isn't a cover I think the logical think is to model it bolted (or appearing to be bolted!) as you can then run trains over the points in the facing direction. The lever position also varies - for instance on the Western FPL (blue) levers usually stood/stand reverse when the FPL is bolted but some others did in the opposite way while if there was an Economical FPL (one lever works both point switches and the FPL - very common on the Midland) the points are bolted when the lever stands normal and when it stands reverse! Oh and are you modelling a place or period when there would have been a Facing Point Lock Bar as well as the FPL bolt? The set up will then be a bit different as usually the bolt was driven off the bar and the bar was worked by the lever - just different and more of, but not necessarily harder if you want to model an FPL in the first place. It depends how the switches are worked and what is being detected but normally any particular detector will only be relevant to the switches through which the facing movement will be made so that means no need to detect any more than in any other facing point, just that the second set of switches will be detected separately (don't forget that in the real world the two sets of switches at one end of a double slip might be worked by two different levers). Incidentally detector connection methods varied - on a facing point there would always be a minimum of three rods - one for each switch and one for the FPL. In some situations on some Railways/Regions a fourth rod would be added to 'anchor' the detector firmly to the stock rail to ensure that adjustment wasn't lost. Depending on Region and period I do have some detailed photos which might help. My layout (see my occasional "Delph" blog) is ex-LNWR/LMS set in the mid to late 1950's BR era. In real life, all the signaling was removed in the early 1900's and the branch worked as one engine in steam. However, for operational interest/modeller's license, I've assumed that the signals were re-installed right at the end of the LNWR period, just before grouping, and probably updated at some stage by the LMS or BR (routine replacement of worn items?). The point in question (facing turnout into the loop/yard) has a locking bar in addition to the lock bolt. Again, I've assumed that the bar length would have been increased to about 60 feet and the operating connection from the box moved to the end further from the point and the lock bolt connected to the end of the locking bar nearest the switch rails. The double slip is at the exit from the run-round loop and goods yard to the main line, controlled by a yellow arm ground signal which has the detector in the cable run actuated by the facing end switches. Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovenor Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Dave, 60ft is rather long for a lock bar, the wheelbase, between inner wheels, of BR coaches was essentially set by the usual length of lock bars, ie until the demise of lock bars rolling stock design was constrained by the bars rather than vice versa, lock bars were extended when bogie stock was introduced but not subsequently. Regards Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 11, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 11, 2012 Dave, 60ft is rather long for a lock bar, the wheelbase, between inner wheels, of BR coaches was essentially set by the usual length of lock bars, ie until the demise of lock bars rolling stock design was constrained by the bars rather than vice versa, lock bars were extended when bogie stock was introduced but not subsequently. Regards Keith All depends on the Railway Keith - the GWR had some very long vehicles so it had no option but to have long lock bars on some of its routes (although 60ft would no doubt have been pushing things and was probably too long for a one piece bar in any event). And coming back to Dave's post there was an awful lot of LNWR signalling kit still in use into the 1960s let alone the 1950s; most obvious replacements might be UQ arms for LQ (but most likely only if they were badly corroded), and replacement signals where a signal post had rotted and was getting unsafe. Otherwise, especially on a secondary line, there would still be a pretty heavy air of LNWR about things signalling. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Holt Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Oops - my mistake! I was going from memory, but having just checked, the locking bar is actually a scale 50 ft long - more typical, I believe? Any thoughts about the FPL covered/open to view question and the double slip blade detector rods? Cheers, Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 12, 2012 Oops - my mistake! I was going from memory, but having just checked, the locking bar is actually a scale 50 ft long - more typical, I believe? Any thoughts about the FPL covered/open to view question and the double slip blade detector rods? Cheers, Dave. As far as covers are concerned my impression was that these seemed to be less common on some parts of the LMR although there were quite a few of the standard LM chequer plate examples around and in some cases on secondary lines the covers were just timber. As for leaving the cover open well you could but is it foul of any running gear in that position and you will need to have the Lineman nearby of course. As far as the double slip is concerned both sets of switches should be detected (there won't be an FPL of course) but I'm not sure if both sides of each turnout in the slip would be detected with a yellow arm disc under LM practice. Signal Engineer would be the best person to answer that one I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Holt Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 As far as covers are concerned my impression was that these seemed to be less common on some parts of the LMR although there were quite a few of the standard LM chequer plate examples around and in some cases on secondary lines the covers were just timber. As for leaving the cover open well you could but is it foul of any running gear in that position and you will need to have the Lineman nearby of course. As far as the double slip is concerned both sets of switches should be detected (there won't be an FPL of course) but I'm not sure if both sides of each turnout in the slip would be detected with a yellow arm disc under LM practice. Signal Engineer would be the best person to answer that one I think. Mike, Thanks very much for you advice. Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.