Cysgod-y-Fedwen

[mdjr78]

I have been working on the signalbox diagram of the layout. It should be something like this.

 

1. Up Distant
2. Up Home
3. Up Starter (or would this be the inner home?)
4. Up Shunting Signal
5. Up Advanced Starter
6. Ground Signal - Down Line to Down Siding
7. (Catch) Points - Down Line ↔ Down Siding
8. Ground Signal - Down Siding to Down line
9. Ground Signal - Up Siding to Up Line
10. (Catch) Points - Up Line ↔ Up Siding
11. Ground Signal - Down Line to Up Line
12. Points - Down Line ↔ Up Line
13. Ground Signal - Down Siding to Up Line
14. Points - Down Siding ↔ Up Line
15. Ground Signal - Up Line to Up Siding or Platform
16. Ground Signal - Up Line to Down Line or Siding
17. Down Starter
18. Down Home
19. Down Distant

I'm not too sure about signal 4 and the arrangement of signals 15 and 16.

As there are no facing points, I assumed that there will be no FPL. Is this correct?

Both points with the 0 would be manual operated points (not controlled from the signalbox).

 

Comments are welcome.

 

Werner

Edited January 3, 2017 by mdjr78

[5BarVT]

Well done with your frame allocation. Only two points from me (both of which could be wrong). I'm not sure of the need for the shunt ahead (4) as I don't think it was a western thing (but the N&W line may not have been 'western' practice). Also, shunt signal 13 needs 12 and 14 reverse which obstructs access to 13 (called a 'pull between'). I think that would have been avoided (but being a shunt signal may nave been OK as not a long pull). However, swapping 11 shunt and 12 points will sort the issue anyway.

 

Mike (stationmaster) will have views if he reads this topic!

Paul.

[The Stationmaster]

Agree with Paul (5BarVT) above regarding the pull between although 13 would be a one hand job to pull but still best avoided and not liked on a Western frame if it could be helped.  

 

The only problem is No.4  if you are going to have a Shunt Ahead Signal at all it would be beneath the Section Signal, No. 5.  The provision really depended on the amount of use they got plus local operating circumstances and in your case just how far No. 5 is from 15/16.  So not essential but if you want one go for it as it would add to the operational interest and look a bit different (especially if you used the old pattern arm with a big 'S' on it).

 

The other point you might like to think about is the GW habit of littering its railway with stop signals.  It can be a problem on a layout because slavishly sticking to the way the GW did could lead to a forest of signals and start looking rather silly but the company would quite likely have had another stop signal on the Done Line to protect No.7 points - it really depends on the distance between No.7 points and No 14 connection and it might well look far too much on a model so just one to possibly think about.

 

That apart what you have called 'Catch Points' are actually 'Trap Points'.  Taking your other questions - no FPLs as you say, 15 & 16 are quite ok, and 0 as hand points is also correct.

 

Signal names - the position of No.3 is the crucial bit - will it be between the signalbox and the platform end or will it be between the signalbox and points No.10?  Whichever it is will alter the name of the signal as on the GWR stop signals in rear of a signalbox were Home Signals and those in Advance of it were Starting/Starter Signals.  Thus if it's between the platform end and signalbox it would be the Inner Home Signal and No.5 would be the Starting Signal.  But if No.3 is between the signalbox and No.10 points it would be the Starting Signal and No 5 would be the Advanced Starting Signal - easy when you know how the naming works, perhaps not so when you don't.

 

Hope that helps a bit

[mdjr78]

Thanks, Mike.

 

I don't know what the exact position of signal 5 will be (on- or off-scene). We might place it on the other end of the bridge and use the shunt signal.

 

The distance between points 7 and 14 is about 80 cm. We will see in practice if we will include an extra stopsignal on the down line.

 

Werner

[Pinkelpa]

A first photosign-of-life from the module we want to build and an attempt to get around with photos and galleries  here on RMWeb.

 

[Donw]

You are making a good start don't worry about the Welsh naming the changing of the first letter of words is difficult to follow. The area you are based on has the wonderful Chain Bridge on the Usk it is a road bridge not railway. The Wye Valley is spectacular for the autumn leaves as the wooded hillside changes to red and gold before the leaves fall. 

Don

[Mike Storey]

Looks like a very interesting project - good luck! Can I just ask what software you used for the track plan in your first post? I have tried using 3D in the latest issue of AnyRail and have not achieved the same success!

[br2975]

The name has been worked out using Google Translate, knowing that there were peculiarities with the Welsh language but not which ones.

 

It may be worth bearing in mind that large organisations such as the GWR and its successor BR, and also for example the National Coal Board, always had difficulty with Welsh place names, and occasionally misspelt them, generally out of ignorance.

.

Therefore, wrongly translated Welsh place names could be 'almost' right, for your purposes........ and you can then tell the 'rivet counters' why it's wrong.

.

Similarly, some English place names in Wales have been 'Cymricised' by the Welsh, and also become questionable

 

 

Brian R

[mdjr78]

Looks like a very interesting project - good luck! Can I just ask what software you used for the track plan in your first post? I have tried using 3D in the latest issue of AnyRail and have not achieved the same success!

Hi Mike,

 

I've used Wintrack (version 9.0) for this. See http://wintrack.de/.

 

The 3D-library for Wintrack is mostly German orientated. But if you are skilled enough (I am not), you can make some UK-models. This is an very nice example that Sierd-Jan (Trains&armour on this forum) has made for us with his 3d models.

 

 

Werner

[Mike Storey]

Hi Mike,

 

I've used Wintrack (version 9.0) for this. See http://wintrack.de/.

 

The 3D-library for Wintrack is mostly German orientated. But if you are skilled enough (I am not), you can make some UK-models. This is an very nice example that Sierd-Jan (Trains&armour on this forum) has made for us with his 3d models.

 

 

Werner

 

Many thanks Werner - I shall give it a go!

 

Mike

[Trains&armour]

 Wintrack comes with a basic 3D editor. Primitive, but I did manage to produce some simple British stock and buildings with it for a planned layout. If there are RMwebbers out there that use this program and think that my models would come in useful, send me a PM and I will send them over.

Some examples:

Edited January 11, 2017 by Trains&armour

[MinZaPint]

Well you've got me interested I look forward to following your progress.

[Pinkelpa]

Progress indeed... Last week we assembled parts of the modules: the two boxes (each 1200x590 mm). The track plan is now copied onto the board and as soon as the lacking Peco parts are delivered by the postman, we can really start building. As soon as the connecting 'black boxes' are finished - hopefully this week - we can start laying the (straight and curved) tracks, the turn-outs and everything else of which I do not know the name yet.

We also adapted the totem/logo a bit. We replaced 'eindhovenmodelbouw.nl' by Monmouthshire, as can be seen (bottom left) on this photo:

 

 

To be continued....

[Pinkelpa]

Today, we 'sculpted' the river area. We want a 2 inches lowered river and a characteristic bridge. With proper woodworking tools, making room for the river was a peace of cake. The hard work was in fact the 'thinking before doing'.

 

 

Not only we wanted to address a small industrial area, also a little bit of nature should be part of the plan. Though probably not particularly South East Wales, this type of bridge  is something we aim for: http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/uploads/7/6/8/3/7683812/1978044_orig.jpg

The bridge, not all the persons on it.

 

Paul is working on stepper-motor driven turnout control because the solutions we have seen with a servo-motor or electromagnetic coils do not fulfill the wish for a slow turnover. The stepper-motor found is priced about £ 1, and with a miniature relay to control the electrofrog, we expect that we can compete with the commercially available turnout controls. He is also working on electromechanicaly driven ground-signs with miniature leds. Photographic evidence will be provided later on  

[mdjr78]

Hi all,

 

Just a small update to let you guys and girls know that we are currently laying down the track. And some pictures to prove this.

 

 

 

All the pointwork is in place. The rest of the track should be straightforward.

 

Werner

[mdjr78]

With the help of Paul and Mike I've corrected the signalbox diagram. The shunt ahead signal (5) has moved to the advanced starter. And the "in between pull" has been corrected.

 

I want to incorporate a working interlocked leverframe. So I have been working on the interlocking table. It should be something like this.

 

The signals with the red text are locked when the levers are in the normal position (backward). A little bit special are levers 15 and 16 which can lock 10 and 14 in both positions. Is this correct? Any other suggestions or corrections?

 

Regards,

Werner

Edited April 1, 2017 by mdjr78

[5BarVT]

You've done a lot of work there! In your Locks column you have shown Normal, Reverse and Both Ways locks: in doing so, you have lost the ability to do some simple cross checks and what you are doing is duplicating things that you have listed elsewhere. WR locking tables (and therefore I assume GWR) have four columns: Released By, Locks Normal, Locks Both Ways and Releases (Releases is really just Locks Reverse). If you do it that way, anything in the Locks N column should have a corresponding entry in the locked lever e.g. 6 Locks 8 and 8 Locks 6 as you have shown (known as a converse lock - if the frame is locked mechanically you can't have one without the other). Likewise anything in the released by column will have an entry in the releases column e.g. 1 is released by 2, 3 and 4 so 2, 3 and 4 have 1 in the releases column as you have shown - you don't need 2, 3 and 4 in the Locks column of 2. 10(2) in 15 and 14(2) in 16 would be in the Locks Both Ways column with no converse shown on the table. This is all just presentation and you could leave your Both Ways Locks as they are, knowing that the converse won't be shown.

 

You also have some superfluous locking: one example is 18 locks 6 - 18 needs to lock 7 as you have shown, but 6 is released by 7 so 6R needs 7R which automatically holds 18N. A more interesting one is that 18 does not need to lock 14! 18 Locks 13 and 14 is released by 13 so must already be N. 14 is locked indirectly by 18 (phew!) through 13. Similarly in the released by column, 12 only needs to be released by 14. You have caught some of these because you don't show 11 or 12 as locking 15 because they want 13 points in the opposite direction hence the lock is present already.

 

None of this really matters when it's only on paper, but when you start to design your frame the extra locks that don't do anything will make it significantly more complicated.

 

There is other locking that GWR would have included to a improve safety and help the the signalman not to make mistakes, but I assume that you're trying to make the signals operate realistically rather than have a 'true to prototype' frame. There is a limit to how many rivets can be counted!

 

With a quick look through I can't see any locks that you have missed. Well done.

 

Paul.

[Pinkelpa]

A lot of work has been done the last months. Paul made the control electronics for the points and signals. As we mentioned before, stepper motors are to be used to realize a slow transition for the points, as well as the signals:

 

 

 

Three control units will be managed by one Arduino. So we need at least 6 of them, and an extra one for damage control. Extensive tests are done with a single prototype, but now we are arriving to the moment where the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We start with the points. The signals are very fragile, so we will place them later on. We also intend to start controlling the points individually using simple SPDT switches to get things going.

 

Jelle

Edited June 15, 2017 by Pinkelpa

[Focalplane]

Most interesting, I shall be following your progress.  I have a similar project, only in 7mm scale - but also set in Wales.  The modules will have to be larger and will not be started before October, but I am progressing with some of the buildings, all of which will represent the prototype station.

 

With respect to the name, much depends on the era you are modelling.  Many names were mis-spelled by the GWR in the first place and even today there are arguments about the changes of some names in 1975.  As an example, many argue that Portmadoc should never have become Porthmadog.  The locals simply refer to it as Port, perhaps to avoid confrontation!

 

Even more complex can be the pronunciation of a place name.  Usually both versions are considered correct for towns like Dolgellau/Dolgellley.

[mdjr78]

Another small update.

 

Still working on the underside of the modules. There are lots of wires to be connected. Progress looks pretty slow, also due to the holidays. But we are getting there. Almost all motors are now connected on the main module. This module also has the ground signals in place. We are about to calibrate the motors tomorrow and then test them.

 

_{Paul is busy connecting...}

 

_{A Close up of two point motors}

 

We also made a temporarily signal tableau. This will eventually be replaced by a lever frame.

 

More updates soon (and hopefully one with a moving train)

 

Werner

[mdjr78]

Hi all,

 

Last weekend the 'Britse ModuleBaan' has attended at the Eindhoven Maker Fair. This was also the first outing for Cysgod-y-Fedwen.

 

 

Although all the motors for the points and ground signals are now working, they couldn't be operated. Simply because the control panel hasn't been wired yet. But the trains can travel over the main line.

 

 

All working well.... Although

 

 

We had one or two derailments. Probably due to the screws that temporarily fix the track in place. That will be solved once ballasting commences. 

 

Regards,

Werner

[philip-griffiths]

Hi, how is this little piece of Wales coming along in the Netherlands?

 

Regards.

[mdjr78]

Hi Philip,

 

Thanks for informing. Unfortunately there is not much progress on the layout due to some other priorities. For example I've made a totally new module, named Ollerbrook Booth, which attended in two exhibitions in The Netherlands.

 

Cysgod-y-Fedwen has been set up in our clubroom. The control panel has been wired up. And for the last 6 months it has been tested thoroughly (read, we have played with the trains on it ). 

 

 

This autumn we will be starting with the scenery. Hopefully I can show you some progress in the not so distant future.

 

Werner

[Pinkelpa]

Dear reader,

we would like to show you, that we are still alive and and I want to present a picture from some progress, already made some time before we made the move to our clubhouse:

 

 

 Unfortunately, I can't add 'and kicking' to 'alive' , because there is not much kicking due to the Covid-19 threat which causes our clubhouse to be closed, now already for a long time.

Therefore I took the liberty to present an older picture.

 

Krds, Jelle

 

 

 

[Pinkelpa]

Well,

I like to add 2 more photos, just to show our progress of the past (how much more do we have to wait before we can continue with our modules):

 

 

... this one is made before we moved to our (still closed)  clubhouse:

 

 

It already feels a bit like a walk down memory lane

 

Krds, Jelle