t-b-g

2 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

 

The real problem at AIMREC was the originally envisaged premises not being available, and nothing on a similar scale being available, funds were perhaps not as much much as had been hoped, and whilst the pandemic has obviously delayed progress I don't think it was a key factor.  I don't think there are any photos of the layout online, although it featured in a series of three consecutive issues of the Constructor many years ago.  Part of the layout were originally portable, and it did venture out once to an exhibition before I was involved.  The layout has been extended considerably since then and dismantling/moving it will be very difficult. 

 

It's quite easy to wire with old fashioned 3-rail DC. Each station has a controller for each of its running lines.  Control is handed over from one operator to the next at the Home Signal.  The power feed is taken through a rotary selector switch, and you select the signal to which you want to drive and that runs to the third rail via contacts on the levers of the signals in rear of that.  Where points intervene, lever contacts corresponding to the normal/reverse positions link the relevant tracks together.   So unless you set the points and clear the signals power doesn't reach the piece of track the loco is on, and if you pass the selected signal, the train grinds to a halt as the power goes no further.  One the running rails acts as common return for traction.  The other rail is broken into sections for track circuits, these are connected to bulbs for illuminated box diagrams, fed by an AC supply.  The uninsulated wheels of 3-rail stock complete the circuit, which lights the lamps when the track is occupied although of course this system is not fail safe.    

Buckingham works in a similar way but on 2 rail. Basically, you drive a train towards you. So if a train is leaving Buckingham for Grandborough, you offer it, set the points and signals and that transfers the relevant platform and departure line to the Grandborough controller. Buckingham then gives the 2 beats before the train starts. On Buckingham, 2 beats means "Points and signals set at this end, train ready to go, turn your controller on". When the signals are not cleared, the train is isolated but you can drive in and out using the Buckingham controller which is connected to the track via calling on and shunt ahead signals. No need for track circuits on the scenic section but there are lights to indicate which fiddle yard road has been selected and whether the points are set correctly for an up or a down train.

I did a little video on the control systems for one of the "virtual" shows earlier in the year, if you are interested to see a bit more detail.

17 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Glad to hear it's still going strong.

 

I've had to maintain a number of home-made instruments and bells similar to this for the layout I mentioned earlier.  That is worked mostly by lever frame and cords, with the signal or point returning to normal either by a rubber band or using gravity with a weight to pull it back when the lever is restored.  This needs an enormous amount of maintenance of a big layout.  There was originally some limited interlocking using additional cords.  For example, the signal reading over a point required to be Normal could not be cleared when the point lever was Reverse because a cord tied between the signal and point lever via a pivot behind the frame prevented both being pulled at the same time.  Signals reading in both directions over a crossover could not be cleared at the same time by the same method.  This interlocking was however far too heavy on maintenance to cope with ham-fisted operators and has been abandoned.

That sounds a fascinating layout. It is a shame that Cliff has had to scale back his plans for AIMREC but it was always a very ambitious scheme and the pandemic seems to have made the difference between him being able to do the full version or having to be a bit less ambitious. I hope a new home can be found for the layout. Are there any photos online or any that you can show us? I would be most interested in seeing what it looks like.

I know the joys of maintaining old layouts very well! Several things on Buckingham rely on springs, cord and rubber bands. All weaken and lose their effectiveness over time and trying to work out how to get things apart to replace or fix them is sometimes very frustrating but a great learning experience.

Thanks for the notes on the operating procedures too. If you read the notes next to the Buckingham Block instruments, I am not sure we are doing it 100% correctly but as the power is switched through the signals, they really need to be pulled a bit earlier than perhaps they should!  

20 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I remember articles in the Modeller decades ago.  I assumed that layout was long gone - I take it I was mistaken.  I quite agree that proper block working, a timetable and clock make an enormous difference to a satisfying operating session.  For over 50 years I have from time to time operated one part or another of a very extensive O gauge coarse scale railway which is fully block signalled, although for security reasons it would be quite inappropriate to identify the layout or disclose where it is.  The layout in question will ultimately need to be relocated and it was going to be moved to AIMREC, but they have now been forced to drop out as they don't have the extensive premises they had originally hoped for.

 

 

Yes, Buckingham is alive and well! There are still plenty of little jobs to be done but it is mostly fully operational and it gets run once or twice most weeks. I attach a recent photo plus some snaps of the block bells and instruments.

29 minutes ago, Lacathedrale said:

Maybe 2019? Everything is blurring into one

 

As you know, this layout has all the turnouts in one board also, so mechanical actuation would (hopefully) be fairly straight forward - but the signals are a little more widely spaced to unless I can figure out a reliable mechanical join for the runs will have to be servo operated.

On Buckingham, mechanical linkages are taken across baseboard joints by a sprung plunger arrangement. The lever creates a push on the plunger on one side and the signal or point is held one way by a spring and returns to that position when the lever is returned in the frame. I attach a couple of snaps of the underneath of Leighton Buzzard to illustrate.

6 minutes ago, Lacathedrale said:

It pains me to know that you must have been standing behind Leighton Buzzard at the LFRM in 2020 and I didn't join the dots at the time, so you'll have to excuse that. I dearly wish one day I could see Buckingham in the flesh, maybe I can ply you with gateaux one of these days.

 

RE: operator interaction, I think if you've got buy-in from both then that makes alot of sense. I've joined the local finescale group so between that and a few current friends, hopefully I may find some who are sporting enough.

 

I think interlocking is definitely one of the things that would be added AFTER the layout is 'finished' as a way of extending the modelling and construction opportunities on an otherwise complete system. If I remember correctly there's an arduino sketch which you enter in a table similar to that shown in the original blog entry and it handles the locks and releases (albeit with flashing red lights and nothing happening, rather than a physical lock).

 

 

I am not sure we exhibited anywhere in 2020!

I like the idea of adding interlocking retrospectively. It is one of those jobs that you can do just when you think there is nothing left to do.

You set me off thinking about it. My new one will have all the points and signals on one board, so I was planning on having a mechanical lever frame. The track layout and signalling is fairly simple, so perhaps if I add a suitable arm to the levers in the frame to work interlocking, I will have the option of adding it later myself.

Having operated Buckingham for around 10 years now, I have grown to enjoy operating with a good timetable, signalling and block bells and instruments. When I operate layouts without them, it just seems as though something is missing.

The block bells and instruments only really make sense when you have two control positions and two operators. On other layouts, without such things, you end up asking the other operator "Are you ready for the express?" anyway. So why not do it the way the real railways did?

When we exhibited Leighton Buzzard, the controls for the station were at the front and visible, which created lots of opportunities to explain to people, especially youngsters, what we were doing and why and we were able to create audience participation by getting people to have a go at sending the bell codes. It really added to the enjoyment.

You need to get the volume of the bells just right and you need the pace of operation just right too. If you are too frantic, it can become too much. If you make the fiddle yard something like flashing lights rather than bells, you lose the false effect of geing able to hear the bells at both ends but on Buckingham and Leighton Buzzard that has never bothered anybody.

As for interlocking, I have never bothered. We don't lose lives if we get it wrong on a model railway. I have thought about trying it once or twice, possibly electrically rather than mechanically. It has never got any further than trying to work out all the combinations needed and my brain hurting!

Buckingham is mentioned in the past tense but is still operated week in week out by a small group. Although we have the speeded up clock in a working condition, we very often operate without it. We find it quite restrictive if we are particularly well organised in the shunting and preparation of trains and then have to either send it before its proper time or try to invent some extra shunting to fill the gap until it is time for the train to go. Other times the trains are timed too closely together and things get very hectic. So we find running to the sequence without the clock more enjoyable.

We do the same when we exhibit Leighton Buzzard. For less complex layouts, with only one route and perhaps single line, a sequence becomes less vital and I have layouts where we just improvise as we go along. All the various methods can work and produce interesting operation as long as the operators are on the ball and willing to put on an entertaining display rather than just treat a show as a day out with their friends.

As a little encouragement for you I will bring along a completed Black Hawthorn, built my my good friend the late Malcolm Crawley. I sat opposite him as he was building it and I lost count of the number of times he expressed his appreciation of the design and quality of the kit.

It really is a lovely kit of a delightful loco.

I look forward to seeing you there,

Tony

Roy usually asks that any photographs that are taken are for purely personal use and are not to be published (in print or on the internet) without his approval. That way, when he considers that it is a good time for a published update (which is usually when he is asked to do one by an editor), he has some control over what is seen and how his layout is portrayed to the public.

Apart from wanting to retain some editorial control over how his layout appears to others there have also been, in the past, some unfortunate incidents involving publication of photos which could have compromised the security of the property, as they clearly showed access points into the property.

I don't think that there is any one of us who would like photos of their security arrangements posting on the internet and for those two reasons, Roy asks that photos are not posted without his specific permission.

The superb photos that Andy York took of the layout for MI and BRM give a very good idea of what it looks like now and very little of note has happened since they were taken. Babworth Bridge has moved on and the gardens on West Carr Road have progressed plus there are a few more working signals but nothing spectacular! 

So you ain't missing much by the lack of photos with the blog!

Tony

Hello Dave,

I would always recomend a seperate power supply to the servos. If you use a common return, any slight variation in the power level, such as the surge when a motor starts drawing current, can be misinterpreted by the servo drive board as an instruction, which needs to be obeyed by moving the servo.

I have even had servos go daft when I unplugged a soldering iron from a 4 way mains extension, which also had the transformer for the servo supply plugged into it. So any variation in the power input to the servo drive boards is best avoided.

Having spoken to others, it seems they have experienced similar problems.

You might get lucky and find that you don't have such problems but I just wanted to give you a "heads up" of the problems we have found.

Tony

Good luck with your project. Peter would have been highly delighted that his wonderful layout is still inspiring modellers after all these years.

Tony

Hello Simon,

A certain Rev. Peter Denny did a similar conversion many years ago, when the GWR clerestories first appeared. They were the only RTR vehicles he produced for Buckingham (as far as I know). They still look good today.

Details appeared in a Railway Modeller many years ago but I can help out with some photos if it would assist!