Dale Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 Could any of the wise folk of RM Web help me out by amending my attached XTrack file with the location and type of signals for this north eastern inspired terminus layout. I would also appreciate help with the placement of trap points. On the secondary main line there is an up and down however once into the station a train can be allocated to any of the platforms. The branchline is single line so loco's will be travelling up and down this line. All freight workings will come in and depart from the goods arrival / departure line. The limit of shunt for the goods yard as marked as well as the extent of the MPD. The period is quite wide covering the early and late crest window of BR, its OO and its fictitiously based on Teesside. Many thanks. D. Thorn Abbey Exhibition Format Mk III.xtc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 20, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 20, 2012 Can't read the file - can you post in a more 'universal' file type please? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 20, 2012 Author Share Posted October 20, 2012 I have attached it as a .jpg as the site wont let me upload a .tif I suspect the quality of the compression on thye .jpg may well make it unreadable though...? D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 20, 2012 Author Share Posted October 20, 2012 OK, i dont think the .jpg is too bad? The red marks show the extent of shunt for both the MPD and the goods facilities (you cant read the notes on the plan, font too small). D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 20, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 20, 2012 Reads perfectly ok when enlarged and you are heading exactly the right way - traps required at the two places marked in red PLUS one more required on the lop at the top of the drawing where it rejoins the platform line. The other platform runround line would also need to be trapped but in the situation you have in your track layout that would most likely have been done using a wide to gauge trap where it joins the line from Platform No. 3 (and as part of the normal pointwork, not as something additional) The alternative is a wide-to-gauge trap just before it joins Platform No. 2. (The reason for a wide-to-gauge trap is that it would be far more likely to contain a runaway away from the two adjacent platform lines whereas a normal trap would be likely to turn a derailed vehicle towards one of those two lines). The picture below shows the principle of a wide-to gauge trap in a very similar situation and you will see that with the switches standing in their normal position they are open on both sides - one side or the other would close depending on whichever route is set out of the runround loop (don't worry about the signals etc - this is at Sydney, NSW, so not exactly British signalling practice!!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 Hmmm. I'd just like to question the line I marked with the red arrow. It seems that platforms 2,3 the goods yard, coal, cattle dock and engine facilities all share this one bit of two way single track line. Because the station is not really double track. PLatform 1 is one single track and the rest another. Is this what you intend? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 20, 2012 Author Share Posted October 20, 2012 Hmmm. I'd lust like to question the line I marked with the red arrow. It seems that platforms 2,3 the goods yard, coal, cattle dock and engine facilities all share this one bit of two way single track line. Because the station is not really double track. PLatform 1 is one single track and the rest another. Is this what you intend? To be honest this is something I had not thought of up until this point but you're right, there is a lot of traffic relying on that one section of line. I am guessing the wide to guage trap point will involve a bit of bespoke point making as I am fairly sure Peco dont make it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 And another thing. All the goods yard traffic in both directions and the coal and platform 3 rely on the double slip I've marked with the blue arrow. From what you've drawn I think the station throat is going to be a little strangled, with only one movement possible at once. This may lead to operating frustration. And would the cattle dock be so close to such a big, busy engine shed? Lots of noise and animals don't really mix. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 20, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 20, 2012 Nobody makes a wide-to-gauge trap - and the best of luck to anyone who tries it! I suggest that just getting a decent appearance of one might be the answer - and don't let it show in photos of the layout Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 20, 2012 Author Share Posted October 20, 2012 Fair point about the cattle dock and noise. I may be able to find a better use for that space and sack off the cattle dock? As for the double slip its a necessary evil I am afraid. In order to give me the operational choices I want, the point work needs to be a little congested. I have tried to avoid double slips at all costs but that one is unavoidable. Fortunately its only going to see goods traffic although shunting across it isnt the best but what can ya do?? The track plan is the best balance I have come up with. As for the wide-to-guage I will get one of the track guru's up at the club on it and offer the suggestion of it... D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 Fair point about the cattle dock and noise. I may be able to find a better use for that space and sack off the cattle dock? As for the double slip its a necessary evil I am afraid. In order to give me the operational choices I want, the point work needs to be a little congested. I have tried to avoid double slips at all costs but that one is unavoidable. Fortunately its only going to see goods traffic although shunting across it isnt the best but what can ya do?? The track plan is the best balance I have come up with. It's not the fact you have a double slip but that there's a lot of traffic going through one place. I really think that between the red and blue arrows you need to double the track. At the moment it's single and for such a large station you're going to need to get things in and out. I can imagine the bobby swearing every time he'd have to route something over that section. I think you have to look at the whole design of the station throat and the movements you expect over it. I doubt whether a prototype would have been built that way as the operations are just too restricted. Now I don't have N.E. design experience, but if you look at what movements you need, and the signalling operations necessary for them to take place then you might wish for a change. As virtually every turnout is facing, you're going to need a helluva lot of facing point locks, and operation for each of those fitted that way are not just one lever movement but three (unlock, move, lock) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 20, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 20, 2012 One very simple change would be to carry on the incoming road of the mainline so that it connects into platform 2 as well (you'll have to shift the signalbox sideways but no problem there I think). That means you can then have a second platform in which you can parallel a branch arrival departure with a mainline arrival or departure and you get slightly improved parallel arrival/departure opportunities for the mainline as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 Thanks Mike, just tried that and I think I can just squeeze the needed points onto the track plan although the right hand point is right on the baseboard join. Maybe a surface mounted point motor hidden under a hut, lol. Cheers lads. What about the signalling folks? D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Over to Mike for that one - Think he'll need you new plan, though, so that he can advise on what's going to be. If I were doing it I'd print the plan out and mock up some stock so that you can see the movements you're going to want, and make sure that you have the track geometry to manage them. And just wondering if you need to develop the entry to the loco shed so that locos coming off platform one can get straight to the shed without multiple reverses. May mean moving the junction further up the line but the benefit of that would be to be able to use any platform for branch trains. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 21, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2012 In some respects the signalling is going to define your time band for the layout as - notwithstanding the efforts of the LNER years - an awful lot of further signalling rationalisation on the NER(egion) went on in the late 1950s and well into the '60s. So trying to be reasonably typical early 1960s-ish I would think the Home signals would have been rationalised down to a single running arm plus a sub arm and have been given a theatre route indicator (they might possibly have been replaced by colour lights but that would have been entirely dependent on the state of the gantry which carried them. The ground shunting signals would probably be LNER pattern discs by then - maybe ground position lights but possibly unlikely except -as a fainter possibility - for those which were facing for incoming trains. The platform starters would probably still be semaphore although in some places colour lights were there by the 1960s and that would have led to removal of the splitting signal where teh branch turns off so they would - being NER - have had theatre route indicators albeit serving only two routes. So overall a bit of a mixture with several ways of setting period to suit what you want. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 Cool, thanks mike. I have fiddles with things a bit and have made some changes based on comments about the bottle neck and the cattle dock location. Signals wise I was going to avoid coloured lights opting for semaphore to keep as broad a window of time open. in reality my rolling stock is Late 50's - mid 60's but you never know when i might go mad on teak coaches D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 21, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2012 Semaphores will mean something of a forest at the Home Signals as there are 6 routes, including 3-4 running routes, from both the main and the branch with little option but to put the whole lot on one gantry although it might be feasible to have a second signal where the line to Platform 3 splits - but there will still be a lot of dolls and arms on the Home Signal gantries. The more I look at the signalling the more I see some problems in the track layout the big one being the position of the facing crossover (as it has now become) on the main line. Having added the second line what really needs to happen to make the layout a lot more workable is to transpose the facing crossover and the connection which gives the branch access to platform No.2. This still doesn't create a link from the branch to Platform 1 (= no problem) but it does make the signalling a lot simpler by allowing trains to draw up to a second Home Signal where the incoming line splits between Platform No.2 and the other routes although I can see that fitting the pointwork that way round is likely to be awkward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Another question - the traverser. How are you going to do the running round? Crane shunt by hand? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 The traverser will use a loco cradle/hand of god to swap the loco ends although initial consideration has been given to a turntable on a 3x3 baseboard added to the end of the traverser to avoid handling delicate stock. Mike, can you sketch/scan what you mean with the points swap as I am a little confused? D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 21, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2012 The traverser will use a loco cradle/hand of god to swap the loco ends although initial consideration has been given to a turntable on a 3x3 baseboard added to the end of the traverser to avoid handling delicate stock. Mike, can you sketch/scan what you mean with the points swap as I am a little confused? D. Alas the printer seems to have gone on the blink for some reason which I can't fathom so i can't do anything at all on your plan. So best I can suggest is come along the mainline from the traverser end and the second point end you come to (which is the first facing end you come to) effectively makes a facing crossover onto the outbound main/branch lines. Instead of having it facing put a trailing crossover just there (i.e left hand instead of right hand). Now go down to where the extended incoming line splits to serve platform No 2 and you effectively have a trailing crossover there made up with the connection from the outgoing line/branch. Turn that connection round so that you have a facing crossover for trains coming on the extended incoming line. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 Hi Mike, UI have just had a look at those points and am struggling. If you swap that facing crossover for a trailing you're just replicating the crossoever preceeding it and cutting the up line comming into the station from accessing the branchline platform (3). I cant see how that would work? I know facing points are bad but at the throat of a terminus station they must have appeared surely? I may well have the wrong end of the stick completely... Dale. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted October 21, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2012 Nobody makes a wide-to-gauge trap - and the best of luck to anyone who tries it! I suggest that just getting a decent appearance of one might be the answer - and don't let it show in photos of the layout Too late! There's one showing on the front cover of this month's BRM (November 2012). Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 Will have to go and study the pic as the mag is sat in my locker. So am I right in saying that this layout would be a lot easier to signal using more modern lights instead of a gantry of semaphore's? When did electric lamp signals come into play in the north east? D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 22, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 22, 2012 Will have to go and study the pic as the mag is sat in my locker. So am I right in saying that this layout would be a lot easier to signal using more modern lights instead of a gantry of semaphore's? When did electric lamp signals come into play in the north east? D As explained above (Post No. 15) you have a degree of choice depending on period modelled. I'll try to get a sketch done tomorrow showing the layout change I have in mind - it would make the semaphore signalling a lot easier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 23, 2012 Author Share Posted October 23, 2012 Thanks Mike, would be a massive help. D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.