1930s GWR Layout Signalling help

[Harlequin]

Sorry Keegs, but this design feels really awkward to me. I can see you're struggling with the space available but there's got to be a better way to do something like this.

 

If the yard was outside the main line then it could be longer because the connection to the mainline could be, at least partly, in one of the curves and it could use some of the corner space. And if the main line curved gently through the scenic section it could be slightly longer, again help with an outside yard connection and help to disguise the tight radii at the sides. Tricky to balance these things without losing too much offscene storage space, though. How long are the arms of the U from the top of the drawing?

 

If you want a proper station with platforms and a passenger bridge, why not go for it instead of saying it's a halt?

 

BTW: As part of the signalling you will need some ground signals controlling the crossover and access in and out of the yard. Signalling experts: Should there be an Up Home signal as well as the Up Starter?

 

[Flying Pig]

Honestly, a terminus would give you more modelling and operation, now you've lost the continuous running.

[RJS1977]

2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

 

 

If the yard was outside the main line then it could be longer because the connection to the mainline could be, at least partly, in one of the curves and it could use some of the corner space.

 

 

Conversely though, having the yard outside the main line could make uncoupling more awkward. Perhaps not so much of a problem now the continuous run's been lost (as that would have potentially led to leaning over to uncouple while trains were circulating) but something I try to avoid in plans.

[Harlequin]

11 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

Conversely though, having the yard outside the main line could make uncoupling more awkward. Perhaps not so much of a problem now the continuous run's been lost (as that would have potentially led to leaning over to uncouple while trains were circulating) but something I try to avoid in plans.

Remote uncoupling would help and there are many ways to skin that rabbit: Ramps, magnets, Brian Kirby couplings, Kadees, DCC controlled active couplings on locos, etc., etc...

 

Edited February 9, 2022 by Harlequin

[Keegs]

9 hours ago, RailWest said:

Unless your prototype is assumed to be an ex-broad gauge line with an over-wide 'six-foot', then you are unlikely to have had signals in the six-foot, they would be on the far side of the adjacent line as the Stationmaster has suggested.

I believe the B&ER was broad gauge the track spacing in 30s appears to be aswell (to my eye)

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Nailsea-Backwell-Railway-Station-Photo-Yatton-Flax-Bourton-6-/262965662771?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&_trksid=p2349624.m46890.l6249&mkrid=710-127635-2958-0

 

[RailWest]

4 minutes ago, Keegs said:

I believe the B&ER was broad gauge ....

 

Indeed it was :-)

[Keegs]

9 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Sorry Keegs, but this design feels really awkward to me. I can see you're struggling with the space available but there's got to be a better way to do something like this.

 

If the yard was outside the main line then it could be longer because the connection to the mainline could be, at least partly, in one of the curves and it could use some of the corner space. And if the main line curved gently through the scenic section it could be slightly longer, again help with an outside yard connection and help to disguise the tight radii at the sides. Tricky to balance these things without losing too much offscene storage space, though. How long are the arms of the U from the top of the drawing?

 

If you want a proper station with platforms and a passenger bridge, why not go for it instead of saying it's a halt?

 

BTW: As part of the signalling you will need some ground signals controlling the crossover and access in and out of the yard. Signalling experts: Should there be an Up Home signal as well as the Up Starter?

 

I’ll have another go at it. 
 

I need to have an excuse to run a King with 6-7 coaches as I already have them!

 

the goods yard was to accommodate my Skaledale goods shed. I may be able to cut the yard size down, and have a full station, maybe something inspired by Nailsea and Backwell…

 

 

let me mull over it in the coming days!

 

 

Cheers,

Kegan

[Michael Hodgson]

5 minutes ago, Keegs said:

maybe something inspired by Nailsea and Backwell…

 

 

let me mull over it

 

Mulled cider ?  

 

The Coates works was still in business when I lived there.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/634937247467769668/

[Harlequin]

25 minutes ago, Keegs said:

I’ll have another go at it. 
 

I need to have an excuse to run a King with 6-7 coaches as I already have them!

 

the goods yard was to accommodate my Skaledale goods shed. I may be able to cut the yard size down, and have a full station, maybe something inspired by Nailsea and Backwell…

 

 

let me mull over it in the coming days!

 

 

Cheers,

Kegan

Are the arms of the U long enough to hold a King and six coaches? It’s an ambitious length of train when your scene is relatively small.

 

You could use your road over bridge to actually cross the platforms to suggest they are longer off scene. Then your  express trains could stop with just a few coaches against the visible platforms. The road bridge could double up as the passenger crossing to simplify the scene a bit.

 

[Keegs]

14 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Are the arms of the U long enough to hold a King and six coaches? It’s an ambitious length of train when your scene is relatively small.

 

You could use your road over bridge to actually cross the platforms to suggest they are longer off scene. Then your  express trains could stop with just a few coaches against the visible platforms. The road bridge could double up as the passenger crossing to simplify the scene a bit.

 

Sorry! I forgot to answer your question!

 

They are just over 6 ft -long enough to fit a King, x6 57’ collet coaches and a Siphon.

 

The idea was not to have it stop(express) but just to pass through(hence the halt/platforms). I would have something like a diesel railcar stop at the platform. Or perhaps a prairie with 2-3 coaches. 

Edited February 10, 2022 by Keegs

[Keegs]

21 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Remote uncoupling would help and there are many ways to skin that rabbit: Ramps, magnets, Brian Kirby couplings, Kadees, DCC controlled active couplings on locos, etc., etc...

 

I forgot to mention this: All my goods wagons and locos have kadee’s and there will be Neo magnets embedded strategically in the yard

[The Stationmaster]

On 09/02/2022 at 08:36, RJS1977 said:

 

Thinking about it some more, for a halt, a subway may be overkill - the point of a halt is something that can be constructed cheaply. A ramp/steps down from the road (Denham Golf Club halt is accessed by ramps up from the road), or even a foot crossing (with gates locked by the signalbox if on a main line), would be more likely,

 

Much better to have separate access to each platform from the road bridge.  But I am struggling to think of any haly back in 'old days' where there were gates and gate locks worked from a signal box.  The most common thing was separate access from each side of the line on double lines.

[The Stationmaster]

On 09/02/2022 at 09:40, Harlequin said:

Sorry Keegs, but this design feels really awkward to me. I can see you're struggling with the space available but there's got to be a better way to do something like this.

 

If the yard was outside the main line then it could be longer because the connection to the mainline could be, at least partly, in one of the curves and it could use some of the corner space. And if the main line curved gently through the scenic section it could be slightly longer, again help with an outside yard connection and help to disguise the tight radii at the sides. Tricky to balance these things without losing too much offscene storage space, though. How long are the arms of the U from the top of the drawing?

 

If you want a proper station with platforms and a passenger bridge, why not go for it instead of saying it's a halt?

 

BTW: As part of the signalling you will need some ground signals controlling the crossover and access in and out of the yard. Signalling experts: Should there be an Up Home signal as well as the Up Starter?

 

Being pedantic there already is an Up Home Signal (although it might be the Inner Home and the Home is off scene?) and there isn't an Up Starter.  The latter could of course be added but the end of the scenic area is pretty close to the crossover so it might look a bit contrived and it could therefore be assumed to be off scene.

[Harlequin]

9 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Being pedantic there already is an Up Home Signal (although it might be the Inner Home and the Home is off scene?) and there isn't an Up Starter.  The latter could of course be added but the end of the scenic area is pretty close to the crossover so it might look a bit contrived and it could therefore be assumed to be off scene.

I was expecting to see a home signal immediately in rear of the platform and for the signal shown between the platform and the signal box to be the starter.

What am I missing? Does the fact that it’s a halt, not a full station, change things?

[RailWest]

15 hours ago, Harlequin said:

I was expecting to see a home signal immediately in rear of the platform and for the signal shown between the platform and the signal box to be the starter.

What am I missing? Does the fact that it’s a halt, not a full station, change things?

The first stop signal that you come to after passing the Distant is the Home, regardless of its location relative to any platforms etc. It was not unknown for the Home to be at the 'far end' of a platform, ie a train entered the platform before reaching the Home. A good example of not wasting money on signals in places where operational requirements did not merit one :-)

Edited February 11, 2022 by RailWest

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, Harlequin said:

I was expecting to see a home signal immediately in rear of the platform and for the signal shown between the platform and the signal box to be the starter.

What am I missing? Does the fact that it’s a halt, not a full station, change things?

GWR/BRWR signal nomenclature is a very interesting and rarely explored area.  Although there was a different use of one description in some Minute books prior to the mid 1920s I don't know if it was reflected in lever leads at that time but I suspect not unless a lot of brass leads happen to have been renewed.

 

The basic principle was that all running line stop signals, with one exception, in rear of the centre of the signal box which worked them were Home Signals and all running line stop signals in advance of the centre of the 'box were Starting Signals.  The exception was running signals used for exits from bay platforms (and possibly refuge sidings, but not loops) which were 'bay (etc) starting signals.

 

The exact title of a Home Signal was governed by its position relative to other Home Signals (this is where a different description can be found in some minute books) thus on the Westermn the outer most Home Signal was the Home Signal (which tied in nicely with the Block Regulations).  The names of any other Home Signals depended on how many there were but normally the one most immediately in rear of the signal box was the Inner Home Signal and any between tthe Home and inner Home would normally have the word 'Intermediate' in their name.   I don't think I've ever come across a situation where there were more than two or three Home Signals and the latter was unusual but could happen because of the GWR's fondness for numerous stop signals protecting point work.

 

The signal immediately in advance of the centre of the 'box (even if it was almost opposite the 'box structure as in one example I knew of) would be the Starting Signal, naming of successive Starting Signals then depended on how many there were.  And here there could be differences which I suspect might have been influenced by distance for the 'box  (I can see no other logical explanation but we are talking about Western signalling) thus in one situation it went Starting Signal, Advanced Starting Signal, Outer Advanced Starting Signal.  But I have also come across Starting signal, Intermediate Advanced Starting Signal and Advanced Starting Signal.   Possibly things changed a bit over the years in this area of naming?   And of course this is also why in explanations the term Section Signal (for the most advanced Starting Signal or even for a Home Signal where there is only one stop signal) is far simpler to use than any other term or mixture of terms.

 

Now we come to actually positioning a Home Signal and in many cases the least important factor affecting siting is the presence of a station platform.   A Home Signal does nothing additionally to protecta station platform unless it is one to which wrong line shunts might be made and even then it is almost change for sixpence.  Why? - Simple - if the signal is not far in rear of the platform the block should still be at Train on Line when there is a train standing in the platform (and it would be highly unlikely that a Warning Acceptance for a following train would be authorised in such circumstances).  If there was any pointwork then inevitably there would be a stop signal to protect that , and (on the GWR) more than one if there was a succession of points needing protection.  

 

Another reason for providing a signal in rear of the platform might be to facilitate a Warning Acceptance in order to keep trains (perhaps not of all classes) moving during busy times when a full Clearing Point is not available in advance of that signal.  But in that situation, provided the block section was long enough, an additional stop signal would be provided to create a Clearing Point - and on the Western that would become the Home Signal (some other Railways/Regions would call it the Outer Home Signal but that term was not used on the Western for naming signals as far as i can trace thus far). 

[Keegs]

 

On 09/02/2022 at 22:40, Harlequin said:

Sorry Keegs, but this design feels really awkward to me. I can see you're struggling with the space available but there's got to be a better way to do something like this.

 

If the yard was outside the main line then it could be longer because the connection to the mainline could be, at least partly, in one of the curves and it could use some of the corner space. And if the main line curved gently through the scenic section it could be slightly longer, again help with an outside yard connection and help to disguise the tight radii at the sides. Tricky to balance these things without losing too much offscene storage space, though. How long are the arms of the U from the top of the drawing?

 

If you want a proper station with platforms and a passenger bridge, why not go for it instead of saying it's a halt?

 

BTW: As part of the signalling you will need some ground signals controlling the crossover and access in and out of the yard. Signalling experts: Should there be an Up Home signal as well as the Up Starter?

 

 

On 10/02/2022 at 08:11, Keegs said:

I’ll have another go at it. 
 

I need to have an excuse to run a King with 6-7 coaches as I already have them!

 

the goods yard was to accommodate my Skaledale goods shed. I may be able to cut the yard size down, and have a full station, maybe something inspired by Nailsea and Backwell…

 

 

let me mull over it in the coming days!

 

 

Cheers,

Kegan

 

 

OK!

 

Here is my 'nother go at it.

 

I've tried to straighten the whole thing out so the only curves that are seen are on the left (and are a gentle radius) heading into the tunnel.

 

Shown excluding fiddle/staging yard boards, all track in green will be backscene, Halt has been promoted, imagine trailing crossover is off-scene to the right as it was in the old one(there is a little point setup going on in the staging yard that allow the goods train to back into the yard from the UP main line)

 

• Detailing incl. exact positioning of buildings, bridge etc not complete just in roughly the correct place give or take an inch or three.

• Signalling may well need re-doing as I have only copied from the previous version. I expect @The Stationmaster will be along soon to correct as necessary!

• Signal box is assumed to be where it was originally(off-scene next to the trailing crossover to the yard) unless another would be needed due to the bridge blocking sighting? @The Stationmaster if you could clarify?
• (The thing next the the "UP" is a plate layers hut not a signal box) No trap points added, there is one on the yard entrance though unsure if more are needed.
• As this is a re-draw it may not be as refined as it needs to be, specifically the layout of the goods yard & town.

 

Special thanks to @Harlequin for making me re-assess my plan as I'm much happier with how this flows more naturally and isn't so cramped/squashed!

 

 

[bécasse]

Much better. I would, however, place the goods shed so that its road vehicle access faces the front of the layout - that may be what you intend anyway but it isn't clear from the plan.

[The Stationmaster]

8 hours ago, Keegs said:

 

 

 

 

OK!

 

Here is my 'nother go at it.

 

I've tried to straighten the whole thing out so the only curves that are seen are on the left (and are a gentle radius) heading into the tunnel.

 

Shown excluding fiddle/staging yard boards, all track in green will be backscene, Halt has been promoted, imagine trailing crossover is off-scene to the right as it was in the old one(there is a little point setup going on in the staging yard that allow the goods train to back into the yard from the UP main line)

 

• Detailing incl. exact positioning of buildings, bridge etc not complete just in roughly the correct place give or take an inch or three.

• Signalling may well need re-doing as I have only copied from the previous version. I expect @The Stationmaster will be along soon to correct as necessary!

• Signal box is assumed to be where it was originally(off-scene next to the trailing crossover to the yard) unless another would be needed due to the bridge blocking sighting? @The Stationmaster if you could clarify?
• (The thing next the the "UP" is a plate layers hut not a signal box) No trap points added, there is one on the yard entrance though unsure if more are needed.
• As this is a re-draw it may not be as refined as it needs to be, specifically the layout of the goods yard & town.

 

Special thanks to @Harlequin for making me re-assess my plan as I'm much happier with how this flows more naturally and isn't so cramped/squashed!

 

 

As far as the signalling is concerned I would keep the stop signal on the Up linewg here it is - excellent excuse reason for having a white painted sighting 'board' on the bridge structure,  a big rectangular patch of white paint.  You could possibly add another stop signal on the Up line back near the tunnel mouth as it would be much easier to sight as the Home Signal for an approaching train than the one by the bridge (which we can assume protects the yard point).

 

On the Down line I would move the Starting Signal ( which it most likely would be further from the platform end as it looks a bit contrived (to be near the platform end) as it currently is.  I'd go for trying to accommodate as much train length as possible 'on scene' for a train standing at that signal waiting acceptance - which is bound to happen some time!

 

the only thing which concerns me about the plan is the radius of the curve into the goods yard - are you sure it would s be suitable for propelling wagons into the yard?   BTW having the goods shed deck area and road access placed as suggested by 'bécasse' puts it on the town and access road side and makes more room for road vehicles to get to the middle siding.

[Harlequin]

On 11/02/2022 at 11:55, The Stationmaster said:

GWR/BRWR signal nomenclature is a very interesting and rarely explored area.  Although there was a different use of one description in some Minute books prior to the mid 1920s I don't know if it was reflected in lever leads at that time but I suspect not unless a lot of brass leads happen to have been renewed.

 

The basic principle was that all running line stop signals, with one exception, in rear of the centre of the signal box which worked them were Home Signals and all running line stop signals in advance of the centre of the 'box were Starting Signals.  The exception was running signals used for exits from bay platforms (and possibly refuge sidings, but not loops) which were 'bay (etc) starting signals.

 

The exact title of a Home Signal was governed by its position relative to other Home Signals (this is where a different description can be found in some minute books) thus on the Westermn the outer most Home Signal was the Home Signal (which tied in nicely with the Block Regulations).  The names of any other Home Signals depended on how many there were but normally the one most immediately in rear of the signal box was the Inner Home Signal and any between tthe Home and inner Home would normally have the word 'Intermediate' in their name.   I don't think I've ever come across a situation where there were more than two or three Home Signals and the latter was unusual but could happen because of the GWR's fondness for numerous stop signals protecting point work.

 

The signal immediately in advance of the centre of the 'box (even if it was almost opposite the 'box structure as in one example I knew of) would be the Starting Signal, naming of successive Starting Signals then depended on how many there were.  And here there could be differences which I suspect might have been influenced by distance for the 'box  (I can see no other logical explanation but we are talking about Western signalling) thus in one situation it went Starting Signal, Advanced Starting Signal, Outer Advanced Starting Signal.  But I have also come across Starting signal, Intermediate Advanced Starting Signal and Advanced Starting Signal.   Possibly things changed a bit over the years in this area of naming?   And of course this is also why in explanations the term Section Signal (for the most advanced Starting Signal or even for a Home Signal where there is only one stop signal) is far simpler to use than any other term or mixture of terms.

 

Now we come to actually positioning a Home Signal and in many cases the least important factor affecting siting is the presence of a station platform.   A Home Signal does nothing additionally to protecta station platform unless it is one to which wrong line shunts might be made and even then it is almost change for sixpence.  Why? - Simple - if the signal is not far in rear of the platform the block should still be at Train on Line when there is a train standing in the platform (and it would be highly unlikely that a Warning Acceptance for a following train would be authorised in such circumstances).  If there was any pointwork then inevitably there would be a stop signal to protect that , and (on the GWR) more than one if there was a succession of points needing protection.  

 

Another reason for providing a signal in rear of the platform might be to facilitate a Warning Acceptance in order to keep trains (perhaps not of all classes) moving during busy times when a full Clearing Point is not available in advance of that signal.  But in that situation, provided the block section was long enough, an additional stop signal would be provided to create a Clearing Point - and on the Western that would become the Home Signal (some other Railways/Regions would call it the Outer Home Signal but that term was not used on the Western for naming signals as far as i can trace thus far). 

Thanks Mike. That all seems very clear.

I'll ask you a couple more questions on PM, if I may, to avoid cluttering up this thread with tangential stuff.

 

[The Stationmaster]

1 minute ago, Harlequin said:

Thanks Mike. That all seems very clear.

I'll ask you a couple more questions on PM, if I may, to avoid cluttering up this thread with tangential stuff.

 

Go ahead Phil although I'm told we might shortly be heading to Tesco so you might not get an early reply

[RJS1977]

Is that a station building on the bridge? If so, the 'footbridge' would more likely be steps down from the booking hall to each platform, rather than a stand-alone bridge.

[Keegs]

9 hours ago, bécasse said:

Much better. I would, however, place the goods shed so that its road vehicle access faces the front of the layout - that may be what you intend anyway but it isn't clear from the plan.

 

Oops! I moved my track slightly in anyrail and the goods shed didn't move with it!

 

7 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

As far as the signalling is concerned I would keep the stop signal on the Up linewg here it is - excellent excuse reason for having a white painted sighting 'board' on the bridge structure,  a big rectangular patch of white paint.  You could possibly add another stop signal on the Up line back near the tunnel mouth as it would be much easier to sight as the Home Signal for an approaching train than the one by the bridge (which we can assume protects the yard point).

 

On the Down line I would move the Starting Signal ( which it most likely would be further from the platform end as it looks a bit contrived (to be near the platform end) as it currently is.  I'd go for trying to accommodate as much train length as possible 'on scene' for a train standing at that signal waiting acceptance - which is bound to happen some time!

 

the only thing which concerns me about the plan is the radius of the curve into the goods yard - are you sure it would s be suitable for propelling wagons into the yard?   BTW having the goods shed deck area and road access placed as suggested by 'bécasse' puts it on the town and access road side and makes more room for road vehicles to get to the middle siding.

Thanks again Stationmaster!

 

Adjusted slightly incorporating suggestions:

The only things in this that are pretty much set in stone now is the main line track plan and the signalling. There is still more work required to Adjust the town/goods yard and the station buildings. More detailed research is required on my part in order to make all of those things flow nicely!

 

Thanks again guys, the track plan is the most important part and I feel that is mostly complete...

 

@The Stationmaster would the one signal box(to the right of the bridge) be alright? Also if I were to add a level crossing(just a what-if at this stage!) at the left end of the platform, would that change the signalling at all?

 

 

Regarding the goods yard curve, it will look like this beyond the bridge(I think):

Unless you were referring to actual curve/headshunt that leads to the fiddle yard.... it's not too bad it's no less than R4 (572mm) I don't intend to run any 2-8-0s on it most likely, Hall, Mogul & Pannier

 

 

Thanks all!

[Michael Hodgson]

The connection to the yard would include a trap and there would be a signal into and out of it.

 

That last diagram is only a hypothetical (non-modelled) track plan and the track is in reality curving away towards a fiddle yard, using the bridge as a scenic break ?  I think that's why teh Stationmaster was worried about curvature and propelling moves.  The signalbox position as shown there looks typical to me, as the only points worked by the box would be the crossover and the access to the yard.  Wherever there's a level crossing, the box would ideally be next to that so the signalman can work it himself and they don't need to employ a crossing keeper, but that isn't possible given the location of the crossover as the rodding run would be too long.

 

Most tunnels are approached through cuttings, so level crossing right outside a tunnel mouth is unlikely - better for the road to go over the hill, though there's bound to be a few exceptions to that.  If the crossing is merely a private road leading to the goods yard (say, from Station Road on the Up side of the line), then it would only be used during business hours and could be worked by one of the station staff as required.  Some form of road access to the yard is a business requirement - but from the front of the layout somewhere would be preferable and much more likely.  If the crossing is a busy public highway, it would need a crossing keeper 24 hours (or less if the line closes at night).  Crossing would be interlocked with signals, and protected by Up Home and Down Starting signals.

 

Passengers have an unfortunate habit of opening doors when trains stop, so I'm not so sure about Mike's preference for moving the Up Home closer to the tunnel mouth, as you don't want silly sods getting out in tunnels - or falling off viaducts!  However I suppose it's going to be unusual for any train held there to be a passenger working.  If it's only a short tunnel I'm wondering whether the Home might be before entering it, but he knows a lot more about Western practice.

[Titanius Anglesmith]

3 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Wherever there's a level crossing, the box would ideally be next to that so the signalman can work it himself and they don't need to employ a crossing keeper, but that isn't possible given the location of the crossover as the rodding run would be too long.

In that case they might relocate the box next to the level crossing to get rid of the crossing keeper, and works the points from a ground frame instead. That’s exactly what happened at my local station, and several others on the line, when the Midland it over.