Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 20 of 71 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi,

I have searched and located this thread topic before and seen the books that have been recommended. I however am still struggling to get to grips with adding modern signalling to my layout! I was hoping that a few kind people would take my included track plan and help me roughly position standard type modern image signalling (hopefully readily available on the market) in a reasonably prototypical position! I am also not very good at understanding the types so an indication to the type of signal in that position would also be very helpful. I have also uploaded a few photos (although blurry) of the layout at present!

Many thanks in advance to those that can help!

Jason









 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
I think we need to know a bit more about the function of the sidings before we can start giving advice.
(i) What is the purposeof the three shortish sidings on the front left? ie Engine shed, (sorry, depot!), goods sheds or a private works or....?
(ii) Why do they have their access via a separate line from the 'main line'?
(iii)What is the purpose of the three sidings front right which are accessed only by a reverse fron the bay platform?
(iv) What is the purpose of the two sidings on the right side accessed directly from the main line?

Also, re the through platforms - most modern prototype stations would have the through platforms bi-directional for greater operating flexibility and that means more signals would be needed.

If you can put some more information on the diagram and repost it, that would help.

Also are we talking about a surburban station with many commuter trains and few fasts, or a small town station that would have both fasts and some commuter trains? These are all factors which would affect the choice of signals on the prototype.

Regards,
John Webb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
John, I have added some information directly relating to your post questions and this is included below. I am sure that some of the sidings are not prototypically set out as I am no expert! I therefore am not going to get an entirly prototypical signal system but then again I am only looking to get the correct feel and types of signals that would normally be present on a modern image layout. I am also only looking to use the standard light signals available on the market.

Many thanks for any help you can give

Jason

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
Thanks for that - does help quite a bit.

I'm not certain from the photos if your track is already fixed or if you've just laid it out as a trial run of the layout. If it is all fixed then OK, we'll work from there; if the latter then I'd like to suggest a couple of modifications to it to reflect the practices of the last couple of decades.

Regards,
John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
it is all fixed and wired in! to be fair i very much enjoy creating model railways but i am by no means someone who runs and operates with any form of realism but just for my enjoyment! depending on how drastic the alterations i would consider anything from those who know better! I would rather alter now whilst the track is not ballasted! Wiring and track pins can be removed and replaced! It is all DCC so alterations will not change anything just change droppers.
Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
OK - I'll work with it as it is, but if there is any chance of the diamond cross-over (where the line from the bottom bay platform crosses over the line to the engine shed) being replaced with two points......
The reasons for this are that
(i) for the last twenty years or so diamond crossings have been kept to a minimum on the prototype;
(ii) to get a DMU out or into the sidings, the bay platform has to be clear of stock, which means the platform cannot have a train left in it; if there were two points instead of the diamond, the approach to the engine shed could be used as a head-shunt (as it would be in the prototype) allowing the platform to hold a train indefinately.

Two other coments:
1. Regarding the top bay platform, how do you get a train into it from the 'anti-clockwise' main line? It really means that that bay cannot be used for arriving passenger trains as they would have to make a shunting move - which isn't allowed on the prototype. The only way I can see of overcoming this is to alter the two points at the end of the upper island platform to face the other way. Any chance at all of a photo showing the whole of the track from the ends of the platforms to the right-hand side of the road bridge? That would help quite a bit.
2. The line from the 'Future Yard' only feeds trains onto the lower through platform, so that will be have to be bidirectionally signalled as well.

I'll try and post something with signals on in the next week, hopefully at the coming weekend.

Regards,
John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
thankyou John for taking the time and helping me! looking at the layout diagram i can see the problems you are describing! im unsure how exactly your alterations are to be made mayb a quick sketch might help me once ive uploaded some more photos. I am at uni and the layout is at my parents house. I am returning this weekend and on friday afternoon will be able to take them to aid you. I look forward to seing your recomendations.

Regards Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
Noted - I'll await with interest. If you can take a picture as 'square-on' and as high as possible that would be of considerable help - your existing pictures just seem to leave a critical bit out despite their otherwise excellent coverage. By the way, what subject(s) are you studying (as a former student myself!)?

Regards,
John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
ill try! the square on bit might be difficult as the room is in a barn and the roof slopes across the layout not far above! i am studying a BA in Architecture (First Year) so im fresh to the uni stuff although work load is stacking up already!

Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
i am having fun trying to get a good picture for you! due to the roof issue im stitching some photos together! Hopefully be able to get them up tonight.

Regards
Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
All noted - I look forward to seeing them! I'm retired from Building Research, by the way - used to be on the scientific staff there, so I have a working knowledge of architecture.

Regards,
John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
All noted - I look forward to seeing them! I'm retired from Building Research, by the way - used to be on the scientific staff there, so I have a working knowledge of architecture.

Regards,
John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Ahh thats interesting! I think ive managed to stitch them together fairly well! if you compare with layout diagram should all match ok! Ive put a couple of images in as well of the layout from further away to get an idea of length and the roof problems i have for taking plan shots! I look forward to seeing your ideas!

Regards
Jason





 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
the stitched image hasnt come up very large! its not very good quality if you save the image either... what other ways could i post it so you could download it at a larger file size?

Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
if you find it isnt a big enough file size to zoom in on i could email you a full size version. im sure we could sort it out! Many thanks for your help

Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
Right - some suggestions for possible modifications.

The easy one (?) at the 'West' end of the layout:


The reason for suggesting the extra cross-over is to allow trains from the 'Future Yard' line to gain access to the bi-directional platform line; otherwise the lower through line will have to be bi-directionally signalled as well.

The more complex suggestion at the 'East' end:
Crossover 1 takes trains to and from the South Bay line, but as sited cannot use Crossover 2 to get onto the 'clockwise' (outer) mainline, for which reason you need cross-over 3.
But light engines on the outer main line need to make a number of shunts to get onto the Loco line.
Likewise DMUs can only get to the lower DMU sidings via the South Bay platform.
Diamonds are not a favoured track formation on the modern Prototype; they are expensive to maintain and the track-circuiting and signal interlocking is, I understand, more complex.
There is no way in which a train on the inner (anti-clockwise) mainline can proceed direct into the North Bay.


By removing Crossover 1 I think you could use the two points to replace the diamond crossing. This still gives direct access from the inner mainline to the South Bay, and also allows the loco line to be used as a head shunt to the lower DMU sidings, while still allowing access to/from the South Bay.
Locos and trains from the loco shed and the South Bay can use the cross-over further to the 'East' (not shown on the diagram, but is on your sketches and photos above) to get to the outer main line.
Replacing Crossover 3 by a facing crossover allows trains on the inner main line to get to the North Bay, also DMUS to/from the sidings as well as other platforms with the minimum of shunting. Also light locos on the outer main can cross onto the inner main and then reverse back up to the Loco line with only the one shunt movement.

I do stress that these are suggestions only; the layout as it is is pretty good (I like the non-straight platforms particularly!) but just lacks a little flexibility which I think would be unacceptable from the prototype operations side.

Let me know in due course what you decide to do and we can then look at possible signal positions.

Regards,
John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Looking first at the complicated alterations to the 'east end' of the layout, i have drawn a detailed close up diagram of the point layouts as 'current'. The alterations to the south bay and loco line are very easy to alter. The change to a facing cross-over are a little more complicated given the space between other points... I am obviously looking at this from the 'alteration' side rather than rip up and start again! I certainly feel though that the three main alterations should be done and i can see the operational benefits! Below are a few diagrams that are hopefully self explanatory. Thankyou very much for your help, its good to be able to hear other peoples opinions and ideas as it develops a better design!

Regards Jason







 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
all of the points apart from the medium radius point as indicated is either a left or right hand standard large radius peco point code 100... these are Radius: 1524mm (60in)
Angle: 12 degrees Length: 258mm (10 1/8in)

SLE88 or SLE89 (peco product code)

Thankyou for your help, this has gone more indepth than i imagined but is looking to solve some very useful issues

Regards Jason
 
1 - 20 of 71 Posts
Top