ColHut

Thanks Stphen, My chalenge is that the pictures in Vann's book showing 3 views of the signal show plates only at the front and back but not any at 90 degrees. I suppose a red plate (and red light at night) would show when on, and when off the white light at light or no face showing in daylight. I think I just expected a facing plate for off as well as on in GNR days. BTW That is indeed the kit I am aiming to cut my teeth on. regards

I am looking to add some to my layout, possibly updated with LNER enamelled discs. I am confused by Vanns description of how they operate. The original ground signals have faces front and back and a lamp inside. It is described as rotating 90degrees to show different faces. That is not possible given the item pictured p.52 of An Illustrated History of GNR Signalling. Was it that the lamp only rotated on a pedastal? And when the LNER modified them with enamel discs, did they mount the discs to the rotating plate and fix the lamp so it fid not move? regards

I will let you know. The DCC ones are quite large. Modratec also do a range of cranks but they are all really for WIT and below board use, and very large. I have some platforms already down so space is limited. Some others I will put under platforms with a loose lid. The rest..we'll see! regards

Thanks Nick, I have just made sure that I cannot run DC on the layout anymore as I have fitted PSX-ARs which are DC Sensitive! I will have a play on the Program track and see what I can do. regards

Thanks both. The Brassmasters versions are listed as cosmetic use only, but Ii have popped them an email as if two were laminated they might be useable. The Wills ones, despite being oversize, do not look durable enough. regards

A footnote to this while I await my new Lenz standard V2 decoders which are winging their way toward me at the speed, well of a Bleriot monoplane to be honest. Anyway, I took the Zen chip back to DCC Concepts, and it was indeed cactus, although not obvious externally why. To their credit they replaced it without fuss so I can at least use it in another loco which is still chip-less; My J50 pobably. Any way kudos to DCC Concepts for their excellent after sales service here. regards

G'day, Is it possible to get scale, or at least small and discreet, 90 degree bell cranks so that surface-mounted point motors can drive turnouts at 90 degrees to the normal direction of throw? I want to use my DCC Concepts Cobalt SS motors parallel to (in fact between) tracks. regards

I will be interested to see how this turns out. I think the "curve friction" might be slightly understated as the tighter the curve the more force is wasted in lateral thrust adding to the actual curve resistence. regards

Thankyou. And yes - a design compromise because of the poor position of the level crossing and tunnel mouth, and very limited platform length. Manbethorpe is the only example I can find easily, although this is dated 1950. https://signalbox.org/diagrams.php?id=512 I'll go with a ground frame in a hut controlling a couple of wicket gates (1 lever each?) and a wheel for the main gates. A bell/plunger or telephone, and a bolt release from the box. There will be an indicator in the signal box to remind the signalmen of the position of the gates if not closed across the road. I will re-read Vanns' book to see what I missed. regards

Lovely. The white on red discs are the targets with lamps on the level crossing gates? What is the date on the St James Deeping diagram (1)? regards

You ask a good question. I am not sure how far a mechanical wheel-worked crossing could be from the signal box. I am guessing that powered electric or hydraulic were available at some time. I hope by the 1930s. The trouble is he can no longer see the crossing! (who designed this?) If not a a very small manned hut on the platform end (where the box used to be) with perhaps a bell or telephone to contact the signalman, perhaps even a set of block instruments, and with the gates interlocked with a lever from the box so that they could only be closed across the line if the signalmen had pulled a controlling king lever. A a local ground frame in fact. There might even be an indicator in the signal box to remind the signalmen of the position of the gates. This would plausible? This would obviously change the levers in the box controlling the gates to a single locking lever. (18,19).

Yes 6B should be touching the line... And the signal box has moved to just south of the siding at the west end of the platform. It is actually a very gentle divergence. I will amend the diagram. regards and thankyou both

I have finally got to the stage of adding point motors now and signals to this part of the layout, and I was struck by twp things: 1) The parsimonious nature of signalling on the GNR - nearly always accepting the lowest bid on capital works. This part of the line is 1930s LNER, but loosely based on original late 19C GNR. I think they would have less signals if they could. 2) I am trying to avoid a forest of signals. Looking at some similar layouts: St James Deeping 1930: https://signalbox.org/diagrams.php?id=1067 Crouch end 1901: https://signalbox.org/diagrams.php?id=267 Holton Le Clay 1937: https://signalbox.org/diagrams.php?id=382 Even Billingboro Station North Box 1891 in Vanns' Illustrated History of GNR Signalling It seems I could probably lose two stop signals, and possibly have just the one ground signal where I have two (8 and 9) with only some loss of control (the moves at 8,9 there will be obvious from the WTT; backing or pulling forward into the siding from the up main, or pulling forward from the up main to the down main to continue or start a journey). The yellow ground signal at 12 will still allow light engine movements onto the up line even if the crossing gates are closed - as an obstruction to be stopped short of. The line is very much a lesser line with only occasional diverted expresses, (similar to an LMS class A line) minimal locking between instruments and signals to be included , although we might stretch to a line clear release. At great expense we might provide a firemans' plunger at 16. Hopefully the last version.

FWIW I managed to haul 6 normal coaches without wheel slip (3 SR new Hornby Maunsell coaches and 3 LNER teak Railroad coaches) and 7 with a bit of slip adding a RR Pullman. I was aiming for 5 so very good effort. No trouble with 15 "loaded" assorted mineral wagons and a weighted brake van. Similar results with a similar length goods train. This was slightly better than my Robinson O4. I will double check the magnet heights on that one. By comparison the tender drive A3 was woeful with bare capability to pull 4 old style coaches. Not much to be done there with only two driven axles despite the magnets. As the loco has sentimental value, a new Hollywood Foundry 8 wheel drive tender chassis is in the offing. regards

try halving the radius... regards

It may well be thst the speed of the trin will be limited by the wagons it is pulling. Grease axle boxes will mean much slower speeds. regards

Thanks Mick, My screwdrivers are magnetic but no match for the nearby rare earth magnets. They shoot off like darts!

I wish I have given up on the frets. Much too weak for me, and not being a brass kit builder, I have no ability to run beads of silver on brass etches. That will await further training ! In any case I think Richard was having a lend when he provided tiny steel self tappers to screw the frets down in the immediete presence of intense magnetic fields. I cannot get the near the holes I drill without the screw shooting off to the magnet. Fair results by using balsa spacers whish are reasonably easily cleaned up if I need to remove them, 3 on the Bachmann 45xx have allowed it to pull 4 Pullmans (the ones with coach lighting and quite heavy - 238g each) up the the curved gradients. I will try now for 6 ordinary coaches. regards

Thanks all. Interesting charts. I have some more experimenting to go, but am even considering running a thin strip of galvanised steel from a roll above the sleepers in the offboard section to greatly increase the attractive force. I will first try a few more options on my little Bachmann 45xx first. regards

Rather than start a new thread I thought I would add my experience to this. I retrofitted two long (each is about 32' there and back) under board loops with 1 in 30 gradients and 2/3 radius curves to convert a roundy round to a dog bone. Don't ask about my sanity. The combination of acute curve resistance and steep gradient is a formidable challenge for any system. I chose Powerbase as the only plausible way of recovering at least some performance. Results have been quite mixed. Where it is possible to get the magnets low down at the optimum 1mm above rail height and a sufficient quantity of magnets - results have been very good and in line with expectations. Note that the metal plates are underneath the sleepers so it makes a difference depending on your track code and sleeper thickness. The finer the better. The metal plates appear die cut, and have a very slightly concave side. I suggest placing them concave side down. If you have nicely modelled locos with brake rigging - it is likely that the brake rigging will have to go. You should think about that before you start You can see the magnets hanging down underneath, but only close up, and you can paint them black. Many locos have a number chassis screws and a bulge (for the gear housing)s in the bottom chassis. Placing magnets around these screws and bulges can be a real challenge If you are not willing to cover them up and can severely restrict the amount of magnets you can mount underneath. Sometimes existing screw holes can be used in conjunction with the screw holes in the brass frets to mitigate this to a certain extent. I found the brass frets quite weak; it is recommended that you solder up the corners if you are so inclined, but this seems a rather ad hoc solution. Better would be pre bent non magnetic aluminium or steel I suspect. That might cost more. The mounting holes on the frets were too small for the coarse pitch screws provided, and tore the frets up in use. Trying to drill out the frets also tore them up. Perhaps a QA issue, or I might be a bit heavy handed. You could just superglue the frets in place. In practice, I find the smaller the loco, and the more occluded the bottom of the chassis, the less effective Power base is as a system, but the more it needs powerbase! Tender drive locos seems to suffer the disadvantages of small locos. Bigger loco drive locos with plenty of space to fit and hang the magnets benefit most. This produces an outstanding performance gain. As Richard has mentioned above, to get the most out of the system you need to get the magnets to 1 mm of the rail head for best performance. Just watch out that you don't have anything sticking up, perhaps decouplers or foot crossing in the way. And as noted above it also improves pickup consistency noticeably. regards

Possibly it has been. For me, having no professional involvement in railways, least of all of the 1930s, I simply could not understand why the LNER seemed to do this differently. The oddity for the LNER is that it appears to permit blocking back in advance of an inner home without the 2-4 or 4-2 even if the inner home is not also a clearing point. And blocking back in rear of an inner home is treated the same as outside the home signal (3-3) instead of 2-4 or 4-2. Answers are not obvious from looking at signal diagrams, especially without an understanding of the history and site limitations. Often this is lost in the mist of time. The apparently bizarre distances that stop signals appear from each other, without apparent regard for clearing points certainly adds to my confusion. Thanks to the above I am better educated concerning the pre-grouping tensions and outer home additions which probably explains it. regards

Thanks all guys for the advice. I will track down a lenz standard. regards

Thanks Mick, Absolutely fascinating. It certainly provides some context. regards

If it helps, the new large super cap stay alive on the Bittern will run it for a couple of yards. The others - very much smaller - 1/4"? Even then some locos seem to have very little space to accommodate a small SA. They can be separated from the chip by a fair distance, so chip in boiler and SA under coal or even under loco might work. I got two in my Holden Tank 0-4-0 large

G'day, I got one of these to haul my track cleaners around. I have a fair amount of under board loops to clean. I had fitted the Class 26 with a Zen Nano and it performed well with the Dapol Vacuum unit (Great bit of kit) but I have come unstuck with the CMX. I was testing the Class 26's capacity to haul the CMX up the banks, and trying to decide whether it need a banking engine or could haul it by itself. Unfortunately it stalled and appears to have fried the chip. Tests showed that it does not respond and causes a constant short, but if the blanking plug is replaced it runs fine again on DC. Looking into the matter it seems as if the 750mA/1A peak for the Nano might be just too low for peak current draw on the class 26 on maximum draw at stall. A little disappointing. There is not a lot of space under the hood so would appreciate anyone's recommendation. regards