imt

24 minutes ago, St. Simon said:

I far as my understanding is, an O.C.S. Panel is one switch for each signal (regardless of the number of routes it has) and one switch for each set of points, where as a I.F.S. panel has a switch for each individual route from a signal and a switch for each point.

Dear Agony Aunt,

That is precisely the OPPOSITE of what I THOUGHT Mike had said.  Though he may have MISUNDERSTOOD what I had done or in my ignorance I described it incorrectly.

As I understand it there are two beasts:

Type A which has (like a mechanical lever box) ONE lever per point and signal.  To signal a train through several point and signal levers might be moved. It is the job of the interlocking to check if it is a safe route. 

Type B which has NO swiches for points (well it may have to one side but not for normal operation), and for each signal it has a number of buttons/switches ONE FOR EACH POSSIBLE ROUTE from that signal which subsequent to its operation causes the necessary point changes for that route and then sets a suitable signal aspect.

Please could you identify which is IFS and which is OCS.

My panel (above) is of type B, so if somebody answers the question I will know what its proper name is.

Yours sincerely,

Confused of Newcastle upon Tyne.

41 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

As far as I can see IFS (Individual Function Switch) is basically a massive leap backwards

I agree that is what it appears to be, but then there appears to be quite complex relay locking behind it which, on moving a signal switch to proceed, has to investigate the route set by the point switches to see if it is valid and there can be no conflicts by points or TCs before locking the point switches (logically not physically as i understand it) and finally setting and locking an appropriate aspect on the signal. Now I am not sure how such logic is set up in relays, but it would be quite complex I think if "programming" something like JMRI or some other "solid state" system.  I am hoping Dave or some other passer by can make that clear to me. Dave is busy doing this, except he is making it more difficult for himself by having limited contacts per relay (again as I understand other comments).

Like you, I think OCS is easier to understand.  But maybe not for professional signallers - though of course you have that experience too.  IFS is not much different from a lever frame with relay locking, or is it???

2 hours ago, Dave-5-5-7 said:

Immingham West

Dave, after what you have taught me so far I can understand this panel. 

Currently there is a train standing behind signal 255 on the ore line.  Points 103 and 104 have been reversed to allow that train onto the Killingham UP line towards signal 267.  Points 102 and 105 are also locked against conflicting routes I suspect.  Signal 255 is set to proceed but not yet locked? Points 117 and 118 have been locked normal ahead of signal 255 presumably a route up the main line and signal 257 has also been set to proceed, green light is on but NOT the locked light.  Presumably the sytem was ticking through its functions at the time and it is not yet all set.  I presumed the red "hat" is to remind the signaller where all this started from? The TCs will follow the progress as the train moves Z, T, S, O, 448 and 447.  Presumably the signaller will reset 255 and then 103/104 as it passes onto (say) tc "S"  or later.

Did I read that right?

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

OCS means One Control Switch.  It was system which as far as Britain is concerned came into use in the 1930s and was still being installed in some schemes into the early 1960s long after it had been technically superseded by the NX (eNtrance eXit) system

Thanks Mike.  I continue to learn.  So OCS is the right term for what I have done EXCEPT that (for ease of use by an amateur like me) I put the switches (acrually buttons) onto the face of the diagram.  Mine is indeed fully internocked and prevents conflicting routes.

So where does IFS fit in.  In my ignorance, because it was so close to a lever signal box, I presumed it was the next in line after lever - so I assumed lever to IFS to route setting (OCS) to full NX (which is quite beyond me).  I had seen the York panel in live operation, but didn't really understand it (too young at the time).

I agree - certainly my "toy" Ullapool is one switch (in my case illuminating button) per route.  I have only ever seen a real one like that once in my life and have no photograph so its all my own invention - though based on something real I saw once.

What is OCS? You see I am in amongst the professionals confusing things, misunderstanding and making a fool of myself.  Can somebody enlighten me or perhaps just tell me to p**s off.

23 minutes ago, Dave-5-5-7 said:

a more modern variant of an IFS which is basically a lever frame with rotary switches) seen here at Immingham West

OK I thought that was what we were talking about.  Those photos match what you have on your diagram and I thought I understood that.  It was Simon's "switches are provided for each route rather than each signal," that threw me.  You have switches per point/signal not per route which is what I thought IFS was all about.

14 hours ago, St. Simon said:

4) On an I.F.S. panel such as Dave's, switches are provided for each route rather than each signal, i.e. a signal with 2 routes would have two switches, one for each route from that signal. So, when the switch for that route, the 'route level' of the interlocking will check that points are set in the correct position or are free to move to the correct position, whilst the 'aspect level' will check the track circuit occupation.

Sorry Simon I don't understand that bit at all.  What you are describing is a Single Button Route Setting which I have used and that isn't how Dave's panel looks - which seems to have a set of individual switches for each object (signal or point).  I may have horrendously misunderstood this whole subject and now I have really trampled on Dave's patch.  Maybe you should PM me and put me right, please very nicely!!!!!!!!

13 hours ago, Dave-5-5-7 said:

Having trouble getting my head round the panel construction. 

Oh yeah, tell me about it!  I had horrendous trouble trying to understand it - and even now I'm not sure.  The photo below is my current attempt to get Ullapool into JMRI.  It works but I am not happy with it.  Please if you like PM me about it, or maybe you would like a separate thread?  I know Simon Paley has had similar problems starting up and he too may be able to comment.

JMRI using Logix programming is infinitely powerful BUT it does need careful understanding first.  It is sequenced stateful operations control not really programming like using a programming language - BASIC or Python.  If you understnd relays and so on you should have no trouble at all.  Honestly.

One last diversion and I'll keep quiet for a while - after all it's your thread!  Happy to take a second look at any further upgrades.

You will have seen the photo of my Single Button Route Setting panel above.  I was very happy with my electronics but (for an exercise) I was trying to automate it using JMRI which I have just about achieved.  I am fascinated by Simon Paley's Collingwood but NX is inappropriate for such a small layout.  On the other hand your diagram etc has inpired me to see if I could IFS my layout.  Of course it wouldn't be using relays as you will be, but I need to have some idea of the relay logic which would be behind the diagram and switches so I can program that into JMRI.

1) One thing I don't understand (ho, ho one of many!) is how incorrect changing of panel switches is prevented (if at all).  When points have been set and the signal set to proceed, and all have their "L" lights on I presume they are not physically locked on the panel (they will be in the logic) and so panel switches could be moved.  If a panel switch was moved whilst locked, the physically point (say) won't move, but presumably it will when the covering signal is set on again?????  Is there a buzzer to warn against this action, or is it OK?

2) Presumably changing a signal switch cancels everything whether the train has set off or no?  If not how is that prevented, or is this just signaller discipline and process as it would have been in a manual box.

3) When points are being set is there any notice taken by the logic of TCs??  Would 0302 being occupied preven 1702 from being set?

4) As for switching a signal to proceed, presumably then the logic has to check all possible routes to see which points are set before locking those points and selecting the appropriate aspect - presumably also appropriate TCs will be checked so if (for example) 0302 is occupied the aspect on (say) 946 will not change.

Its a whole different way of looking at things  ...........

It's the pest again! I am really enjoying learning more about this kind of panel and how it is operated.  I have been allowed (under close supervision needless to say) to pull levers and operate NX switches, but though I have seen photos before I have never come across a real IFS panel.  May I ask again?  Thank you for your patience............

1) you didn't say where that "Send" button was for the single line operations, and it doesn't appear on this update.  Is there one or have I misunderstood something?

2) I understand that none of the signals will illuminate on the diagram and lights will only show on their switch face plates.  The TCs will not illuminate to show a selected path nor are there any lights to indicate point settings - only the "N" or "R" on their switch faceplates.  Normal lie can (as usual) be seen from the way things are drawn on the diagram.  The TCs will I believe illuminate (or the red light at each end will) when occupied?

3) I think I can see how the various aspects will operate.  IF points are set (say) from P1: 1768 and 1773, then setting 942 to  proceed  (switch to the right) would illuminate the PLS for the move to the MPD (and presumable a MI or the SI with advice on the route?).  Nothing will be seen on the panel itself but the "R" and "L" lights on switches 1768 and 1773  and the switch 942 will show "L"  and the white light top right to indicate the PL.

4) if 3) is approximately right, then you are missing the shunt route to "Up Main" on 942 - its there on 38, 944 and 946.

5) Stupid question - why would you want a route from the DMU Depot to the Oil Terminal? 

6) You have inserted a new crossover which gives 2 new routes from 936 but they are not on the faceplate.  I presume only 1761 is required for  the Power Station since normal lie for 1759 is in that direction.  Would it not be better if normal was to Skegness?  You might also like to know that 945 and 955 are misnamed - aren't they the other way round?  Should 955 not need 1759 to reverse?

15 hours ago, Dave-5-5-7 said:

It's basically transcient TCB, with train describer. The code will flash up on a display, and the signalman will turn the accept button to the right and "Train coming from" will flash for a few seconds and illuminate. This mimics the system checking the circuit is correct for an authority to be issued. Box in rear locks release, signals clear, train runs. Once train arrives signalman turns switch back to centre and the system clears. In order to send, signalman enters code into TD, moves switch to left and presses "SEND" once box in rear acknowledges the locks release and MS938 can be cleared. 

Dave, I know you have better (certainly more enjoyable) things to do.  Thank you very much for the explanation.  Please nicely can I ask some more questions?

1) The "Send" button does not appear on your diagram yet - would it be near the direction switch or on the train describer?  Presumably the box in the rear "acknowledging" is that signaller putting his switch into "Train coming from" mode?

2) The "L" on the point switches I assume is "Locked" i.e. the governing signal has now changed so this point cannot be changed? Or am I completely wrong?

3) What is the white circle by the GPLS representations.  Is this a light indicating a TRTS plunger?  If it is it is presumably cancelled by returning the GPLS to "on".

4) I presume the SI/MI on 37, 941 and 39 will set automatically as a result of the route set by the signaller through the points?

5) why are there no SI/MI on the starter signals?

6) it looks as if traffic on the line to the Oil Terminal is handled differently to Skegness - presumably because there isn't a signaller there?

7) Why is there an extra light on the faceplates for the signals 940, 941 and 950.  I at first thought it might show that the JI/SI had operated, but then there would need to be similar lights on other signals too?  Then I thought it was the level crossing operated - but that's not true of 941?

You might not have noticed that the TC in advance of 940 is unnumbered.  I think it should be 0248 and the current 0248 should be 0300 - the gap in the numbers is there.

On 23/04/2020 at 15:45, The Stationmaster said:

Quite a lot of difference between Acceptance Lever (or Switch) working and Tokenless Block.

Mike, we met at Pendon though I doubt if you will remeber me from the crowd.  Thank you again for giving of your knowledge and, what is often more important, your experience.  You helped me in the past sort out my Tokenless Block working, and I now have that working in my electronic control panel for my small layout - I am very happy with it.  Photo attached.

I am not sure that I really understand the difference still, it sounds more like semantics than reality - but that is probably because I don't have any experience of the real thing.  What you seem to be saying is that switch/lever requires positive interaction between the signallers, whereas TB is more passive - i.e. it is normal for the receiving signaller to set his route and leave the the system hanging on the remote sender by setting his instrument to "Accept".

I can see that Dave has switches on his panel for "going to" and "coming from" some point.  It would no doubt also be nearly impossible on such a busy panel to set a route and leave it hanging on the action by somebody else.  So I guess there is some positive exchange - telephonic or bells (but this is an electronic panel so surely not bells?).

Perhaps you should PM me if you have the time else I am highjacking Dave's thread and he knows all this anyway!

26 minutes ago, Dave-5-5-7 said:

Prize for you, you are correct and I'd not noticed. I flipped a section of an old diagram I'd drawn and obviously forgotten to flip the crossing back. Well spotted. 

Of course anyone asks and I was "just testing" ha ha 

Phew!  I am a fascinated amateur who laps up all the stuff on this thread.  Is there a write up on "track circuits with acceptance switches" anywhere you know of.  I use "Tokenless Block" which relies on track circuits and has an "Accept" on the Block Instrument.  Is it the same and just more modern?

Oh dear!  I KNOW nobody likes a smartarse!  But aren't your AHBs on the wrong side of the road????  I ask in fear and trepidation since I have been reading Simon Paley's excellent book and his AHB on p131 (fig. 177) is the same.  Has he made the same "mistake", or is that how you professionals draw them?  The ORR publication on the whole subject https://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/2158/level_crossings_guidance.pdf shows them the other way round on p54 since it is from the point of view of signage.  Gulp.  Am awaiting incoming!

30 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

Could it be connected through to the turntable?

Well........ What happens when the turntable fails?  No pilot?  Doesn't neeed to be a "real" working trap - could just be a dummy built from rail offcuts for show.

Train standing beyond the starter.

Thank you danstercivicman for allowing the diversion and to all those who joined in.  It seemed an interesting point to me and some others thought so too.  By the way Banger Blue this wasn't about shunting or reverse (which is also an interesting point anyway since both the locos in the photo were in that position) this was about "right away" and moving off onto the main line when positioned beyond and out of sight of the starter - can you point to the rules about that?

I just love what you are doing, and like to see your photos. It seems to me that if this extra long train and double heading is frequent then (to avoid a massive SPAD before the train has even pulled away) you perhaps need to move that starter to the right of the signal box and probably half way along the Compund too?

There must have been routine ways that the real BR handled this kind of thing - extra long trains and double heading being a routine summer seaside/ferry port thing.  Presumably something in the instructions and a green flag out of the window after the route has been set and the starter lowered?

Strewth!!! That sea water isn't toilet paper is it?  B****y H**l, you could have sold that at £1 a sheet on any street corner, provided the boys in blue didn't find some reason to arrest you.

There has to be some compromise somewhere.  The siding which would have done for mileage and coal has (in the latest suggestion) been sacrificed in order to have a more Midland placement of the goods shed.  SO if you want that, then unless some extra siding can be wangled in off the loop behind the good shed going either left of right (using a diamond crossover?) there ain't much space left.  This is an excellent design for a small space - but in the end you cannot have everything (however much you want it.  Rule 1: The Coal Merchants have agred only to use the next staion down/up the line?

Just think of a double slip as two points pushed together toe to toe (i.e. the part at which the switch blades direct movement ).  Hence entering a double slip you have 2 possible exits - and there are two possible entrances.

I think maybe you are being too literal here.  Most of us (and I think that includes you) have had to compress our (station) layouts in order to get them to a manaageable size.  I think as long as your scale 15m LOOKS like it is meant to be the real deal I doubt if anyone will  complain - and if they do quote rule 1.  I know that you are trying very hard to bring realism to your layout - but surely there are reasonable limits?

1 hour ago, Jeff Smith said:

I guess it might depend on whether you want a roundy layout to watch the trains go by or a shunting terminus type layout?

It isn't just that.  I (and many others) have learned the hard way how difficult and unweidly large lumps of baseboard are.  As soon as it's big you need lots of hands to erect it, and it probably obstructs a room entirely and must be either up or down.  Something in smaller pieces (given the connectivity issues) can be left part up all or some of the time - say round a childs bed or playroom.

What you might put on the boards is a whole different issue.  If you just want a shunting layout a 6ft by 1ft folding in the middle might do?  It did for me.

Good plan but I think you may want to avoid the slips.  You need smooth curves for your through trains.

An alternative thought might be to have your  through lines as part of the fiddle yard.  If you look at the bottom line, if you used that as the "up" through road there are a minimum of points on it, a smooth curve and speed could be maintained.  Your fourth line up gives something similar for down.  This way you can avoid the slips - though I can see you would want the crossovers which are incorporated - but only for slow tains emerging from the fiddle yard.

You could perhaps look at using more curved points then to start the fiddle yard entries sooner.

On 26/12/2019 at 16:24, Tallpaul69 said:

I did pension off my steam locos when rebuilding  my layout - diesels don't need turntables generally compared to large steam locos..

Buy a PECO Locolift - it fits over the track so you can run locos on to it, pick it up, turn it and put it down again.  I HAVE seen this done on scenic sections, but most people have a short siding in their fiddle yard and run locos from the station to an invisible shed for servicing and return.

2 hours ago, idd15 said:

Hybrid traverser, one that has a fixed track and yet can take cassettes as well? 

I use two Peco Locolifts put together with stripwood/foamboard rather than the floppy foam supplied as a way of manipulating my fiddle yard - so a 2 coach train or DMU fits and can be lifted/turned. An expensive approach which lets me have an intensive timetable.  Two lists plus a single loco on a Locolift gives me a 4 coach train.  If as "idd" suggests you could include something like that with your traverser you could get a lot of trains in/out too?