imt
-
Posts
662 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Exhibition Layout Details
Store
Posts posted by imt
-
-
It might be useful to think that you don't necessarily need more than 6*4 layout space, just do it a different way - split it up. Have 2 * 6'by 1'6" say with 2 * 3' by 1' bits to end up with a 6' by 6' with a hole in the middle! This allows for larger curves and for bits to be spread out. You need trestles to erect in on (4 off under the 6' by 1'6" bits and hang the 3' by 1' bits between them).
It all really depends on the space you have available to erect a layout, and what the access problems might be. I have seen clever designs that have a shunting area on one 6' by 1'6" for use most of the time in son's bedroom plus the ability to go into the garage and erect the full doughnut. The important point is to realise that a 6'by 4' "lump" ain't going to be manageable by a 10 year old on his own. Think out of the box so there is something to do all the time, and something special bigger when dad joins in and can erect the whole thing in a suitable space - like the garage or (when mum takes a deep breath) the dining room.
I was lucky 65 years ago to have Hornby O and the corridors of a bungalow to lay it in - sending tea from the kitchen to the living room! 00 ain't like that but you can have a modular system that gives the impression.
IMPROVISE!
-
Is this 00 or N? We need to know.
6' by 4' is not an easy size I am sad to have to tell you if this is 00. Also how about access - is it all round or restricted on some sides? You might like to look at some of the "Plans for Small Layouts" or perhaps stick with a classic like Bredon see https://www.newrailwaymodellers.co.uk/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=21948. This was one I cut my teeth on in Hornby Dublo days! Some room for shunting and running trains at the same time.
You will have the usual "keep away from 1st radius points/track" since some locos won't go round it.
There is more stuff on a 6' by 4' Bredon here http://www.modelrailwayforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=11160&page=2.
By tyhe way - subscribe to some of these other forums - it costs nothing and you can then look at things there too. Try using Google - these bredon things came from me searching "bredon model railway"
-
I like the idea of being able to stream video from a loco mounted camera, and have a drivers eye view.
You can certainly do that already - especially with the new miniature video cameras from the mobile phone industry. HOWEVER as Olddudders points out - you need somewhere for the processor wifi gubbins and a battery. What I have seen a lot of are video cameras in vans or other rolling stock pushed in front of the loco or some where the van fitted with the electronics is towed and the camera lens on the front of a loco has a wired connection. SOME locos or tenders may be big enough to hold what is necessary, but with Bluetooth and/or wifi needing battery power it will be a long time before it is an off the shelf easy to fit technology. There are several threads on here on Bachmann Bluetooth.
-
Many thanks for your kind remarks and interesting suggestions. I did (briefly) consider servos but, being a bit of a cheapskate, I dismissed the notion because, by the time you have factored in the cost of the servo controllers, it looked a costly solution. Thanks again for your suggestion/reminder to consider the use of WIT. I may investigate that option further as the costs are minimal. My impatience is not a great marriage to this hobby and I do find building the Ratio LNER signals fiddly and time consuming, hence my attraction to the Train-Tech colour lights and the lights with "feathers" look excellent and I could definitely find a use for them. The layout is a pastiche of BR(NERegion) and I've taken inspiration from for example West Hartlepool (platform canopy), Malton (loco shed) and Sandsend (metal viaduct). I've seen contemporaneous pics of the use of colour lights on the Southern Region but not so far on the North Eastern Region, apart from the ECML. Still, I could enforce "Rule 1".
Much to think about. In the meantime I will order some more WIT and experiment with the bracket signal already constructed.
Thanks again for your interest.
Regards,
Brian.
You are talking to a man who gets impatient with his shoelaces!
If you want to go the MAS route don't forget CR Signals (again usual disclaimer) who build to order and will produce signals with multiple "feathers" (for example) which Train-Tech do not, and they are not expensive. If you think servos are expensive keep away from Absolute Aspects MAS which are works of art and cost similar sums of money.
Good luck with the WIT approach - beyond my arthritic 75 year old dexterity levels now, sadly, because in my youth I used the Denny "piano keyboard" system (sliding wooden keys with brass "feelers" and contact screws at appropriate places) which provided WIT and electronic switching on a DIY cheap and effective basis. Seems to have been forgotten about these days. Why not try DCC Concepts wonderful Cobalt-S lever frames - again works of art and beautiful to look at and use - but about £18 each lever! This ain't a cheap hobby any more if you aren't good with your hands!
Happy modelling. As I said, I love your layout and re-read these posts every so often when I feel down!
-
1
-
-
One of the reasons that this corner of the layout...
...remains far from complete is that my "big idea" of using gravity to assist in the manual operation of the semaphore signals, whilst OK for single mast signals, does not work very well on the bracket junction signal below...
...because there is too much friction in the system.
So, what to do? I really did want operating signals but don't have the patience to faff about further with the Ratio kits and I do not possess the soldering skills to build metal (MSE) kits. I am therefore drawn towards operating colour light signals such as Train-Tech and/or Eckon/ Berko. But I wonder whether fitting colour light signals on a 1950s/1960s based NE Region layout is a little step too far beyond belief.
Your views would be welcome peeps.
Regards,
Brian.
As a north-easterner by adoption I love your layout and have found your step by step descriptions above to be most helpful and encouraging..
The Train-Tech signals I find very good and they operate faultlessly on my DCC system(usual disclaimer), never tried DC versions but my friend says they work fine for him with just wires (resistors) and rotary switches - you can buy controllers too. They may not be valid for NE or for the time period (which is a shame if true) but I for one HATE layouts with no or non-operating signals so I use Train-Tech and to heck with it.
Since you have had some experience with wire in tube and slider switches - why not use that?? Is there no room for the odd crank to turn corners? I am told that servos are very good too - they can be easily controlled if you can fit them - plenty of examples/advice on the Signalling threads.
Good luck .............
-
I am a bit bemused by this thread. Lots of talk about signalling what is really a quite improbable scenario. The idea of separate goods and passenger lines is very unusual though I believe not unknown Stourport? on the GWR but usually the double track would be up and down. I know the rationale is running down the station but the track layout does not look much like a double track terminus simplified, indeed it would have needed extensive resignalling for the simplification for which cash was tight early 60s ish.
I suspect the object of the plan is to provide a headshunt for the sidings to allow shunting independent of main line services, however most prototype stations used the outgoing main line as a shunting neck as the staff knew when trains were due, and they were quite rare by late steam days.
I think some redesign of The trackPlan, to a straightforward double track terminus would be a good move. Replacing siding point control with hand levers is more likely than providing ground frames for that purpose.
I think we were all presented with a layout that existed and were asked to comment and design signalling etc. I would agree that I wouldn't have started from here - and the OP (Bob) has done some minor rearrangements - especially moving trap points. I don't think he wants to do more changes. This is what he has come up with as a starter arrangement - he says he will be building something more traditional in due course.
Personally I'd do some tidying up:
1)remove the cross over with single slip direct into the shed area (if there was room making it into the right hand end of the head shunt to have an easy entry/exit - or remove altogether as unnecessary);
2 remove the link between the lower carriage siding line and the Relief line
3)remove/redesign the strange double slip entry into the yard conflated with the Pilot siding which is over complicated and causes signalling/operational problems.
But there you are - probably others would disagree.
-
My comments are on Phil's latest diagram.
As many of you know I am interested in how things really worked and not just the signal and points positioning and locking etc. which are of course vital - but the human element is the final aspect of safety. Please correct me if I am wrong but there are 2 sub-Empires here, the yard (the shunter's domain or was there a Yard Foreman?) and the loco shed (Shed Foreman's domain). Moving in and out of these areas required "a clear understanding" between the signaller and the Foreman as to when something was going in and out. I am also unclear whether a 100 lever box would have a number of signaller's (presumably traffic had a bearing) or whether indeed the earlier suggestion of a second box for shed/carriage sidings and approaches would be valid. Certainly in real life for a single signal box a lot of this would be motors not wires/rods would it not?
I think we might be conflating the real world with the compression inhereent in the model railway world. The situation in the real world was quite simple and, apart from Signalman's workload, the key deciding factor was the distance between the signalbox and any points which it operated mechanically - and by the 1930s that distance had grown to 350 yards. Increase in the distance allowed signalboxes to be amalgamated and much of that sort of thing took place on some Railways and BR Regions. Here it really depends on what Bob wants - I earlier recommended signalling to GWR/WR post-war standards as it would allow greater simplicity but that too is a matter of what Bob wants. But one thing that is debatable is that one signalbox controlling a layout like this in earlier times would be unlikely - the very nature of some features of the track layout (particularly two bi-directionl lines) suggests a more modern tarck lauyout and possible combination of two 'boxes into one - but that in turn would inevitabluuy lead to power working of some points and probably the siding connections between Platform 1 & 2 being operated by ground frames.
I am confused with "telephones, gongs and plungers". I understand that plungers (buttons) were often used for a guard (say) to indicate (for example) that a train was fully in a siding. In the case in point the #1 looks to me to be beside a telephone and that would in all probability be on the Shed Foreman's desk for communication with the signalbox? Would plungers be used on signals 5 and 90 (I think they are the right ones for exit to the Main/Relief) to indicate loco ready to leave? Do we need signals 6 (which reads to the head shunt only?) and 89 (which reads to the shed only?) and presumably are the Shed Foreman's domain. Gongs as I understand it are usually operated by levers in the ground frame to allow the shunter to "talk" to the signalbox - maybe telephones by this time?
I'm equally confused. As mentioned in a couple of posts made since the latest plan was published gongs at ground frames were not a feature of Western practice - ground frames were linked by telephone to the signalbox if any sort of communication beyond a key release instrument was provided. Similarly train crew/ground staff operated plungers were far from common and the only place they were usually found was as 'train arrived complete' plungers for Guards to operate when arriving in a loop from a non-track circuited line although from the 1970s/80s onwards what were known as 'acceptance plungers' were provided in a few places to allow yard staff to 'accept' a train into a yard but they too were hardly a common event. For example I was writing operational specs and agreeing signalling plans for those sort of places in the 1980s without any need whatsoever to provide acceptance plungers - it was all down to who controlled the line in question and acceptance plungers worked by yard staff had a habit of causing delays. Such things definitely wouldn't appear in this layout/. So 'phones yes, including loudaphone type installations or tannoys . A 'phone to 'ring off' from the shed area and possibly similar anywhere else not under the Signalman's immediate view or where he couldn't see a handsignal.
Should signal 7 just be a disc as per 4? Where does signal 9 read to, and if it is into the yard how is that achieved? Would there be a shunter's ground frame or something where there could be a telephone to communicate with the signaller? Trains surely cannot just be stuffed into the yard?
Signalman contacts yard staff and asjks if he can let a train in, or yard staff contact Signalman and tell him he can let a train in - simples
Signal 82 appears to cover 2 routes, one into the shed - should there not be another sub bracketed left associated with 28 and entering the shed? There is a problem with light engines entering the shed from the station end since entry is straight into the shed - from the country end they would go into the head shunt.
Again a matter of communication - there would be a clearly understood method of working about who was allowed to do what without contacting someone else to ask permission to do something or make a particular movement. On Plan Vers,17 signal 82 reads to signal 84.
Some comments might help me make sure that any other silly ideas I have are corected before I comment further.
Thanks for all of that Mike and the time you took over doing it. It is so interesting to understand how these things really worked, rather than just what signals were where. Thanks again for your time.
-
My comments are on Phil's latest diagram.
As many of you know I am interested in how things really worked and not just the signal and points positioning and locking etc. which are of course vital - but the human element is the final aspect of safety. Please correct me if I am wrong but there are 2 sub-Empires here, the yard (the shunter's domain or was there a Yard Foreman?) and the loco shed (Shed Foreman's domain). Moving in and out of these areas required "a clear understanding" between the signaller and the Foreman as to when something was going in and out. I am also unclear whether a 100 lever box would have a number of signaller's (presumably traffic had a bearing) or whether indeed the earlier suggestion of a second box for shed/carriage sidings and approaches would be valid. Certainly in real life for a single signal box a lot of this would be motors not wires/rods would it not?
I am confused with "telephones, gongs and plungers". I understand that plungers (buttons) were often used for a guard (say) to indicate (for example) that a train was fully in a siding. In the case in point the #1 looks to me to be beside a telephone and that would in all probability be on the Shed Foreman's desk for communication with the signalbox? Would plungers be used on signals 5 and 90 (I think they are the right ones for exit to the Main/Relief) to indicate loco ready to leave? Do we need signals 6 (which reads to the head shunt only?) and 89 (which reads to the shed only?) and presumably are the Shed Foreman's domain. Gongs as I understand it are usually operated by levers in the ground frame to allow the shunter to "talk" to the signalbox - maybe telephones by this time?
Should signal 7 just be a disc as per 4? Where does signal 9 read to, and if it is into the yard how is that achieved? Would there be a shunter's ground frame or something where there could be a telephone to communicate with the signaller? Trains surely cannot just be stuffed into the yard?
Signal 82 appears to cover 2 routes, one into the shed - should there not be another sub bracketed left associated with 28 and entering the shed? There is a problem with light engines entering the shed from the station end since entry is straight into the shed - from the country end they would go into the head shunt.
Some comments might help me make sure that any other silly ideas I have are corected before I comment further.
-
How's this?
[Click to enlarge]
- Thicker track lines with "pencil" outlines more like prototype signal box diagrams.
- Revised double slip into good yard - hopefully it's clearer now.
- Revised point numbering as per Grovenor and flying signalman (I think).
- P1/P2 spurs given FPLs, ground discs and control from signal box.
- Signal numbers yet to be added.
Very nice diagram Phil but I have a few issue with it, largely because I think some idea of how the whole is to operate needs to be taken into account. This is questioning some of your colouring but also some of the suggested signal placements (mainly by others). This posting is exploratory in the hope someone will correct my misapprehensions since I am probably way out in my thoughts. I hope this isn't seen as "threadnapping" as I think it will help Bob iof this is thought through.
Earlier Bob said the old Platform 5 was to be a “goods reception” which seems a good idea to me allowing straightforward operations. However that would mean that the point labelled 66 should be twinned with 55 and should normally lie (locked) towards the main lines (and the whole siding and half point be grey). The signaller could then direct a train to the siding from the Relief and then switch and lock the siding to the yard allowing shunting access.
I think that there ought to be a main signal on the old platform 5 for departing goods trains - which can only go to the Relief.
On a similar vein, I think 65 and most of 46/47 would be hand operated as part of the yard. I don’t know quite how this would be done but the double slip needs to be locked “curved” in both directions (i.e. allowing access from the Loco siding to the yard, and Relief to P3/P4 for safe operation). I can see that the trap at 47 is essential to prevent the Pilot moving onto the main line past the signal. I think a single disc is required for that purpose since access to the yard would be under shunter control.
I cannot see a signal on the exit from the goods yard from 47 onto the Relief. If trains are not to exit from P5/Goods exchange via 55 then there will be problems for the Shunter since he will need to clear the path through 65 (now hand controlled) and other points for that to happen. But if it is intended that trains leave the yard in this way then there would need to be a signal? If only a disc to cover shunting onto the Relief.
Isn’t the Up signal at 45/7 simply too close to the starters? Maybe just a disc for entry to the Pilot siding?
I would suggest that the Down signal at 58 is overkill and could be moved back to the previous signal - which I think should be before the bridge for sighting purposes - and likewise swap the Up signal currently at 30 to the station side of the bridge. The indicators would need to have a “GR” for goods reception added. I think there would need to be some telephones/plungers about in order for the shunter/signaller/driver to communicate about entering leaving the yard and entering and leaving the goods reception/exchange siding.
-
Hi Bob,
I made a signalling diagram for Sigtech's "Sproston", which is also 1950s BR(WR), a few months ago. See: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/126780-layout-design-in-illustration-software/?p=3032108
It was produced with the invaluable help of Mike, The Stationmaster.
Would you be interested in something similar for Cambrian Street? I'd be happy to have a go!
Bob,
Just say "yes". His work is just magnificent and clearly neither you nor I are good at drawing signals! A "proper signalling diagram right round past the loco yard would really encourage the comments (I think anyway!) and help ypu get a better idea of what's where and HOW you might operate it all.
Iain.
-
The siting of the posts in photo 2 looks OK, they need to be at the least at the toe of the points they control. The loco will be a little further back from that. On the first photo the post for Platform 5/Goods arrival will need to be where the red mark is where the fish plates are, remembering that the signal should be on the LEFT of the loco where possible, but variable to obtain best sighting position.
Assuming you are NOT having "cash registers" (as described above) you are going to have a forest of signals UNLESS you decide to restrict the routes available from any one signal (all shunting from P3/4/5 only to Relief say? Or only a single sub for shunting/access to Pilot siding on the basis that the moves are obvious and different and the pilot would know where it was going). You could consider having only ONE main departure arm to cover all exits from the platform, but that might be unusual on a larger station like yours.
For the full fig I think something like this.
The signals on P5 (facing direction of travel) would need to be a bracket with sub to the left for entry into the yard and the central main arm reading to the Relief line with 2 subs below reading upper to shunt on Relief lower to the Pilot siding.
The signals on P4 and 3 (facing) would need to be a bracket with shorter main arm to the left reading to the Relief line with a subs below reading shunt on the Relief and lower to the Pilot siding and Main arm to the right leading to the main line with a sub below that reading to Shunt on the main line.
I hope someone will come along and give some advice on how these decisions can be made.
-
Usual (G)WR practice was latterly (post early 1920s) to exclusively use route indicators on signals approaching station necks where there were more than 2 or 3 routes in advance of the signal. They were used on platform starting siognals from termini but nirmally where siting constraints prevented use of a splitting signal with a separate doll for each route.
Thanks Mike. I am assuming in that case that the incoming train would be cautioned and then the signal released when the driver could/had seen the indicator. Or would a speed restriction be normal. or is it part of "route learning"?
-
As nobody has given a starter for 10 - here’s an amateur’s attempt - I will now duck for the incoming!
The signalling gives some pause for thought. Your back story has this as a run down but once busy station “ripe for closing”. Thus once upon a time there would have been a full fit of signals, and the two lines at the station throat would probably have been an up and down - rather than a bi-directional main and relief. How far do you go? IF the reduced station were staying open for an extended period, you might say that, since the signalling needed revising for the new usage, it was decided to use colour lights for some of the work. That is if you want the easy way avoiding making mechanical signals.
Signalling for the station area will mean platform end signals at 1,2,3,4 and 5 - though we have re-purposed 5 to be goods reception and mail/parcels. Signals 1 and 2 would need a main signal which only reads to the main line, and to have a subsidiary branched left reading to the “Loco headshunt” (presumably for a station pilot for main line trains into p1 or p2?) as well as (probably) a sub under the main signal to allow for the pilot shunting stock onto the main. This then allows a pilot to draw out carriage stock onto the main up to the outer home (which will be round the corner before the points into the loco shed) and then propel back into 1,2,3 or 4. This raises the problem of some over signalling based on earlier heavy use as opposed to current use.
Signals 3 and 4 would need a main signal for the main line, a lower (bracket) to the right for the Relief, and probably subs under both for shunting on the main and for access to the Pilot siding. Colour lights would have a Route Indicator to show M/R and a single pls with a shunt indicator to show the route set (they are so small you cannot make them work!).
The loco head shunt would need a small arm/disc/GPLS to signal clear to exit - whether there would be any indication of p1 or p2 or that dubious pair of spurs between them I don’t know.
Signal 5 is the Freight/Mail/Parcels departure and is a main signal reading to the Relief line, a sub for the shunt on the Relief line under that and a sub for entry into the yard bracketed right. The points into the yard and this sub would only be operated once the shunter had indicated “acceptance” by a plunger or telephone call.
The exit from the Pilot loco siding has 1 route which would be unlikely to be signalled - entry to the yard - and 3 routes to P5, P4, P3. You either have 1 disc for economy (the driver would know where he was going?), 1 disc with some indicator lights, or a stack of discs with the topmost reading to 5, then 4 then 3.
We have discussed above that the usual process of getting freight into and out of the yard will be by platform 5. If that remains then arguably NO signals are required leaving the yard. If you want to allow occasional exit (say a short train of coal wagons to the shed) then you will need ground signals on the exit between the two double slips next to the pilot siding. I’m not sure how you would do that.
The home signals on the Main and Relief actually cover 4 routes each. The Main signal into platforms 1-4, probably also needing subs to allow for fresh locos to back down onto carriage sets to form a departing train. A big gantry I guess?). The Relief signal has 3 routes to platforms (3, 4 and 5) and a possible - but dodgy in my opinion, into the yard area which should be a sub I would think with the train first having be brought to a halt. Again a gantry with (left to right) sub for yard, Main and sub for P5, main and sub for P4, main and sub for p3.
How’s that for a start? I warn you it’s probably wrong!
-
Disclaimer: I am an interested amateur and I am NOT an expert - they will appear and criticise and amend in due course. I am just regurgitating (badly) what I have learned from reading (and not always correctly understanding) books and postings on this topic.
If you will excuse me, you have created a bit of a conundrum for operations and signalling. In glorious hindsight you need to think about how something will be used/operated FIRST. All stations were designed for a purpose, rail that wasn’t needed wasn’t laid and signalling was expensive (to install, maintain and operate) so the smaller the station the more minimal it was.
As far as I can understand, you need a “line of control” between the signalled area and the “yard”. Signalling in the yard will be by shunter’s hand signals. Yard “points” will in general be manually operated. Signallers don’t push freight trains into “yard” areas without “a joint understanding” with the shunter (or whoever is in control|), and this usually means that the freight reception goes into a jointly accessible siding and departure will be into the signalled area from a fixed siding - for which the shunter/yardmaster exchanges control - usually with telephones or “plungers” (buttons in boxes) to accept incoming or to say outgoing is ready to depart. In small rural stations freight trains are often received into the passenger platform(s) and then run round and pulled into a headshunt or removed by another loco (unlikely in sleepy branches but could be the case in your larger station).
I would suggest the “line of control” really needs to be across from the Pilot siding to the Local Services platform - below that is signalled and controlled from the box (sometimes by leaning out with a green flag - but controlled). That means the crossover out of the platform and the double slip at the Pilot siding would be locked normal to the Relief line - ensuring nothing could cross (run away) into the controlled area.
I would recommend that freight come into the Local Services platform, this would mean a clean handover into the yard by a pilot pulling it off the incoming loco into the the loop called Goods Siding. The siding above the Local Services is fraught with problems and would mean much of the yard would have to be signalled and controlled (signals and locked points) to achieve it (and much more care taken to keep lines clear and wagon brakes pinned etc.). To build a departing freight, the siding above the Local Services platform could be used, and then (with agreement) the train could be pulled out of the yard and propelled into the station to await a loco from the depot.
You have so many platforms it might be an idea to use the Local Services one for mail/parcels some of the time and freight arrival departure for the rest.
Your “Kip” siding probably won’t work. You cannot readily leave stock on a siding used for shunting, and the coal yard can only be shunted from there. You need to think of using another siding for guards vans.
Anyway - your layout your rules.
-
How clever and skillful is this eh..?
Bob
Absolutely brilliant! Far beyond my arthritic old fingers! I note thr blinds are pushed up - obvious really - silly me. Odd that it is a ringed (freight) signal referring to platforms?
-
Hi
This is where I'd seen route indicators (to arrival platform) on approaches to a station on a layout, but would use on semaphore....wonder whether BR western region ever used them...?
Regards
Bob
Semaphore signals did have "blinds" in a box (usually under the signal arm?) which pulled up on operating the appropriate signal lever. Several levers operated the one signal (each locked against the others) and pulled up an appropriate blind after the route had been set. Such things are only any good when the train is stationary or has been brought almost to a stand, the "Home" being cleared with the appropriate "blind" at the last minute. Drivers cannot see them at speed - which is why they are usually on platform ends showing exit routes. It was (I believe) more usual to have brackets of signals at the approach to stations. Modern practice uses "feathers" (Position Light Indicators) - that is those branches of (usually 5) small lights in a row roughly pointing to the way the locos would proceed.
In any case, there is a problem if you want operational signals of this type. I know of no supplier of mechanical signal blinds, and I think they would be tricky to do, and the only provider of colour light versions (Absolute Aspects - which are what is in your photo) will make your eyes water and give your bank manager a heart attack.
You could use colour light signals (but unlikely in your scenario?) and use those provided by Train-Tech. A cheaper and more limited range, but none-the-less effective. I use them (usual disclaimer) and am most satisfied. They supply kits (simple to make up) or ready made. For colour lights you can also look at Eckon/Berko or CR Signals (who would be a cheaper source of specially made colour lights - I use them too and they are very good and very helpful)
Your problem will be to decide how far you want to go, and whether the signals will work or not. In my opinion a layout looks daft without signals and sillier still with trains ignoring fixed non-working ones - but that is MY personal hang-up. It's your layout.
-
What would help would be some idea of how the station was to be operated, what routes trains would take, how stock was intended to be reversed (the loco is at the stop block end of the train). Do you intend to run round (which means arrivals would largely be to platform 4) or will you draw out stock and propel it back into another platform. If so which lines would you use for that - remembering that you only have a single "main line". Only platforms 4 & 5 have access to the relief line. I note the carriage sidings - what are they for and how long. Are they for DMUs or coaching stock - if coaches how will the pilot run round the stock before propelling it into the siding? The carriage sidings don't need (what I take to be) the trap points since the points off the Relief line would need to be locked normal to the main line. Same applies the other end where the crossover will be locked normal to the Relief to prevent runaways. Personally I would remove the link between the carriage sidings and the relief and provide a crossover in the centre of that area between the carriage sidings line and the Relief line to allow a run-round for a pilot collecting/depositing carriage rakes.
I do not understand the role of the "spurs" between P1 and P2 - what will they hold and how will it get there? Presumably only by shunting since you wouldn't want to signal a train into them - or would you? I'm not sure that they are anything but a hazard on a passenger line - and would certainly need trapping off to prevent runaways. Personally I'd lift and remove them and put P2 parallel to P1 (with a cossover like P4/P3). If there were room I might replace them with a centre road between P1 and P2.
The goods is also a conundrum. How will goods arrive? Into P5 or the siding above it. It would be better if it were the siding - since it has more reverse shunting opportunities there - P5 can only reach the "goods siding". However, if you want to shunt the rest a pilot will need to pick items off the rear of the train. The goods arrival problem is best explained by P5 and the siding above it. If you arrive into the siding, then a pilot can pull stock off the end of the train, and run round it to shunt in various directions. For P5 that isn't possible as it only has access to the lower siding which is shorter because the crossover there faces the wrong way.
I am confused about your goods yard. It might be usual to have a reception and an departure siding - where trains can be broken up or assembled, yet so much seems to be labelled as head shunts - implying stock cannot be left standing on it? By the way - most goods yards of this size don't have signal boxes, and the points would be operated by hand - either singly or from a ground frame.
Anyway - think about routes - because that is what needs to be signalled - not every possible route but those which make the station operable the way you want. For example your signal gantry above may need a subsidiary to signal a loco to the Pilot Loco Siding.
-
Isn't Matt the thread-starter?
regards
Yes it's his thread. Someone else had posted another layout here, and I suggested it would be better if he started a new topic. THAT post has gone.
-
Nothing personal, but WHY do you keep putting this in other people's threads. You can start your own, just click on the top right - "Start a new Topic"
-
I think the OP question is more related which line approaching the station would be used to shunt the stock out of the platforms in a very general scenario.
I've queried similar in the past for a Minories inspired design and the general consensus was best practice used the departing line as a head shunt. The logic (in my head at least) went that there would be less interference with revenue earning services arriving if any shunt occurring is in the departing line, and the signaller is not likely to release a shunt move onto the departing line if a revenue earning service is about to leave. Plus the quantity and distance of 'home' signals from the signal box would (I suspect) be more complicated if the arriving line were used for shunting stock. The signalling experts are probably better to advise on that though.
That is what I meant to ask, however the other information is fascinating too. I get the "revenue earning" bit. That makes the answer much clearer - because I couldn't see a signalling reason why either line could not be used with the right safety margins.
-
This is a "proper procedure" question when considering model design for a terminal station with ECS sidings or the need to release locos. A "Minories" style terminal would bring up the picture for discussion. Now I know that the original idea for such a station was that it was suburban services largely tank engine operated. Forgetting that for the moment, we now have moved to largely DMU/EMU operation but some loco hauling of carriages too. Next door to the station are some Carriage Sidings.
See http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/130407-great-eastern-based-emu-terminus/.
This is another person's thread, it has just caught my imagination. The OP probably knows the answer, I am an amateur in these matters.
To clean and return to service, stock needs to go to the carriage sidings and get put through a washer and internally brushed up. So we have stock in a platform to move to a parallel platform or an area of sidings that is not directly accessible from the running lines - so we have the need to pull out onto a running line and then set back into either a head shunt or a siding.
We have an "in" line and an "out" line. Most of the good quality models I have seen shunt using the "out" line - so set back onto the out line up (as far as the advanced starter at a maximum) and then set back into a new platform/siding. My question is whether the "in" line could be used, with some "limit of shunt".
-
I have a further idea which extends the length of P2 and P3 on the assumption that ECS re-positioning is done via the "out" line. Remove the double slip and point on P2 and replace by back to back points on the central siding/P3 exit. This means that cleaned ECS can exit into either the central siding or P3 directly. Positioning to P1/P2 would require a move to the "out" and then back to the required platform. It then becomes debatable as to whether the line from the centre siding to one of the storage sidings at the right is actually required at all? That would mean 2 storage sidings off a head shunt and all access by shunting to/from platforms via the "out" line.
As I have said - some analysis of the kind of traffic expected/desired would be helpful for making a final design. I am also ignorant of operating procedures that might apply in real life. What I have seen implies shunting is more usual on the "out" line but maybe this ain't necessarily so? In which case the diamond ladder could stay in - it looks attractive and town terminal space limited/complexity.
A mashed up sketch is attached.
-
Here's another idea [Edit: updated slightly]:
Imagine that the two lines entering the scene are either side of a bridge parapet. This spaces them apart enough to allow the line down to the stabling/washer area to cross both the trailing crossover and the up running line.
Plus points:
- Nice lazy wiggle on entry and exit
- Retains your washer/diamond formation
- Stabling sidings with retaining wall on the traverser. When retracted scene looks complete and non-scenic traverser roads could be entirely hidden under scenic cover.
- Traverser opens towards you on telescopic runners so that you have access to all roads
- Giant traverser can have up to 10 roads (although 8 might be more sensible)
- All pointwork in central 5 foot section
- Dense throat trackwork could look great - very urban.
- Crossover on scene means no need for implied crossover offscene or entry onto scene on the wrong side of the tracks.
- Various parallel movements are possible.
Arriving trains can only access platforms 1 and 2 directly (along with the topmost siding and the depot area). Maybe that's OK, though.
There might be other difficulties I haven't spotted yet.
As ever your throat design is fascinating, and the whole thing looks much more uncluttered, realistic and operable to me. I love the ideas on this thread but it was ending up with a set of parallel lines stretching right across the board which IMHO was losing the potential attractiveness.
I would question the trail of diamonds from the "in" line. I am not sure what they are for really. Shunting from platforms would usually (?) be carried out on the "out" line, so this would only be there to run empty stock from some other imaginary point off this layout directly into the carriage siding/washer head shunt at the cost of stopping all other movements. I'd probably remove it, but replace the next point in towards the station (under the SB) with a single slip and extend to the double slip such that incoming trains could get to P3 (and the central siding - but that would be a bit perverse too). If you linked the head shunt to the "out" line maybe by a 3-way and a diamond then the head shunt could be longer. Now all platforms can be reached incoming and leave outgoing on visible point work.
One "requirement" - that of multiple EMU storage lines has gone - and that may be a no-no for the OP. To my mind the de-cluttering is better.
If there were to be ECS coming in for the Carriage Depot, if you remove the diamonds it would have to go into a platform (or the central siding) first and then zig zag into the head shunt via the "out" line.
Someone needs to analyse requirements and traffic flows before any decisions, but I think this is a good contribution.
-
..............
I could fit short, say 6 inch, legs so that I can reach under the boards and get at fixings that way?
Thanks in advance.
Good idea for 2 reasons: 1) levelling (if you add levelling feet). Amazing how "unflat" surfaces can be. I use levelling feet and there is a table under one part and a cabinet under another, the feet are extended to different heights! 2) you can get hands underneath to safely access (in a minor way) and lift the boards. I use the standard coach bolts and engineers dowels and there is room to unscrew the bolts. If it something like a fiddle yard or non-scenic you could use case clips (not sure of their proper name?) on the top at the back and side at the front? I have that in one instance in an out of the way corner and everything holds together fine. Please note that if using dowels for alignment you need space to move boards apart a bit in order to lift one out.
Layout design help
in Layout & Track Design
Posted
1. an upper layer of scenery is a good idea - you will NOT be able to have an upper layer of track (unless it is completely separate because the gradients would be too much for locos to pull up.
2. curved points would be good. Remember in Settrack (as per Hornby, Bachmann, Peco) ALL points are second radius. Peco Streamline is different and to different standard, as are many others. Mixing Settrack and other things requires care. Because they are smaller size and radius and have insulating plastic pieces Settrack points can cause problems with electrical pick-up for locos.
3. you can use 4th radius with any other radius - either continuously so you can have three curved lines one inside the other, or in combinations - half a circle of (say) 4th radius in visible areas and the other half in 2nd radius "off-scene". This is usual practice for railway modellers - though they probably curve their own flexitrack to the exact radii they want.
Please have fun. If you use the easier to set up - but more toy like - Settrack you may have a few running problems. On the whole your youngster won't notice and things will be whizzing about anyway!