ColHut

Possibly he can no longer modify the website, and hopes for the future are now kaput. At least that is the way I read it. regards

Thankyou. I am spending far too much reading many of the accident reports on the Railways Accident Archive. (Collisions involving Light engines seem to be a major problem ). II have also been enjoying Adrian Vaughans books. Plenty of distractions for the signalmen on occasion. regards

Thankyou all for your informative comments. I take it that it would be common to allow approach of trains under the warning arrangement to the box in rear to facilitate train working on busy lines. Also the provision of outer homes and Advance starters would be helpful. Does anyone know of a link to period signal box special instructions for such a set up? were trains signalled from one box to the other in the usual way? regards

I was wondering how train signalling worked on absolute block double track lines where a station had a signal box at both ends to control traffic, presumably because of the distance limitations on hand worked signals in the 1930s. Evesham LMS springs to mind when it had a North and South box. Was the Starter for one the Home for the other and slotted or some other arrangement? regards

Worth noting Modratec still remains on hold: https://modratec.com/modforum/viewtopic.php?t=353 regards

Seem to be unable to access archives, keep getting a “too many redirects” error. Although searches to the pages show them in google. Am I accessing them incorrectly? regards

Thankyou, and yes, perusing GNR track plans shows that where space permitted a stop signal would be placed to protect any intervening crossovers or sidings. Interestingly junction signal are sometime pragmatically dropped back a little to protect level crossings etc. Mablethorpe junction seems to somewhat similar to my use case. https://signalbox.org/~SBdiagram.php?id= 378 regards

Thankyou WillCav; yes, part of the reason for not having the Junction close to the points is that after allowing for not fouling the points, length of engine etc there is not much platform left for coaches, about two and a half is all I get. regards

Thankyou both. one related question: If the junction signals 1-3 were moved closer to the toe of the junction, wouldn’t this uncover the crossover 5 requiring an outer home in rear to protect them? regards

Thankyou Gentlemen. whilst this line was probably approved in about 1880, I note that the branch home signal (2) is also effectively the Branch starter. Whilst this seems not uncommon, would this be of particular concern in my set up? regards

Yes thankyou both. That is the problem. I have been carefully working out the WTT to fit, (And integrate it into the Historical GWR and LNER WTTs). Also I would probably need to provide an outer home so that station duties could be performed within the protection of a home signal and Train out of section given to the signal box in rear if a train was otherwise only partially occupying platform 2. Certainly some negatives either way. Fortunately not a very busy line especially in terms of passenger movements. regards

Some 150 yards from the signal based on the 6 inch to the mile OS map. However the bridge is a very large truss structure and seeing the distant through it might have been very difficult. https://www.eastanglianrailwayarchive.co.uk/Railways/East-Anglian-Railway-Archive/i-FrJJmkb/A regards

Thankyou Mike, I see your point. Looking at various track plans many use track circuit where there is a considerable length between junction signal and points. Bollo Lane had interlaced track . Still others do seem some distance without much protection, Chesterton is on such odd place https://signalbox.org/~SBdiagram.php?id= 700 Mablethorpe another https://signalbox.org/~SBdiagram.php?id= 378 . Would you hazard a guess why these might not have such protection? Perhaps to do with the signal box locations? Just curious. I seem to struggle with drawing the slips correctly, the numbers yes are a better guide. Thankyou.

Thankyou, I don’t really need them, they are too hard to get out with the platforms glued in and track wired in. It does allow me to run around on the main with a wagon or three to shunt between the yards more easilly. I could just have them controlled by a GF locked by the box for use only as required under verbal instructions from the signalman... regards

Well spotted, thankyou.

Thankyou Michael, 1 is the siding signal reading to the west sidings not a calling on signal, should have made that clear. Yes, the double slip is improbable. Good thought on the branch junction signal, I just assumed the most important would be to the main, but most common would be to platform 3, thankyou. The headshunt is much longer on the table so that one is all good. The crossover I think is not much of an issue, but it does serve to allow moving a couple of eagons from the East to West sidings. I nearly just assumed it was worked by a GF locked from the signal box. Whoops, signal box about where 23 is. Thankyou

Thankyou iands. Only if I have really short trains that can use the platform, unfortunately including an engine, space in rear of the points for fpl bars, and avoiding fouling potential traffic on the the toe of the up main points at 10, I think I get just under 3 coaches and engine. So maybe not worth it. I would need a small gantry to carry the signals over the line there too but that could be done. So I suppose in most/many cases 3 would have to cleared to fully access the platform anyway and the junction fouled and that seemed little gain. Certainly an option though.

Dear All, Your comments and advice welcome on the attached track plan. It is a station on the non-existent extension of the GNR's Stafford and Uttoxeter Railway to Market Drayton, herewith The Market Drayton and Eccelshall Extension Railway [The MDEER] (A GWR and GNR joint venture). Running from Stafford Common Junction to Market Drayton. The track was laid quite some time ago (probably 8 years), and was loosely inspired by Winchester, Fairford and a number of GNR lines. The trackplan has a number of deficiencies: the positioning of the Junction is unfortunate, effectively truncating platform two, and at some point platform one has been extended North to accommodate excursion traffic. The Junction does not comply with BoT current requirements. However I am unwilling to change it at this point as it is all wired in. I have not drawn the yards and canal details on the plan. On the signalling diagram below there are also a number of deficiencies. I have not included any distant signals as they are assumed off table. The numbering of signals and points follows no proper pattern and omits the distants. The plan is not to scale, and is actually thinner and wider. The double track is run on the absolute block system with (assumed) 3 position instruments. The branch on the Electric Token system (there is a full branch and station not shown). There are less than 24 trains per day each way on the main, and half that on the branch. I suppose in LMS terms it would be class 3 rail. There is trip working up and down the branch and passenger services. There is a mix of freight and passenger, including express trains passing along the main. There are a few trains which run down the branch and onto the up main, and some limited traffic from the up main to the branch. The East yard is served only by Up trains, The canal docks and yard only by down trains. Wagons are moved between the two yards as required by a station pilot, but in general they handle different traffic, and it is often easier to take the wagons to the end of the line and bring them back on the next train. A shunting horse is available at the East Yard. I have put the junction signal as the Down Home since only the shortest passenger trains could use Platform Two anyway even if the Junction signal was placed as close to the points as possible allowing for clearance bars, FPL bars etc. It is well within the recommended GNR maximum of 200 yards from the points. The volume of traffic means trains are not accepted under Warning, and likewise whilst up passenger trains will foul the junction, junction traffic is light. I have tried to minimise the number of signals, especially shunt signals, but also tried to consider frequent workings which you would expect to be signaled by fixed signals. Your comments welcome.

You might find real ash is heavily alkaline (mix with water to make Lye) and might corrode some metals. So you might need to be careful where you use it. YMMV. regards

Well a thanks and generally a catch you all far less frequently The new forum software works fine on my new Ipad with Safari a big plus. Unfortunately the endless floating ads top and bottom are now so intrusive as to drive me away unless I really need to find something here, and even then I am now more likely to use a desktop with more powerful add suppression software. So thanks Andy for all the work and hosting a great resource.

https://www.bradford.com.au/wwii-armoured-express-train-collection.html?tid=114454&utm_source=social&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=ID14-01645AUM25-65ModelTrainsMC114454 Got everything, muzzle loading screw jack cannons, amazing details, actual underframe, rivet lines. How WWII was really won! BTW There is part of a real one at the Pansari Museo in Finland, I have a few books and models of the some of the real things. But this is much more exciting. regards

Thanks, I may try a replacement Cambrian bogie, but I don't have a lot of faith that new from old mouldings will be much better. Then again I could just have been unlucky. To replace the diamond bogie would require one with the same single vertical volute spring. The Parkside and Gramodels versions appears to have the twin springs. Thanks all regards

Thanks all. Yes, and Romford. The problem is in the deformed centre conical bearing and screw assembly. I should have got replacements but did not. I will try out those two suggestions thankyou. regards

G'day, Can someone suggest a source for replacement bogies for the above? The kit is made, but the bogies as moulded were definitely on the dodgy side, and there s so much slop as to cause very poor running. I thought perhaps something from MJT or elsewhere with white metal cosmetic sides, or even a complete RTR bogie, but so far have found nothing that matches. regards

The recommendation came from the Col. Rich following an accident at Chartly on the S&U on 30/3/1882, a single line passing place recently taken over by the GNR, and resignalled 9 days earlier. The accident was caused by excessive speed. I have no doubt that all sorts of other ways of laying out the passing loops existed. Given the current track diagram I cannot see how , in practice, you could operate or accept more than one train on the single line, especially given I have no idea how the single line is controlled. YMMV. I had incorrctly recalled that there was a sub section on single line signalling on the Signal Box website, but the link to the section on single line staffs does not seem to work. To the OP, there is some information on the web in a number of places on working single lines. Some of the different ways are covered here pp 11-26 [nominal page numbers 1-16] (in the LNER General Appendix, NE area 1947) others were similar. from Limit of Shunt website: http://filestore.limitofshunt.org.uk.s3.amazonaws.com/sectional-appendices/lner/ne-area-1947.pdf How you envisage the line being controlled might help you with deciding how to signal it. regards