Signals

THE SIGNAL BOX


Railway signalling discussion

Swaynton Signal Box

For railway modellers to discuss and share ideas on realistic signalling arrangements.

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Brightspark » Thu Aug 17, 2017 4:59 pm

Yes mine downloads it. You click on the link and a little box appears on the bottom left of your screen. Then when you click that your anti-virus tells you that opening such things is unwise. What you should get is a word file.
I am wondering how I can post it, and the signal diagram as a picture.
John any advise as to format and do I need special permission?
When I learn something new, something old gets forgotten.
Brightspark
Crossing box
Crossing box
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:32 pm
Location: Woking

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby davidwoodcock » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:16 pm

I have added the Locking Table as a .jpg attachment to the RMweb site http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... ?p=2823948
davidwoodcock
Rest-day relief
Rest-day relief
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 7:58 am
Location: Champlon, Belgique

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Brightspark » Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:42 pm

Thanks David,
For some reason my PC set up won't let me do that.

Andy
When I learn something new, something old gets forgotten.
Brightspark
Crossing box
Crossing box
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:32 pm
Location: Woking

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Chris Osment » Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:21 pm

I have had a quick go at producing a L&SWR-style(-ish) locking table - well, what else does one do on a wet morning? - which I have uploaded here http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/temp/swaynton-locking.pdf.

Now I'll wait for everyone else to pick holes in it! :-)
Chris Osment
West Country Railway Archives
http://www.railwest.org.uk
User avatar
Chris Osment
Main line box
Main line box
 
Posts: 2264
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:32 am
Location: Somewhere in the West Country

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Brightspark » Fri Aug 18, 2017 10:00 pm

Thanks Chris,

I have updated my master with those changes. It will be interesting to see what comments there are.

I have been reminded that some time ago I had been given copies of the SRS files for Chiswick and Binegar. This was to help me with this project but I must admit that I had parked these as I could not relate the information to the requirements of Swaynton.
Both of these files are BR/SR drawings and having pulled them out again and with the help of the recent forum help, they now start to make sense.Ha! so I have an example of a LSWR/SR/BR table all along so really should have known better. Anyway I can now study them with a bit more understanding as to what I am looking at

The Chiswick file at first looks unhelpful as it shows the simplified layout of circa 1960. The sidings have been clipped back and the signalling simplified. However it does still have the locking table as this was still in place. What does make this table interesting is that the track layout is nearly almost the same as Swaying Admiral (and Hinton Admiral, New Milton and Sway). All I have to do reinsert the missing signals and overlay it onto the Swaynton diagram. Although an initial inspection looks very much as described in recent posts.

The Binegar file is even more interesting. Although the track diagram is different, it does contain the drawing of the locking bars. This is going to be very helpful with what has now become a very complex locking tray.

Andy
When I learn something new, something old gets forgotten.
Brightspark
Crossing box
Crossing box
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:32 pm
Location: Woking

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Andrew Waugh » Fri Aug 18, 2017 10:38 pm

Chris Osment wrote:I have had a quick go at producing a L&SWR-style(-ish) locking table - well, what else does one do on a wet morning? - which I have uploaded here http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/temp/swaynton-locking.pdf.

Now I'll wait for everyone else to pick holes in it! :-)


The only queries I have are:

1) I wouldn't expect crossovers 10 and 11 to lock each other. Any (shunting) move over 10 reverse towards 11 is protected by Home 3, and similarly Home 15 protects 10 for moves from 11.

2) Homes 3 and 14 become opposing signals when 10 is reverse with 9 normal. I would expect them to lock each other under that situation. However, this requires conditional locking, and I would be quite willing to accept that LSWR practice was not to provide this locking, particularly on older frames. It was difficult, if not impossible, to provide conditional locking on many older frame designs.
Andrew Waugh
Branch line box
Branch line box
 
Posts: 465
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:34 am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Brightspark » Sat Aug 19, 2017 4:30 pm

Hi Andrew,
I have just placed the missing point and signal numbers on the Chiswick drawing. (Chiswick signals with Prefix C and Swaynton with S)
The two crossovers there (C6 & C10 = S11 & S10) do not lock each-other. But there is a shunt signal (C12 on the yard side running line that is not on S) controlling (C10=S10) and another shunt signal (C5 = Not on S but would be beyond 11 after 3) that is locked when (C6=S11) is reversed.
Also the 2 outer starting signals, that is Up Advanced Starting and Down Starting, do not lock each-other when the main crossing is reversed.
So it looks like you may have something.

If you understand what I have said.

Any more thoughts please?

Andy
When I learn something new, something old gets forgotten.
Brightspark
Crossing box
Crossing box
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:32 pm
Location: Woking

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Brightspark » Sat Aug 19, 2017 4:45 pm

I have another question please.

Looking at the table produced by Chris and the tables for Chiswick and Binegar, I notice that the distant signals are not shown to lock the home & starting signals. But the locking tray drawing shows that when the distant is pulled off, these would be locked in reverse.
Am I missing something here?

Andy
When I learn something new, something old gets forgotten.
Brightspark
Crossing box
Crossing box
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:32 pm
Location: Woking

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby RDNA » Sat Aug 19, 2017 5:08 pm

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Post by Brightspark » Sat Aug 19, 2017 4:45 pm

I have another question please.

Looking at the table produced by Chris and the tables for Chiswick and Binegar, I notice that the distant signals are not shown to lock the home & starting signals. But the locking tray drawing shows that when the distant is pulled off, these would be locked in reverse.
Am I missing something here?

Andy


As far as I understand from reading the 'Green Book' a long time ago Andy, mechanical locking is considered to be 'reciprocal' i.e. if 1 is released by 2 and 3 then when 1 is reversed it locks 2 and 3 reverse in return.

Thus converses need not be shown in mechanical locking tables whereas they must be shown if the interlocking is achieved electrically with relays.

Hope this makes sense to you.

DB
RDNA
Branch line box
Branch line box
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Jan 1, 2012 9:39 am

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Brightspark » Sat Aug 19, 2017 5:14 pm

Thanks DB, something to look out for when I start on the locking tray.

Andy
When I learn something new, something old gets forgotten.
Brightspark
Crossing box
Crossing box
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:32 pm
Location: Woking

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Chris Osment » Sat Aug 19, 2017 5:55 pm

Be (very) cautious with Binegar - there were elements of earlier S&DJR locking from boxes such as Binegar provided in the 1880s/90s which I've not seen elsewhere on the L&SWR (yet), and gave rise to such things as rotational locking which would probably be irrelevant at Swaynton. Just because two layouts look the same does not mean that they were always like, nor that their locking was identical.
Chris Osment
West Country Railway Archives
http://www.railwest.org.uk
User avatar
Chris Osment
Main line box
Main line box
 
Posts: 2264
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:32 am
Location: Somewhere in the West Country

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Brightspark » Sat Aug 19, 2017 8:15 pm

Thanks Chris, I shall.

I have just posted on RMweb your beautiful table overwritten with what matches from Chiswick.
http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... ?p=2826207
As usual comments please?

Another Question should the locking table show what is locked by the block instruments? (3,11 &14 by the way)

Andy
When I learn something new, something old gets forgotten.
Brightspark
Crossing box
Crossing box
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:32 pm
Location: Woking

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Chris Osment » Sat Aug 19, 2017 8:28 pm

As mentioned elsewhere, given that 13PUSH is released by 7, and 15 locks 7, then there is no need for 15 to also lock 13PUSH. The other changes are for things which I thought might, or might not, have been done, so I'm relaxed about the changes :-)

My table was purely the Mechanical Locking. Earlier L&SWR diagrams had a separate Electrical Locking table added at the bottom in later years, while more modern SR versions had a ML table with the EL & Detection added to the right-hand side.
Chris Osment
West Country Railway Archives
http://www.railwest.org.uk
User avatar
Chris Osment
Main line box
Main line box
 
Posts: 2264
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:32 am
Location: Somewhere in the West Country

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby davidwoodcock » Sat Aug 19, 2017 8:55 pm

I think that Swaynton would still have had Preece's block instruments at the period of the model, a lot of ex-LSWR country main line did until more modern instruments were thrown up spare as a result of the introduction of c/l schemes for the two phases of Kent Coast electrification (1959/62).

I think that I am right in saying that Preece's instruments weren't (couldn't be?) interlocked with the signals, although a form of Sykes locking was used at certain locations which were considered high risk.
davidwoodcock
Rest-day relief
Rest-day relief
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 7:58 am
Location: Champlon, Belgique

Re: Swaynton Signal Box

Unread postby Chris Osment » Sun Aug 20, 2017 8:01 am

davidwoodcock wrote:I think that Swaynton would still have had Preece's block instruments at the period of the model, a lot of ex-LSWR country main line did until more modern instruments were thrown up spare as a result of the introduction of c/l schemes for the two phases of Kent Coast electrification (1959/62).

I think that I am right in saying that Preece's instruments weren't (couldn't be?) interlocked with the signals, although a form of Sykes locking was used at certain locations which were considered high risk.


I'm not sure whether to agree or not...... For example, there was Preece 1-wire left between Poole B and Broadstone until about 1970, tho' perhaps by then it was so much of a backwater that no-one bothered to change it. On the other hand, I think that all the Preece had gone from the Salisbury - Exeter line by the mid-1960s.

In general I would have said that I've not encountered any places where there was 'Line Clear' release with Preece, but I did find one diagram once which had that feature - but as its accuracy was in doubt for other reasons, I wouldn't use it as a basis to say that it did happen (if you see what I mean).

Going back to locking - I'm still in two minds as to whether or not 14 should lock 9. After all, if you have 10 reverse and a train moving from the Up to the Down main and proceeding past 14, then in effect 9 becomes a facing point in rear of 14, so ought it not to be locked normal?
Chris Osment
West Country Railway Archives
http://www.railwest.org.uk
User avatar
Chris Osment
Main line box
Main line box
 
Posts: 2264
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:32 am
Location: Somewhere in the West Country

PreviousNext

Return to Signalling - model railways/simulators

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest