Mid-Cornwall Lines - 1950s Western Region in 00

[Barry O]

and it was Tetleys... not any more Doombar and Greene King IPA... which is why the visit last week was my first in nearly 15 years...

 

Baz

[The Stationmaster]

Or model railway people either...

 

I remember a big outcry when a pint went up to 32p.

 

I remember a really big outcry when it went up to 2/6d a pint!

[Barry O]

i once had a pint of federation ale in Blaydon Rugby club..it cost 10p (or two shillings) a pint and wasn'tworth it...

[St Enodoc]

i once had a pint of federation ale in Blaydon Rugby club..it cost 10p (or two shillings) a pint and wasn'tworth it...

Remember the "free dips" in the slops bucket at the end of Devon Discos?

[St Enodoc]

Back to trains...

 

Yesterday I set up the double slip and four lengths of track on the spare baseboard space where Porthmellyn Road goods yard will go eventually. As this was strictly temporary I fixed everything down with masking tape.

 

I chose a selection of rolling stock - a four-wheeled short wheelbase wagon, long wheelbase four-wheeled wagon, six-wheeled milk tank, four-wheeled parcels van, short bogie van and Mark 1 coach. I held the tiebars in place using Blu-Tak and pushed each vehicle across all four routes of the double slip at high speed.

 

Everything went across fine except the short wheelbase wagon, which bounced and derailed on one of the straight routes (SW/NE in the photos). I had a good look and the flanges were catching on the closure rails on the right-hand side of the elbow. I didn't have time to do any more before the rugby last night so I went back to it afresh this afternoon.

 

I found that the gauge was slightly wide on the NE route so with the soldering iron and an old file to act as a lever I did a bit of fettling. I eased the switch rail in question towards the centre line until the gauge was right and then eased the adjacent closure rail in the same direction to restore the correct gap. After doing that the wagon ran across all routes without derailing (the other vehicles still did too, fortunately).

 

 

Next I coupled some of the vehicles together, pushing and pulling them across the slip. Again all was well so I went ahead and gapped the timbers so that I could test the slip with a loco.

 

I ran jumpers from the Up Main to the outermost rails at one end of the cross-shaped formation. As there are no electrical switches fitted yet, I used green frog jumpers to get the power across the slip.

 

First I ran a pannier across in all directions with no trouble so I coupled this up to the test vehicles and again there were no problems. I decided to try a few different types of loco - a 42xx 2-8-0T, a small Prairie, a Hall and the Warship. I was very happy to find that they all ran successfully, on all routes both slowly and fast.

 

These tests have satisfied me that the first double slip that I have ever built will work. However, to improve the appearance of the next one I drew a new template on graph paper incorporating some of the lessons learned from the first.

 

I've designed cobbled up a new arrangement of timbers to match a little more closely the drawings in David J Smith's book and allow the ends of the closure rails to rest on a timber instead of floating in the air. The new arrangement is also properly symmetrical. I've moved the switch tips slightly further away from the vees to get a little more space between them, which should let me go back to my standard 2.4 mm gaps. I've also reduced the number of timbers to which the switch rails are soldered from five to three, to preserve a decent flexible length.

 

When I've built the second slip I'll compare it with the first for appearance before deciding whether or not to scrap the first. However, before all that I need to try out my proposed motor drive arrangement, about which more another time.

 

On Saturday we have our next running session, so a chance for the gang to see the new train describer display and decide the best position and angle for it.

 

Note - as the image upload function isn't working, I'll leave the placeholders in for now and upload the photos once the function is working again.

 

Edit - images uploaded - thanks Andy.

Edited July 20, 2023 by St Enodoc
images restored

[Mulgabill]

John

 

Your description of the trials took me right back to my 1st electric train "set". It was a motley selection of Triang stuff which previously belonged to my uncle.

 

I quickly found that in order to get the Pulman coaches to run reliably around the old (grey based) standard track, I had to insert a 4 wheel wagon between coaches.

 

Thankfully with your skills and attention to detail it seems that wont be neccessary on the Mid-Cornwall Lines.

 

 

[St Enodoc]

The image upload function is working again, so I've added the images to this evening's earlier post.

 

Thanks Andy for getting this fixed!

[Richard Mawer]

John

 

I have just been catching up with your thread. I hadn't realised the size of the layout. I'm glad there is someone more mad than me. It's brilliant.

 

I love the proper lever frame and locking. I wish I had gone down that route. Fascinating stuff. So you have split the driver and signalman roles.

 

Have I missed an overall plan? A block plan?

 

Rich

[St Enodoc]

John

 

I have just been catching up with your thread. I hadn't realised the size of the layout. I'm glad there is someone more mad than me. It's brilliant.

 

I love the proper lever frame and locking. I wish I had gone down that route. Fascinating stuff. So you have split the driver and signalman roles.

 

Have I missed an overall plan? A block plan?

 

Rich

Thanks Rich. There's a block plan and some discussion of the background to the layout on page 2 of the thread. There are also snapshots of the actual plan as it develops in various places from page 4 onwards too.

 

Yes, the driver and signalman roles are separate and there are also roles for "yardmasters" at the Paddington and Penzance storage loops.

[Richard Mawer]

Thanks. I get it now. Great concept. Good use of the space and how geat to have that much space anyway!

 

We share many of the operation wish list items. Have you considered a fast clock in due course?

 

One more question that no doubt is hidden away in the thread: how are the loops operated? It looks like trains reverse having arrived in whichever set of loops with locos being released at the far ends. If so, how do you turn the steam locos? Or have I got that wrong?

 

Rich

[St Enodoc]

Thanks. I get it now. Great concept. Good use of the space and how geat to have that much space anyway!

 

We share many of the operation wish list items. Have you considered a fast clock in due course?

 

One more question that no doubt is hidden away in the thread: how are the loops operated? It looks like trains reverse having arrived in whichever set of loops with locos being released at the far ends. If so, how do you turn the steam locos? Or have I got that wrong?

 

Rich

Thanks in return Rich. I like the way you are incorporating the spirit/legacy of Buckingham GC into your layout very much.

 

Many of us down here are lucky enough to be able to find//make space for a larger layout. In my case we bought a house with a small single garage that we had knocked down and rebuilt. I worked out the basic layout plan first so that I knew how big the new garage needed to be. It would have been a shame to spend so much money and then find that it was a couple of feet too small. Having said that, it would have been nice to have room to fit in a small dock scene to represent Tregissey but it wasn't practicable to go any bigger in the space available and under our planning regs.

 

I've operated layouts with clocks in the past. Fast clocks don't work for me, mainly because shunting still needs to take place in real time. Furthermore, even with a fast clock the travelling time between stations is still too short. A good friend back in England runs to a clock in normal time - when there is a long pause in the timetable we just moved the clock hands forward. That layout did, however, only include one station (Whitchurch, Salop).

 

The loops are strictly off-stage. Most trains go out in the opposite direction from how they arrived although some continue in the same direction for various reasons. All shunting is by hand - locos and stock. Many passenger trains get remarshalled as well as goods trains of course. Locos are turned by hand as well.

 

Operation is good fun and, as you will realise, we will be able to expand the sequence progressively as I lay more track.

 

By the way we don't use bells. I don't like hearing the bell at the other signal box when I press the plunger, and there would simply be too much noise once all four signal boxes are commissioned.

[St Enodoc]

W55000 is now on its way from Cornwall. From discussions on the relevant thread elsewhere on RMweb, it appears that the typeface for the bodyside numbers is incorrect so I will have to change them. If I do, it might end up with a different number altogether.

[Richard Mawer]

Thanks for the explanation.

 

My fast clock is not that fast. It is normally run at 1.33x (24 hours model time taking 18 hours real time). Its not too far off real time. I have lulls in traffic to give time to shunt. With a glorified branch, I do not have the same issues you would have with such lulls on the mainline.

 

Because my layout is DC and the destination drives the train, we have just one time in the timetables for any leg of a train's travel. Its always the departure time. Eg Buckingham timetable says departure 11.25 and Evenley's TT says arrival 11.25. That way Evenley knows when to turn the controller. In fact of course the train arrives at Evenley slightly late. I know its a nonesense to have the same time, but it works for us.

 

I know exactly what you mean about hearing the bells in other boxes, but I can't find an alternative and block bells are important to me. Unluckily I do not have the space of the Gainsborough Model Railway, to have stations in other rooms.

 

I'm looking forward to watching your layout grow. I like the video by the way.

[St Enodoc]

Thanks for the explanation.

 

My fast clock is not that fast. It is normally run at 1.33x (24 hours model time taking 18 hours real time). Its not too far off real time. I have lulls in traffic to give time to shunt. With a glorified branch, I do not have the same issues you would have with such lulls on the mainline.

 

Because my layout is DC and the destination drives the train, we have just one time in the timetables for any leg of a train's travel. Its always the departure time. Eg Buckingham timetable says departure 11.25 and Evenley's TT says arrival 11.25. That way Evenley knows when to turn the controller. In fact of course the train arrives at Evenley slightly late. I know its a nonesense to have the same time, but it works for us.

 

I know exactly what you mean about hearing the bells in other boxes, but I can't find an alternative and block bells are important to me. Unluckily I do not have the space of the Gainsborough Model Railway, to have stations in other rooms.

 

I'm looking forward to watching your layout grow. I like the video by the way.

Great idea to have the same arrival/departure times, especially with your DC system. Always best to drive the train towards you with cab control. Do you switch the sections with the signals or separately?

 

I assume that your times are all fictional, whereas mine are based on the prototype timetable so there are indeed long gaps - over an hour in some cases - between trains.

 

I clicked "informative/useful" but would have liked to click "thanks" and "craftsmanship/clever" as well!

[Stubby47]

Richard,

You could replace the bells with headsets and electronic bell sounds, so only the operator receiving the code would hear it.

[Richard Mawer]

Richard,

You could replace the bells with headsets and electronic bell sounds, so only the operator receiving the code would hear it.

Its a good idea. A bit like being in a call centre tho . It would stop some of the "was that me?" That some operators suffer with.

[Richard Mawer]

Great idea to have the same arrival/departure times, especially with your DC system. Always best to drive the train towards you with cab control. Do you switch the sections with the signals or separately?

 

I assume that your times are all fictional, whereas mine are based on the prototype timetable so there are indeed long gaps - over an hour in some cases - between trains.

 

I clicked "informative/useful" but would have liked to click "thanks" and "craftsmanship/clever" as well!

The advanced starter signals switch the power.

 

The TT is all fiction, as is the line. I have based it on as close to typical workings as I can in general. A reasonably regular B passenger service with some connecting to branch auto trains. More B passengers at peaks. Mainline freights in early mornings and evenings. Perishables early morning. Pick up freights mid morning and mid afternoon. Class A passengers to more distant destinations and even onto the old GCR during the day. Milk vans morning and evening to Buckingham dairy and milk tanks to Banbury in the evening. That sort of thing. Just far too many trains for a line of this standing!

 

We are on the 9th iteration due to better notes, copy and paste errors and tweaking timings, but it essentially the same one I wrote from early on. Each day starts at 05.00 and ends 24.05. So at 1.33 timing it takes a few sessions to cover a day. Since the layout became operable about last September, we have covered 5.5 days out of the 6 day week. So there is no chance of getting bored of the same movements.

 

It must be good to have a proper WTT to start with, but quite a task to cut it down to trains you can fit in given storage constraints even on a layout the size of yours.

 

Given you split the signalman and driver roles, does a driver "log off" a loco at the end of that sequenced move and then log onto the next one shown on the screen? Do the signalmen then react to that next sequence event automatically, or is there a form of communication?

[The Stationmaster]

One alternative to using bells is to use lights, or LEDs, to ring the code.  In any case - unless you want to be an absolute stickler  -you could sensibly reduce the number of bell codes (even if trains are correctly lamped to match their timetable description).

[St Enodoc]

The advanced starter signals switch the power.

 

The TT is all fiction, as is the line. I have based it on as close to typical workings as I can in general. A reasonably regular B passenger service with some connecting to branch auto trains. More B passengers at peaks. Mainline freights in early mornings and evenings. Perishables early morning. Pick up freights mid morning and mid afternoon. Class A passengers to more distant destinations and even onto the old GCR during the day. Milk vans morning and evening to Buckingham dairy and milk tanks to Banbury in the evening. That sort of thing. Just far too many trains for a line of this standing!

 

We are on the 9th iteration due to better notes, copy and paste errors and tweaking timings, but it essentially the same one I wrote from early on. Each day starts at 05.00 and ends 24.05. So at 1.33 timing it takes a few sessions to cover a day. Since the layout became operable about last September, we have covered 5.5 days out of the 6 day week. So there is no chance of getting bored of the same movements.

 

It must be good to have a proper WTT to start with, but quite a task to cut it down to trains you can fit in given storage constraints even on a layout the size of yours.

 

Given you split the signalman and driver roles, does a driver "log off" a loco at the end of that sequenced move and then log onto the next one shown on the screen? Do the signalmen then react to that next sequence event automatically, or is there a form of communication?

Thanks Rich. That sounds like a very good switching system.

 

The model Service Timetable represents about 60% of the full prototype timetable, and each passenger/parcels set is 60% of the length of its full-size equivalent, rounded up. Even so I will have over 200 coaches and vans in use for the full timetable (40 of these need to be stabled overnight at Pentowan carriage sidings!). I think that there is enough space in the storage loops...

 

We're still working out the best ways to operate the layout. At the moment we are doing as you suggest - the train describer is advanced to the next train as soon as the previous one starts its journey. As each driver completes his move he picks up the next train shown on the describer. This is working fine on the simple oval at the moment, but we will have to see if we need to change it when the branches come into play.

 

The signalmen and yardmasters will set up the routes for each train in the sequence in succession. No late or out-of-course running on the Mid-Cornwall Lines!

 

I plan to use a "first come first served" system for the single line between St Enodoc and Treloggan Junction. I'm still thinking through the simplest way to do this.

 

Finally, for Mike the Stationmaster's information, we will in due course be using the correct lamp codes.

[St Enodoc]

Six of us for today's running session, but four wanted to be drivers so Chris took the Paddington Yardmaster role for the first time while I took Penzance and the embryonic Porthmellyn Road signal box (only one switch for the Down Goods Loop at the moment) as well as being Fat Controller again.

 

All went well, with only a couple of minor derailments caused by point motors not throwing. It has been quite cold lately and I think that the motors were a bit sticky and sluggish as a result. Things got better as the afternoon progressed but a couple still needed two or three shots before they would fire. This is annoying and, as much as I like the traditional H&M motors, if they aren't going to work reliably I will have to think about replacing them with slow-actions. This is not a decision to be taken lightly, not least on cost grounds, but it is going to be in the back of my mind now. Anyhow, I won't do anything about it until I have completed the trackwork at Porthmellyn Road.

 

Feedback from the team included:

 

- change "pass" on the sequence sheets to "non-stop" for clarity.

 

- think about when to change the train number on the train describer. When trains don't run in strict sequence, as for example when a goods waits in the DGL, things can get a bit confusing. Perhaps the answer is to change it when the previous train completes its journey rather than when it starts it. We shall have to chew this over.

 

- think about changing the loop numbers at Penzance, so that they don't duplicate those at Paddington - that is, change them from 1 - 14 to 15 - 28 (or possibly 21 - 34?). I can see some merit in this but again it needs more thought.

 

- we definitely need "exit" LED signals at Paddington and Penzance to complement the existing "entry" signals.

 

The next full session will be combined with a BRMA visit in early September. We may run the sequence or just demonstrate a selection of trains and give others a chance to have a go. Either way, it would be good to have a couple more points laid so that we can run the railbus in and out of platform 3. I also intend to dismantle St Enodoc before the meeting, so that there is a bit more circulating space than we had last year.

[Andrew P]

Always good to get a large group together for a nice running session, it's also interesting to see / hear others ideas as well.

[Richard Mawer]

Six of us for today's running session, but four wanted to be drivers so Chris took the Paddington Yardmaster role for the first time while I took Penzance and the embryonic Porthmellyn Road signal box (only one switch for the Down Goods Loop at the moment) as well as being Fat Controller again.

 

All went well, with only a couple of minor derailments caused by point motors not throwing. It has been quite cold lately and I think that the motors were a bit sticky and sluggish as a result. Things got better as the afternoon progressed but a couple still needed two or three shots before they would fire. This is annoying and, as much as I like the traditional H&M motors, if they aren't going to work reliably I will have to think about replacing them with slow-actions. This is not a decision to be taken lightly, not least on cost grounds, but it is going to be in the back of my mind now. Anyhow, I won't do anything about it until I have completed the trackwork at Porthmellyn Road.

 

Feedback from the team included:

 

- change "pass" on the sequence sheets to "non-stop" for clarity.

 

- think about when to change the train number on the train describer. When trains don't run in strict sequence, as for example when a goods waits in the DGL, things can get a bit confusing. Perhaps the answer is to change it when the previous train completes its journey rather than when it starts it. We shall have to chew this over.

 

- think about changing the loop numbers at Penzance, so that they don't duplicate those at Paddington - that is, change them from 1 - 14 to 15 - 28 (or possibly 21 - 34?). I can see some merit in this but again it needs more thought.

 

- we definitely need "exit" LED signals at Paddington and Penzance to complement the existing "entry" signals.

 

The next full session will be combined with a BRMA visit in early September. We may run the sequence or just demonstrate a selection of trains and give others a chance to have a go. Either way, it would be good to have a couple more points laid so that we can run the railbus in and out of platform 3. I also intend to dismantle St Enodoc before the meeting, so that there is a bit more circulating space than we had last year.

Hi. Sounds fun.

 

Have you thought about having each driver moving on the sequence as they finish their move. That way they know that the one it changes to is the next one they are running. So driver A takes 1, B takes 2, C3. When A finishes he changes the sequencer and takes 4. If B is delayed so C ends next, C operates the sequencer and takes 5. If B ends next shortly followed by A, then B will operate the sequencer and take 6 closely followed by A moving it on and taking 7.

 

Is there any way you can make the entry and exit signals from the loops actual semaphores on the running lines near the tunnel mouths?

 

Rich

[The Stationmaster]

Six of us for today's running session, but four wanted to be drivers so Chris took the Paddington Yardmaster role for the first time while I took Penzance and the embryonic Porthmellyn Road signal box (only one switch for the Down Goods Loop at the moment) as well as being Fat Controller again.

 

All went well, with only a couple of minor derailments caused by point motors not throwing. It has been quite cold lately and I think that the motors were a bit sticky and sluggish as a result. Things got better as the afternoon progressed but a couple still needed two or three shots before they would fire. This is annoying and, as much as I like the traditional H&M motors, if they aren't going to work reliably I will have to think about replacing them with slow-actions. This is not a decision to be taken lightly, not least on cost grounds, but it is going to be in the back of my mind now. Anyhow, I won't do anything about it until I have completed the trackwork at Porthmellyn Road.

 

Feedback from the team included:

 

- change "pass" on the sequence sheets to "non-stop" for clarity.

 

- think about when to change the train number on the train describer. When trains don't run in strict sequence, as for example when a goods waits in the DGL, things can get a bit confusing. Perhaps the answer is to change it when the previous train completes its journey rather than when it starts it. We shall have to chew this over.

 

- think about changing the loop numbers at Penzance, so that they don't duplicate those at Paddington - that is, change them from 1 - 14 to 15 - 28 (or possibly 21 - 34?). I can see some merit in this but again it needs more thought.

 

- we definitely need "exit" LED signals at Paddington and Penzance to complement the existing "entry" signals.

 

The next full session will be combined with a BRMA visit in early September. We may run the sequence or just demonstrate a selection of trains and give others a chance to have a go. Either way, it would be good to have a couple more points laid so that we can run the railbus in and out of platform 3. I also intend to dismantle St Enodoc before the meeting, so that there is a bit more circulating space than we had last year.

 

Argh, dumbing down hits Mid Cornwall with 'pass' ( a proper railway timetabling term) turning into 'non-stop' (wot passengers was told as they asked about trains)   .   Rolling within graves takes place in numerous cemeteries as antipodean terminology takes hold beyond the Tamar  

 

(talking of which if holiday plans go to plan we shall be crossing said river next week - however the last time we were told to go to Penzance it was altered to Weymouth at two days notice and instead of disembarking in Swansea we ended up going ashore in Greenock)

 

And for the loop numbers  - a simple (proper) prefix such as PDN for - well you know.  And, of course, PZE for the others ?

Edited July 15, 2017 by The Stationmaster

[St Enodoc]

Hi. Sounds fun.

 

Have you thought about having each driver moving on the sequence as they finish their move. That way they know that the one it changes to is the next one they are running. So driver A takes 1, B takes 2, C3. When A finishes he changes the sequencer and takes 4. If B is delayed so C ends next, C operates the sequencer and takes 5. If B ends next shortly followed by A, then B will operate the sequencer and take 6 closely followed by A moving it on and taking 7.

 

Is there any way you can make the entry and exit signals from the loops actual semaphores on the running lines near the tunnel mouths?

 

Rich

Thanks Rich. The original plan was indeed to let the drivers advance the train describer at the end of a run. I had in mind doing this through a relay activated by a macro that would short out the left mouse key contacts. I thought that letting the Fat Controller do this instead would work but now I'm not so sure, so we might revert to the original plan.

 

Your second comment has planted a seed. The LED "signals" are, in effect, not signals but block indicators, showing whether the line is clear or blocked. It might be possible to link them in some way to the Porthmellyn Road signal box to give a Line Clear release to the appropriate section signals.

[The Stationmaster]

Right - 1948 Freight Marshalling (alphabetical order of starting point), Section B starting stations only so basically Bristol, Exeter and Plymouth Districts -

 

21.55 Bristol West Depot - Penzance, Class C, Engine power group DX  Max load 45 wagons in Cornwall.  Par traffic marshalled rear from Bodmin Road connects 04.40 Par to St Blazey, 07.03 and 07.25 Passr trains Par to Newquay, 08.20 StBZ to St Dennis

 

19.18 Drump Lane - Bristol, Class C. Engine power group DX.  Cattle wagons for Highbridge formed on the engine (if any running).  Does not call at Par, Newquay branch traffic via Truro.

 

17.05 Marazion - Oxley, Class C, Engine pg DX.  All non-vac marshalled rear.  Does not call at Par.

 

14.50 Penzance - Paddington, Class C, Engine pg D (47XX from Laira).  Load 45 wagons in Cornwall, livestock marshalled in the non-vac section rear.  Not to convey between Penzance and Paddington wagons with axleboxes packed with horsehair or waste.  Does not call at Par.

 

19.45 Penzance - Plymouth,  Class J, Engine pg D.  Calls at Par - no feeding trains noted.  Traffic added to be marshalled as per segregations on train.

 

00.45 MX/01.10 MO Plymouth - Penzance, Class D, Engine pg D.  Calls at Par - connecting freight trains as noted for 21.55 Bristol WD.  Par traffic marshalled between approx between vac and non-vac sections.

 

22.30 St Blazey - Tavistock Jcn, Class J, Engine pg E (42XX)

 

 

01.40 Tavistock Jcn - Penzance, Class J, Engine pg D.  Does not call at par, Newquay traffic via Truro.

 

07.00  Tavistock Jcn - Penzance, Class E, Engine pg D. Does not call at Par.

 

09.25 Tavistock Jcn - St Austell, Class J, Engine pg D (51XX).  Par traffic formed front on arrival, no connecting trains noted.

 

N.B.  All clay empties for terminals. sidings etc on the area were routed via St Blazey  There must have been a tavistock Jcn - St Blazey return working for the 42XX but it isn't shown in the Marshalling Instructions.