Mid-Cornwall Lines - 1950s Western Region in 00

[St Enodoc]

8 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

I’ll be fascinated to see how this turns out (no pun intended) if you go for the Barry slip.  I’m not a track builder, so I’m interested to see: my guess is that planning it is made more complex by the absence of the second (diagonal) straight line, but might making it then prove to be easier (fewer parts to line up precisely)?

 

I can see from the track diagram why you don’t need to full double slip - the key thing will be to remember / train visiting operators that Track 6 is not the headshunt for Tracks 1 to 5!   I like the way you’ve designed the fiddle yard though: the headshunt (track 10) may be described as the shortest, but the ‘effective’ length of the headshunt is from the buffers on track 10 round to the slip point, making it more useful, while keeping the longer tracks 6 to 9 for storage.  Very clever.

According to the post I quoted yesterday, one of the attractions of Barry slips was that construction and maintenance was much simpler (= cheaper) than a double slip - clearly, with no elbows (K-crossings) and only two pairs of switches that must be so.

 

I think that, as with the double slip, it just isn't possible to set out a "perfect" 1 in 5 Barry slip with minimum 30" radius curves in 00. If I could move everything at Polperran to the left slightly, I would have room for 1 in 6 points throughout but because of the relationship of three reverse curves - the line from Pentowan to Treloggan Junction, the curve at the junction itself and the line from Treloggan Junction to Polperran - I just wouldn't be able to fit it all in without having to compromise on train lengths.

 

Well spotted regarding the headshunt! That's exactly how it will work. I might paint the headshunt tracks bright red or something to help folk remember.

[Mulgabill]

12 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

According to the post I quoted yesterday, one of the attractions of Barry slips was that construction and maintenance was much simpler (= cheaper) than a double slip - clearly, with no elbows (K-crossings) and only two pairs of switches that must be so.

 

I think that, as with the double slip, it just isn't possible to set out a "perfect" 1 in 5 Barry slip with minimum 30" radius curves in 00. If I could move everything at Polperran to the left slightly, I would have room for 1 in 6 points throughout but because of the relationship of three reverse curves - the line from Pentowan to Treloggan Junction, the curve at the junction itself and the line from Treloggan Junction to Polperran - I just wouldn't be able to fit it all in without having to compromise on train lengths.

 

Well spotted regarding the headshunt! That's exactly how it will work. I might paint the headshunt tracks bright red or something to help folk remember.

 

 

Just looking at your diagram John, do you have to define the headshunt? I would

think that ANY free siding on the Right (6-10?) would work equally well. The siding

length, and the "pointwork" length would increase and decrease, more or less

in proportion.

 

Having learnt all about the Barry Slip from here, I would love you do it, just because

they existed, and it can be done.

 

TONY

[St Enodoc]

22 minutes ago, Mulgabill said:

 

 

Just looking at your diagram John, do you have to define the headshunt? I would

think that ANY free siding on the Right (6-10?) would work equally well. The siding

length, and the "pointwork" length would increase and decrease, more or less

in proportion.

 

Having learnt all about the Barry Slip from here, I would love you do it, just because

they existed, and it can be done.

 

TONY

Thanks Tony. Yes I do, because the road lengths and train lengths, particularly on the right, are closely linked (as @Keith Addenbrooke noticed). Road 6 is for the Okehampton (T9 + 3 Hornby Maunsells), 7 is for the Padstow (02 + 2 Hornby Maunsells), 8 is for 1419 + trailer and 9 is for the GRCW single power unit. On the left it doesn't matter so much, as all the roads are longer.

 

As for the Barry slip, let's wait and see!

[Michael Edge]

There's one of these "Barry slips" on Cwmafon - if you remember it. It's at Cwmafon Junction by the gravity yard - I built it just because i wanted to, after finding out that they existed. It has caused some confusion for inexperienced operators when they have tried to set the non existent route across it.

[St Enodoc]

9 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

There's one of these "Barry slips" on Cwmafon - if you remember it. It's at Cwmafon Junction by the gravity yard - I built it just because i wanted to, after finding out that they existed. It has caused some confusion for inexperienced operators when they have tried to set the non existent route across it.

Yes, I remember it well Mike! A friend near here has one on his 0 gauge layout too - a confounded nuisance right in the middle of the goods yard.

Edited February 14, 2021 by St Enodoc

[5BarVT]

Must be  set out  wrong on the diagram then!

:-)

Paul.

[St Enodoc]

3 minutes ago, 5BarVT said:

Must be  set out  wrong on the diagram then!

:-)

Paul.

Sorry Paul, too cryptic for a Sunday evening. What must be set out wrong on which diagram?

[Barry O]

something else for me to create havoc with when I attend a running session 

 

Baz

[5BarVT]

58 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

Sorry Paul, too cryptic for a Sunday evening. What must be set out wrong on which diagram?

It's still Sunday morning here (just), so I'm bright as a new pin.

But I have forgotten the first rule of communication: think how others will interpret what you say!

I was referring to operator confusion and thinking how a badly set out 'panel' or 'diagram' could lead to error.

Since a picture paints a thousand words . . .

'Confusing' on the left and 'clear' on the right.

Paul.

[St Enodoc]

2 minutes ago, 5BarVT said:

It's still Sunday morning here (just), so I'm bright as a new pin.

But I have forgotten the first rule of communication: think how others will interpret what you say!

I was referring to operator confusion and thinking how a badly set out 'panel' or 'diagram' could lead to error.

Since a picture paints a thousand words . . .

'Confusing' on the left and 'clear' on the right.

Paul.

Ah, I see what you mean. The Polperran schematic was drawn with a double slip. The text mentioned that taking the horizontal line out of the DS would change it to a Barry Slip (I nearly wrote BS but changed my mind).

 

The points control panel will reflect the actual configuration, whichever one it turns out to be.

[bgman]

3 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I might paint the headshunt tracks bright red or so

 

Might save a few RED faces ! 

[St Enodoc]

8 hours ago, bgman said:

 

Might save a few RED faces ! 

I wouldn't say that any of my operators are GREEN but we're all feeling BLUE because we haven't had a running session since January 2020.

[St Enodoc]

I thought it was time to think more seriously about Porthmellyn Road signal box, so last night I opened up one Ratio and one Fordhampton kit to see how they looked. Here are some of the parts strewn across the desk.

 

The starting point is to use two Ratio roof mouldings to extend the overall length of the box to about 130mm. I found that one long Ratio window unit and one single full-width window will just fill this length, to form the front, while at the back another long unit and a small window with narrow panes will leave room for a chimney stack near one end.

 

At the door end, I can use the Ratio configuration of a narrow window and a glazed door but the opposite way round to the standard kit design. Finally, at the other end, the Fordhampton double end-window unit will fit. The Fordhampton mouldings aren't quite as nice as the Ratio ones but, as this end won't be as visible, I don't think I'll worry about that.

 

Between the four kits there should be enough brick panels and planked panels to build the rest of the structure.

 

The next step is to sketch it all out properly and start a mock-up.

Edited June 28, 2023 by St Enodoc
Images restored

[The Fatadder]

Will be interested to see this come together, now that I have sorted out getting the goods shed laser cut, the signal box for Brent is the last structural build that I have any concern about.  I think it is of similar length (but full timber construction), so will be interesting to see your approach for bits like the roof and windows. 

[St Enodoc]

40 minutes ago, The Fatadder said:

Will be interested to see this come together, now that I have sorted out getting the goods shed laser cut, the signal box for Brent is the last structural build that I have any concern about.  I think it is of similar length (but full timber construction), so will be interesting to see your approach for bits like the roof and windows. 

Thanks Rich. It's a bit of an experiment really, to see how easy it is to cut-and-shut the Ratio and Fordhampton kits to make something that will be inspired by (to coin a phrase), but not a replica, of Par signal box. The roof determines the overall size, as I need to cut off one hip from each of two Ratio roofs and join the remaining sections together. I want to use as much of the kits as practicable to see how much I can get away with.

[St Enodoc]

I've done some work on the basic configuration for the signal box.

 

The Fordhampton end windows didn't look as good as I thought they would, being a bit stretched horizontally and a bit squashed vertically, As a result, to my eyes the proportions don't look right at all, so I don't think I'll use these:

 

Two Ratio end windows, like the one next to the door at the other end and above the locking room door, would fit but it seems a bit extravagant to buy two extra kits just for two new windows (I might ask Peco if they can sell spare sprues though). So, I had a look in the spare parts box and found some Dornaplas windows. Although they haven't got the "3/2" panes of the Ratio ones, I think they look better:

 

The rest of the building seems to work, except that I don't think I've quite got enough height on the planked section between the windows and the brick base. I'll stretch that a bit, to improve the proportions:

 

https://www.alamy.com/par-signal-box-image182033002.html

 

https://www.alamy.com/semaphore-signals-and-signal-box-at-par-station-cornwall-with-the-junction-of-the-main-line-and-the-newquay-branch-line-in-shot-june-2004-image210366005.html

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/129659811@N08/16206998206/

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_09_2014/post-10222-0-69395300-1411156926.jpg

 

If it still looks good in a couple of days' time, I'll make a start on cutting plastic...

Edited June 28, 2023 by St Enodoc
Images restored

[Nick Gough]

On 18/02/2021 at 07:02, St Enodoc said:

I thought it was time to think more seriously about Porthmellyn Road signal box, so last night I opened up one Ratio and one Fordhampton kit to see how they looked. Here are some of the parts strewn across the desk.

 

The starting point is to use two Ratio roof mouldings to extend the overall length of the box to about 130mm. I found that one long Ratio window unit and one single full-width window will just fill this length, to form the front, while at the back another long unit and a small window with narrow panes will leave room for a chimney stack near one end.

 

At the door end, I can use the Ratio configuration of a narrow window and a glazed door but the opposite way round to the standard kit design. Finally, at the other end, the Fordhampton double end-window unit will fit. The Fordhampton mouldings aren't quite as nice as the Ratio ones but, as this end won't be as visible, I don't think I'll worry about that.

 

Between the four kits there should be enough brick panels and planked panels to build the rest of the structure.

 

The next step is to sketch it all out properly and start a mock-up.

When I saw this photo I immediately thought of an article I had just read in the latest Great Western Echo. The author had just started as a 'second man' at Old Oak Common in 1971.

 

His first turn involved taking the depot's steam crane, and breakdown train, to Hungerford following a stone train derailment.

 

There are a couple of photos of the signal box resembling a part assembled/squashed kit.

 

It was replaced by one of the 'plywood wonders' for the last few years of semaphore signalling.

[St Enodoc]

Yesterday and this afternoon I ballasted the last sections of the branch track, as far as St Enodoc 7A points. That didn't take too long, so while the PVA was drying I changed from civil engineering to S&T engineering mode and wired up the last four relay modules, for the Porthmellyn Road Branch signals, that I installed a couple of weeks ago.

 

Porthmellyn Road lever frame is now fully connected up, so I tested the four modules to make sure that the relays picked up. Of course, I haven't installed the signals themselves yet - I'll do that once I've tidied up the branch ballast, with luck in time for our March running session if it takes place.

Edited June 28, 2023 by St Enodoc
Images restored

[St Enodoc]

I tidied up the ballast this afternoon, starting by scrubbing all the track with a dry, stiff kitchen brush before running the end of a coffee stirrer along the running edge of all the rails to clear any bigger chips of ballast. Then I cleaned the track with the Gaugemaster track rubber and vacuumed up all the debris. Next, I pushed a wagon slowly and gently over all the track to find any remaining small lumps and bumps, which I chipped off with the coffee stirrer or, for more persistent ones, an old file. Finally, I ran a loco over everything to make sure all was well.

 

I posed the long china-clay train on the Up Branch for a photo, then decided to run some trains, just for fun. That's when things went wrong (@Clive Mortimore please look away now).

 

You will remember that since about November 2018 I've had intermittent problems with the DCC system "freezing", causing a loss of control both of the trains and the points, which only clears itself after switching off the mains power for about 20 to 30 minutes. It happened again today after about 20 minutes' running. I suspect that the previous advice that this is a command station problem still stands but I've asked Gary and Marcus to see if they've any further thoughts before I shell out on either a new PH Box or repairs to the existing one. A bit disappointing after all this time without problems, although admittedly I haven't run many trains lately.

Edited June 28, 2023 by St Enodoc
Images restored

[Clive Mortimore]

3 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

 

You will remember that since about November 2018 I've had intermittent problems with the DCC system "freezing", causing a loss of control both of the trains and the points, which only clears itself after switching off the mains power for about 20 to 30 minutes. It happened again today after about 20 minutes' running. I suspect that the previous advice that this is a command station problem still stands but I've asked Gary and Marcus to see if they've any further thoughts before I shell out on either a new PH Box or repairs to the existing one. A bit disappointing after all this time without problems, although admittedly I haven't run many trains lately.

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by Clive Mortimore

[St Enodoc]

15 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

 

No - that's the problem...

[Chamby]

5 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I tidied up the ballast this afternoon, starting by scrubbing all the track with a dry, stiff kitchen brush before running the end of a coffee stirrer along the running edge of all the rails to clear any bigger chips of ballast. Then I cleaned the track with the Gaugemaster track rubber and vacuumed up all the debris. Next, I pushed a wagon slowly and gently over all the track to find any remaining small lumps and bumps, which I chipped off with the coffee stirrer or, for more persistent ones, an old file. Finally, I ran a loco over everything to make sure all was well.

 

I posed the long china-clay train on the Up Branch for a photo, then decided to run some trains, just for fun. That's when things went wrong (@Clive Mortimore please look away now).

 

You will remember that since about November 2018 I've had intermittent problems with the DCC system "freezing", causing a loss of control both of the trains and the points, which only clears itself after switching off the mains power for about 20 to 30 minutes. It happened again today after about 20 minutes' running. I suspect that the previous advice that this is a command station problem still stands but I've asked Gary and Marcus to see if they've any further thoughts before I shell out on either a new PH Box or repairs to the existing one. A bit disappointing after all this time without problems, although admittedly I haven't run many trains lately.

 

Looks like you might have added additional accessories to your system recently, for the branch extension?  That could mean additional residual current draw, and/or added background ‘chatter’ that is now testing the capability of your supply.

 

The fact that both both points and trains were affected suggests that you feed both from the same power unit?  Might be worth thinking about separating them, as your railway empire grows!

[bgman]

40 minutes ago, Chamby said:

The fact that both both points and trains were affected suggests that you feed both from the same power unit?  Might be worth thinking about separating them, as your railway empire grows!

 

I don't recall how all the electrickery has been wired up on this excellent layout but if it is feeding off the same unit then I would tend to agree that may well be the problem.

 

I have always had separate power units to track and accessories in an attempt to stop the problem happening even on a small layout.

 

5 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I've had intermittent problems with the DCC system "freezing",

 

I hope you manage to find and eradicate this problem soon John.

 

G

[St Enodoc]

9 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

Looks like you might have added additional accessories to your system recently, for the branch extension?  That could mean additional residual current draw, and/or added background ‘chatter’ that is now testing the capability of your supply.

 

The fact that both both points and trains were affected suggests that you feed both from the same power unit?  Might be worth thinking about separating them, as your railway empire grows!

 

8 hours ago, bgman said:

 

I don't recall how all the electrickery has been wired up on this excellent layout but if it is feeding off the same unit then I would tend to agree that may well be the problem.

 

I have always had separate power units to track and accessories in an attempt to stop the problem happening even on a small layout.

 

 

I hope you manage to find and eradicate this problem soon John.

 

G

Thanks gents.

 

The configuration is fairly standard for an NCE DCC system. A single combined command station/booster (PH Box), the output of which supplies the track power and of course the cab bus that carries all the DCC control signals round the layout.

 

The PH Box is also connected to a separate booster (SB5 in dumb mode), the output of which feeds the accessory bus that powers the Cobalt digital point motors in the storage loops.

 

The cab bus connects the command station to the radio base unit (RB02) and two Mini Panels, one at each of Paddington and Penzance, that control the points at those locations. The cab bus is made up of several lengths of cable that are connected by Universal Throttle Panels (UTPs), two of which have a 12V dc feed to boost the cab bus signal.

 

In DCC terms that layout is small and fairly simple, so I don't think that the few extra feet of track on the branch are the problem (the points, being controlled from the signal boxes, are purely analogue and have nothing to do with the DCC system). Marcus (http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/nswmn2/DCC.htm) emailed me last night to suggest that the symptoms sound like a cab bus problem, possibly within the command station. I'm going to call him later today to talk this through.

 

Watch this space!

[Clive Mortimore]

56 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

 

Thanks gents.

 

The configuration is fairly standard for an NCE DCC system. A single combined command station/booster (PH Box), the output of which supplies the track power and of course the cab bus that carries all the DCC control signals round the layout.

 

The PH Box is also connected to a separate booster (SB5 in dumb mode), the output of which feeds the accessory bus that powers the Cobalt digital point motors in the storage loops.

 

The cab bus connects the command station to the radio base unit (RB02) and two Mini Panels, one at each of Paddington and Penzance, that control the points at those locations. The cab bus is made up of several lengths of cable that are connected by Universal Throttle Panels (UTPs), two of which have a 12V dc feed to boost the cab bus signal.

 

In DCC terms that layout is small and fairly simple, so I don't think that the few extra feet of track on the branch are the problem (the points, being controlled from the signal boxes, are purely analogue and have nothing to do with the DCC system). Marcus (http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/nswmn2/DCC.htm) emailed me last night to suggest that the symptoms sound like a cab bus problem, possibly within the command station. I'm going to call him later today to talk this through.

 

Watch this space!

That means as much to me as "A--bop-a-loo-bop, A-lop-bam-boom!" does to many other people.