Matloughe

Thanks for your comments Grovenor, the disc/shunt signal (not quite sure which yet) will be at the toe of point #7 yes - I was in a rush yesterday and didn't have the time/inclination to mark the diagram correctly - my bad I know! That'd be fantastic Martin; provided its not too much trouble? It'll be interesting to see. Thanks for the diagrams I wasn't too far off on my guesstimate of the signalling when I revised it downwards! Interesting that I can't see shunt signal #9 on any photos I can find of them - not even the nice clear full-page shot of the Dyke on page 82 of "Southern Infrastructure" taken from what looks like the very tall home signal shows it! And there is definitely something on the Starter half-way up the post on the same side of the lamp its not the counterweight as its on the opposite side of the post right at the bottom. "IG" is my sort of internal designation for a layout; when I build something for it for the first time it is marked with the layout it was designed/built for - I always find it interesting to turn a building over and find a different layout's mark on it - most of the fiddleyard is marked as "BP" for my older minories layout as the wood was recycled into Ifield Green. It looked good as a 'fake' signal box code so I went for it. Thank you to everyone for your assistance! Kind Regards, Gary

Based loosely on Devils Dyke, just transplanted elsewhere Martin. Kind Regards, Gary

I've been studying the prototype thoroughly and I've spotted an oddity; it looks like as the Dock Road IRL wasn't for passenger use like I am proposing it's exit was covered by a Ground Signal only and no catch point!! - however on the main platform starter there looks like on the single arm a raised ground signal as well. The problem of looking at 100+ year old photographs with bad resolution is I cannot quite make out what it is aside from what looks like a lamp case - if I did the same thing and made the dock road freight only it would eliminate #11 from my plan and #4 would become a ground signal only - but I'd probably have to add the raised Ground Signal on the Starter and possibly a shunt signal on the Home in place of #11. Kind Regards, Gary

Thanks for your input; I've had a bit of a re-jig and come up with the plan below - and I've renumbered the levers correctly as per the diagram I believe. I've removed the Advanced Starter and Outer Home - but made the Distant a 'working' signal, I'm assuming a Limit of Shunt Board somewhere along the line prevents a loco wandering too far down the line without permission - would it be worth fitting a Shunting Disc adjacent to the Home Signals to control any shunt movements back? The link to the full sized image is here - to make it easier to see. Again ignore the white levers they are just there to colour in should I need them. The revisions in place bring the levers required down from 17 levers to 12 levers. #6 is the FPL for Crossover #5 from the Main into the Dock Road including the Catch Point #8 is the FPL for Crossover #7 for controlling entry into either the main/dock road or the loop. Normal lay of points is indicated and differs to the original image. Kind Regards, Gary

Thank you for your replies so far, I will try to explain my thought processes: Don't worry about the spare levers on the right, I drew the diagram on the PC in paint and just kept duplicating levers until I had more than I thought I needed - the final diagram will omit the ones I don't need. I'm intending to work on a Peco Lever frame for my layout and they are in blocks of sixes for levers. Thanks Martin; No its not overly harsh at all I am looking to get an authentic flavour on the layout - I know roughly what the signalling was on the prototype was for my layout but its not complete knowledge. Plus my layout doesn't copy the prototype exactly so I went my own way, when I looked at it I thought it was over engineered. I wasn't sure on the track circuits - I wondered if there would be some sort of audible warning for when a train came onto the diagram apart from "TES" being sent from the previous box. Would the combined FPL+Point lever not bee in use by the LBSCR/SR at this time - doesn't bother me if not just my research suggested one lever would be suitable for this job - by making #9 & #5 switch together as a crossover does that mean #9 would gain a FPL as well? #13 & #14 i will remove as I agree they're probably not needed and rename the terminology on #11A/#11B to plain #11. I agree #10 is probably superfluous and would be better served as a signal on the loop protecting movements towards the 'Main or Whitehall Siding' i'm not sure if the LBSCR had Yellow armed shunt signals - more research needed. If there is no advanced starter would both #15 & #16 need to be released by the adjacent box? It would preclude shunting out of either platform road unless a shunt signal/disc is provided whereas the Advanced Starter would allow shunting but conversely needs the outer home to protect it. Thanks Ian - I agree and buried in my note book I found (after i posted the diagram) my notes saying #9 acts a trap point for protecting the main and should be positioned normally facing down into Whitehall Siding - with yourself and Martin both saying the same thing I will amend the diagram correctly. Totally agree is an oversight on my part - I am guessing it would be switched as a pair with #6 working like a crossover and locked appropriately and interlocked with the platform starter. Of course! Thanks I had forgotten this - the perils of having a three year old running around when trying to design a signal frame - I'll leave it incorrectly numbered until the final draft - so changes can be referred to - then renumber it the opposite way round. Thanks to All! Kind Regards, Gary

Hello All! How is everyone on this fine Bank Holiday Morning? I spent last night and this morning working on the signalling plan for my latest layout - a project that has been on/off since 2013. And I am slowly making progress - recently I've been looking at the signalling on the layout and I am slightly concerned that I am over signalling it with respect to the economy that any company paying for the installation would be casting an eye over. Above is the signal diagram for my layout, a larger version is located Here, as I didn't want the embedded image to be too large for a forum post. I am slightly concerned as I said that I am over signalling it or that I am applying too modern thinking to the plan for it to be correct. The layout is planned to have been built by the LBSCR and currently is sitting in 1936 having been absorbed by the Southern Railway and new paint applied but not much more - the uncertainty in Europe isn't overly concerning to the residents of Ifield Green who have been carrying on as they have always done so. The visible scene on the railway doesn't include the inner home signal so only from The end of Whitehall Siding & Point 5 onwards towards the right. Passenger Trains can be accepted into the Main Platform Road & The Dock Road which are both equipped to handle passengers - although the Dock Road is more for the handling of parcels and freight and perhaps to send the freight on its way leaving the platform road clear for an arriving passenger train. There is a calling on signal to allow a loco to run around its train and back down onto its coaches - and in theory a freight could be accepted directly into the loop line if needed but its not a passenger move. The advanced starter is on the other side of the bridge/short tunnel that forms the scenic break so you cannot see the points & routing from that position in my minds eye. The run around points are always switched as a pair so I've put them working off of the same lever #11 with no FPL and no passengers will travel over it in a facing direction But wondering if it would be better to separate them off with 11A having a FPL and 11B being put on its own lever - I've also spotted that I probably need a catch point from the Dock Road protecting the 'Main Line' which I'll add and that'll need a FPL - thankfully the LBSCR had the economical FPL on the same lever as the switch itself!! I'm not sure if the Distant signal would be working or fixed - I've depicted it as a fixed Distant but included a lever on the Frame for it. I think the lay of points 9 needs to be reversed with Whitehall Siding acting as the 'catch point' for the mainline. I am open to any/all criticism as my rudimentary understanding of railway signalling is most likely incorrect - it just looks like there are too many signals on there to my eyes. The layout would operate normally as 'One Engine in Steam' with the occasional Daily Freight and Passenger being in the station at the same time or a special there as well. The installation would be as I said Saxby & Farmer from the 1870/1880's and taken into SR ownership at Grouping - so mostly original i would imagine as this sleepy backwater wouldn't need/warrant changes. Please be kind & truthfull! Kind Regards, Gary

Thank you for your input everyone - I really appreciate it. @BlueLightning I didn't know EB Models did the signals - I will fire off an email to them shortly; I've looked over their website many times and the beautiful kits in IEG. It makes me want to backdate my layout further whilst I still have the chance. I've emailed 5&9 Models this morning as I am after a Water Column for my layout and I knew they did a Stroudley version - as well as enquired about wagon kits. @Skinnylinny Yes! This is sort of what I was thinking using the LNWR posts and the LBSCR etches in my minds eye - I've scoured the internet this morning for all the prototype pictures of Devil's Dyke where my layout is based on and it looks like the signalling was the main starter, and three shunt signals one on the platform road to access the run-around loop another at the end of the loop to go onto the main and a third on the bay road/goods line to access the main. Plus the Home and Distant most likely that I cannot find in a photograph. So perhaps I am over signalling my terminus somewhat. Are you still producing Stroudley Coaches & van on your website @Skinnylinny? I've only a limited budget per month but was looking at getting some to have a go with. Kind Regards, Gary

They're beautiful aren't they - but I just don't think I have the experience to put them together. Is why I am looking for a passable alternative - even if it is a bit heretical to mix/mash components :-D I have to say though I do really want a set of rotating LBSCR shunt signals on the layout though! Kind Regards, Gary

Hello All, I hope you're all well? I am currently puzzling over how to make some passable 4mm scale signals that look like exLBSC prototypes - although I currently model outside of the pre-grouping era; I am looking for infrastructure to put on the layout to give its origins prior to grouping. I've found some lovely LBSC buffer stop castings to order & install; and now my thoughts have turned to signalling. Ideally I would like to have operating signals - but there is no way I am competent enough to solder up MSE components to make anything near a decent job on it. So my thoughts turned to Ratio signals and I was worried I would have to install the rail-built signals until I spotted the LNWR twin armed signal here; not my photo - copy right of the original owner/taker. I always like my modelling to look 'passable' at two/three feet away - it might be 100% accurate but if it feels right. To me this signal kit reminds me a lot of the Sheffield Park home signals of LBSC vintage. The only thing that puts me off is the arms of the signal which to me don't really portray and LBSCR design entirely - but the GWR LQ Signals look like a much closer match with their separate arm and spectacle glasses. I know the ladder for access needs to be positioned at the front face of the signal as opposed to the rear of the signal normally. And for the position I am looking for on my layout I am not entirely sure I need the subsidiary signal - but that would be on the main platform line so perhaps might be ideal to have a subsidiary arm for proceeding to the limit of shunt. As for my purposes i would be looking to situate the signal infront of the platform ramp facing away from us with the arms showing towards the Van C & M7. The platform the M7 is at is the main platform; whereas where the Van C is is more of a goods platform where vans are unloaded as per the prototype. Please tell me if I am going barking mad; and breaking the spirit of pre-grouping by mixing & matching? Kind Regards, Gary

Thowback Thursday! Hello All; I am determined to make semi-regular updates on this layout as we go along and for quieter times I am going to focus on either a piece of rolling stock, a project or some modelling memories. Today as you can tell by the title its Throwback Thursday! Today I am going to take you back to time when the layout was stored in a semi-working condition in the cold unheated garage whilst we awaitied the arrival of our newborn. During this time - the regular service on the branch was being handed by these mysterious trains without any form of locomotive - in a different shade of Green to usual and most certainly far removed from the rich brown tones of the LBSCR of the past. I am of course referring to the branch being operated by a shuttle service of 2-EPB's and a through train of a 3-CEP for London or the Coast: Yes, as you can see the branch train has been shunted to the former loop line whilst the through service is attending to the stations patronage's desire for travel further afield than "the junction". In another view the branch shuttle 2-EPB is hiding in the bay road but barely fits - plans are in place to allow full 2-coach trains to be stored in the platform as the platform is being refurbished and the road lengthened somewhat. Other than that a return to normality fast ensured afterwards with the errant Southern 'Region' replaced with the familiar Railway - and a railway equipping itself with new signage for the name of the layout has been decided on and vinyl has been procured to advertise this: The layout has been for some time known as "Ifield Green", I grew up in Ifield West in Crawley, West Sussex and it has been a name I often band about as a layout. The layout itself is currently under refurbishment - I'm not trying to do things on the cheap but I am certainly shopping around in the current climate for bargains for what I need - some of the extraneous fleet that isn't going to be used or wanted is planned to be parted with to make way for further purchases so watch this space - I've got a number of small projects on the simmer just waiting for extra bits & bobs to bring them up to the boil and make some real tangible progress. Kind Regards, Gary

Hello All!! Having gone away and thought about it and re-reading others comments I've decided to build some sort of operable diorama for 7mm scale using what I have to hand currently. Which currently is three yards of flexi track, a settrack straight my Hudswell Clarke and assorted wagons with my spare 4x1 board which was the fiddleyard for Bishops Park. The vague plan is to use the settrack straight as a cassette and lay two sidings in a similar fashion to Lyddlow Goods. Not planning anything fancy just a simple introductory diorama. I spent some time on the 00 layout with my note book creating a list of work to bring it up to scratch and I tested decoders out of my eight DCC fitted locos only two work it looks like dead chips as all models work on DC power so that's something!! Kind Regards, Gary

Hello All! This is a thread which has re-emerged from the depths of the server no-doubt; having been around pre-Photobucket crisis and endured several Conservative Goverments; two house moves - a daughter who is now three and has come back. Welcome to the 'Summer Project' started in 2013 to give me something to do whilst unemployed is now back whilst I am on Furlough and I have been giving the layout some attention - I cannot promise rapid progress; nor can I promise excitement or feats of daring do (unless you count my attempt at reprogramming a DCC Decoder on the 'Main'). But this layout is currently on the cusp of being refurbished. Having been stored for the majority of the last five years with only occasional outing to see daylight the layout is surprisingly intact - it worked in its entirety electrically on DC; some scenery was damaged in storage but it wasn't anywhere near finished at all so that is being scraped off for returning to bare boards and track for re-working. I had to work from home for a few weeks at the outbreak of corona so I made a concerted effort to clear space in the Garage for a makeshift office - now I am on furlough that has been swept away and the layout without the FY Board is in its place instead. Appropriately; the first loco to run was the last locomotive to 'close' the line. The last new item of rolling stock has had its first outing in 'service' a Hornby Southern Railway set of Railroad coaches - these are planned to have some upgrade work done on them as part of a future project. A 'Friendly Face' Stepney appeared and entertained my daughter somewhat; Stepney was the last present bought for my from my late Nan who passed away a few years ago and I don't actually think has ever been run. Bought as a "joke" present its earned its place on my layout! I will work backwards through posts to try and restore some of the images that are missing - they are all saved on Google Drive so is just a case of matching them up. Whilst sorting the garage i found two point motors, some passing contact levers, point motor harnesses, wire, inter-board jumpers... so I might attempt at wiring up the cross over at the platform end of the layout to get that working from the lever frame. If only I could find my Solder and Flux... its not with the Soldering Iron! Anyway, I hope all is well and if you survived the rambles and are interested I will post more as/when I can. Kind Regards, Gary

I have a couple of plans in my head I've been working on - with an overall constraint of 9 feet end to end and two feet in width. However I may well permit myself an additional three feet to keep any future layout as four boards that can be bolted together to form a box structure for storage. I have played on AnyRail; and with my Ixion Hudswell Clarke and some O gauge wagons on the little bit of Peco track I have to get a 'feel' for what I want. That I think is the most important thing I have taken away from the conversation today - I need to decide what it is I want in a layout and go from there. I know I want to focus on realistic operation; even if its a fictional location. To have an accurate track plan for the era depicted, accurate signalling etc my current 00 layout features some rudimentary electrical interlocking on the Peco lever frame to ensure points are 'locked' into a position - that is something I'd like to expand upon. Kind Regards, Gary

Thank you all for your input. I think the attraction of the larger scale goes back to my first exhibition I went to - my mother had a friend at work who was the security guard in an office block - and I remember going whilst she cleaned the offices and being left with the security guard - he would solder some of his locomotive together then go on a patrol and return to his desk and solder something else on - that wonderful intoxicating smell of Solder, Flux and hot metal. Anyway I digress we went to Scaleforum South at Leatherhead Leisure centre and I was presented with I think it was Ditchling Green and I was mesmerised by this layout - I already was enthralled about the LB&SCR at this young age and looked out for ex LBSC infrastructure wherever we went as I lived in the heart of their former territory. Even today I will linger on any LBSC layout observing fascinated. I feel the larger scale offers a presence that the smaller ones do not; they move more realistically and I dare say more reliably - bad running is a bug bear of mine especially at an exhibition; it is inevitable with small motors, electricity and dust/debris but too often it is the same hand of god pushing stuff around on layouts. Perhaps its the higher mass of the larger scale which seemingly provides the illusion that they run better also when kit building I've noticed the larger kits go together easier than a smaller one. Perhaps I am seeking the approval of others as to ratify my idea - I know my other half is sick of hearing about train related conversations :-) Kind Regards, Gary

Hello Everyone! I hope you're all well at this uncertain time; having been furloughed after a period of enforced working from home I have managed to set up my fledgling 00 Gauge layout I had been planning in the Garage - an LBSCR based terminus loosely based on Devils' Dyke. However I've hit a snag - despite it electrically working; the DCC system appears to be dead - not the controller but the majority of the chips in the locomotives and I am not really wanting to invest in replacement of the chips so I suspect they will be returned to DC operation. However the other perhaps more pertinent issue is that after such a long time (the layout was commenced in 2013) it no-longer holds my interest and it feels a little bit like trying to breathe life into a dead horse. Now I have long been interested in the 'Senior Scale' not surprising as I was in the 'Senior Service' for a time as well ;-) I have for a long time a thread in the 7mm section about moving up to 7mm scale but it sort of fizzled out with moving house; having offspring, changing jobs etc - basically normal life got in the way. I currently have a 10.5 foot by 1 foot layout broken down into a 7 foot scenic section and a 3.5 foot fiddle-yard board what I am dithering over is do I bring my 00 gauge layout back to boards & track to refurbish it or should I just take the plunge and sell off my 00 equipment that is of no interest (I have an eclectic collection) and use the funds to start an O Gauge layout - which is what I think I really want as I only tend to linger on Southern Railway/Southern Electric layouts in 00/N but I'll sit fascinated at any O Gauge layout I find. So if you're still here after the above preamble, is there any viable way of using my existing boards for O gauge - I am looking to build a end of the line Branch Line Terminus; with a light railway sort of feel - a Terrier puttering along with a handful of wagons and guards van, or a mixed train of a single carriage and wagon or two. I've been inspired by the rebuilt Trebudoc, Badgers Oak, Goonhilly and Godshill amongst others. I am more than happy to build new boards if needed - but my woodworking skills aren't great and I am keen to reuse whatever I can lay my hands on to keep costs down. I think I've come to the conclusion that I would rather have a much smaller collection of items that I really want and will use rather than my current mix & match of anything that took my fancy in 00 gauge. I apologise for the ramblings - i've come to the conclusion that if I have to build boards that I should build an even number of them so that they can be bolted face-to-face for storage/transport in the future and have integral legs - something my current boards are unable to do. I have full use of the length of a normal 16 foot garage but any layout movement/assembly would need to be undertaken by myself alone so perhaps pushing it out to 12 feet by 2 feet wide as an absolute maximum. Please send help & sanity!!! Kind Regards, Gary

Because it's a forum.. it's what it is designed to do people to chat & offer opinions. Sometimes other people's opinions don't correlate with your own and we just have to accept that not everyone will agree.

Still doesn't mean common courtesy and manners and permitted the OP was complaining about paying outlandish prices for an exclusive item. It's going to be expensive as it's a special, can either look for them and pay over the odds or buy similar and repaint/modify no? Being told "end of discussion" isn't polite or needed, I can appreciate I may be being aggravating the situation but I genuinely felt put out with the end of discussion comment it wasn't warranted or needed. Perhaps I should end my own discussion here to avoid more agro.

I thought it was the end of discussion some time ago...?

Charming!!!

But if you're buying an "exclusive" model... limited production run etc it will be more expensive than a normal model no?

Thank you all gents, sadly as the layout is getting to the scenery stage and I very much doubt I could make alterations to it. (Besides there is no space for expansion at the moment) I will have to keep it as it is track-wise. This is it currently I did run a mixed EPB/CEP service a while back which was interesting is somewhat implausible. My plan is to base the layout in the immediate pre-WW2 era, looking at 1938 using primarily exLBSC motive power - naturally with the odd flight of fancy. I won't be going any newer than Southern Sunshine wartime black normally although the malachite M7 I have was too good looking to refuse! You've all given me some things to think about.

Yes that's right Talisman I suspect the electrification to Horsted Keynes never justified the cost on expenditure. How different things might've been if the East Grinstead line was electrified sooner.

No i've build a single branch line terminus with main platform with run-around, bay/siding, and two other sidings. It looks very much like this photo from Disused Stations the branch line itself would be single track very much like the Horsted Keynes Branch, or Wimbledon - West Croydon. The vague idea I had would be to electrify it as a 'why not' as part of the Brighton Line electrification works a bit like Horsted Keynes was electrified to provide a space off of the mainline to turn back or divert EMU's, but the primary service would be offered by steam-hauled trains normally. I think as others have said if there is a juice rail it is unlikely to have any meaningful steam powered service for passengers. So perhaps I will for now just keep at a steam hauled line lets face it, it'll be more operationally interesting with a mix of Push-Pull, normal passenger & freight etc. Kind Regards, Gary

Thank you to all who have commented, your views have re-enforced what I already thought was correct that once a line was electrified unless a vital service passed over it (for example diverted trains via Horsted Keynes) the steam passenger service was abolished. And being the little end of a small twig of the Brighton system unless the juice was turned off (for repairs or damage) or a special was needed it would only be steam-hauled freight. I'm going to ponder - I might lay the 3rd rail but my station layout only allows the Main Platform to be electrified as the bay road is actually the main goods siding and likely to be blocked. Many Thanks to all! Gary

Good Evening all, I am having a problem so thought I would ask the pool of knowledge that exists here on the forums to answer a question I cannot find in my books or online. I am building an ex LBSCR Branchline in Southern days, based loosely on Devils Dyke but if it had continued on past its closure date - but the site of the station is potentially linked to the Brighton Mainline via a junction just south of Clayton Tunnel rather than via the West Coastway notionally it is a Triangular junction with tracks facing both Brighton & Hassocks - but I've not decided. Now onto the actual question, I am mulling over whether or not to 'electrify' my Branch as part of the original Southern Railway Brighton Mainline Electrification in 1933. What I am trying to find out is are there any examples of a joint Steam & electrified Branchline to Southern Railway / Region practices with steam powered "pull-push" trains running alongside 2-BIL's or 2-NOL's that are terminating clear off of the mainline. I know Horsted Keynes's sole reason for electrification was to turn back the Seaford service clear of the Junction at Haywards Heath - and I know the East Grinstead - Lewes line was still steam powered at the time but did Steam Passenger local services run regularly over electrified tracks other than diverted expresses or scheduled London-Brighton trains avoiding the Brighton Mainline. Its probably a resounding no, especially in later Southern Region times but - earlier in the thirties when electrification was less widespread could it have been a proposition to 'share' passenger services on a branch line. Or would steam be more relegated to specials or one-off passenger runs & freight primarily. Kind Regards, Gary