British modelmakers

[wairoa]

Boxcar_jim yes thanks I did mean the Cl66 not the 60. Your also right of course about why OO is prevalent in the UK. I just sigh whenever I lash my 2 66s together.

[devils]

Nothing wrong with doubling up 66's, they do it on the new heavy coal flows up North and it's pretty frequent all over when they want to move an extra loco between yards.

With signalling it only gets complicated if you want to actually operate a complete railway with individual blocks, as has been said most layouts are too small to have more than one anyway. You can model the average station realistically with 2 starting signals and 2 home signals, ( the distants are usually too far out to fit in), and a couple of ground signals controlling the goods yard.

[MidlandPacific]

PS What's a Brit?  I'm English... I don't eat haggis, I don't wave leaks around at Rugby matches, I don't have a red hand or three legs and I drink warm Ale made with the right hops.  Ever tried telling a Scot he's "Scotch"?  Forget "god save the queen"... we had to borrow the Scotish lineage... "Send 'em back" is what I say.  Then again Liz is German and Phil is Greek... so they're pretty representative of our "multi cultural society".  I'd ratherput up with Liz than the presidents you've been lumbered with while she's been on the "throne".  OOPS!  Mustn't be "political". (Always wondered when I'd get to use that smiley! )

You can be English if you want - I'm British - at least we agree on the ale. (FYI - one half of me waves St George's flag and the other the Legs of Man), or maybe I'm just a citizen of the European Union ... oops mustn't be political now.

Now, Dave and Devils for heaven's sake will you leave the signalling stuff alone ... your making us all look like a bunch of ... err ... well ... train spotters?

On a more serious note I think you're right about few Brits actually understanding signalling and operating practice - just read back your posts and then wonder why? The basic details of block signalling is fairly straight forward, but applying the detail is impenetrable to the lay man. I'm guessing that one or both of you are in the industry. Researching that is way beyond what I'd consider fun, which if I remember correctly is the whole point of this hobby - right? Ah, yes that's something else British modellers seem to have forgotten ....

The other thing about British modelling is that layouts tend to be a) exhibition orientated b) much smaller. In an portable exhibition layout the emphasis on prototypical operation is replaced, to a greater or lesser extent, by the need to keep something moving for Joe public who paid to come in and watch the trains. Being smaller there is less railway to signal or need to understand the operating complexities, a few approximately correct looking signals is all it takes.

I operate both British and US models. The knew British models from Hornby and Bachman are just as well detailed as those from Atlas, Kato and P2k. Just make sure you are getting the knew models and not those from 10 years ago. Of course these knewer models are also significantly more expensive than their older and rather toy like predecessors. My biggest issue with OO is the size of it. I really wish Hornby etc would start building in HO. There is a big difference in size between a Bachman class 60 and it's Mehano equivalant. Oh yes the knew Mehano range is also excellent.

Its unsurprising that Hornby and Bachmann's British stuff is getting closer to US models - they are all made in the same factories in China. Yes there is a sizeable difference between 4mm and 3.5mm scales, problem is now that way too much of the "compromise" OO/HO been sold over the years to allow any commercial change to happen. Rivarossi (and someone else Jeuof or Lima?) tried some HO a few years back and it flopped - no-one would buy it in the UK. Mehano's class 66  (as far as I am aware Mehano don't do a Class 60 which is a rather different looking beast http://www.semg.org.uk/diesel/class60_1.html) is aimed at the European market where there loads of class 66's in service too.

Scale modellers in the UK tend to have gone the other way about adressing the out of scale rails problem - sticking with OO scale (1:76 4mm/ft scale) and altering the gauge - there are two schools of thought 18mm gauge EM, or Scale / Proto 4 - 18.83mm.

There's some very nice stuff out there - the kits look impressive.  The range of signalling equipment is especially interesting to me. 

You are absolutely right, away from the RTR stuff there are loads of craftsman kits about of, it has to be said, varying quality. Certainly many of these kits require a great deal of skill to build, far more than I have ever seen with any US kit in recent times. Now I'm not saying that's a bad thing its just emphasising a different aspect of the hobby.

Oh, that signalling stuff's just what I wanted, so it's OK by me. 

I'm interested in your description of the kits - what makes them different from American craftsman kits?  Extra machining required, building up components that are typically cast from smaller pieces? 

[steveblackledge]

Somebody wrote "British models are a bit toy like",,,,, do ANY American manufacturers make a ready to run model with Real Opening cab door's like Hornby do, when i went with american models in 2000 it was because the detail was better,,, but the Brit's are fighting back with some fantastic looking AND sounding models.

[Dave-the-Train]

Very briefly on the compexity issue... when I grew up with railways (vice trains in scenery) ("vice" is rail speak for "Instead of"... comes from the telegraph days - "cape" = cancelled and "Deepdene" = a Royal Train--- oops!  that's supposed to be secret) anyway... Back in those days '58 -'68 I guess not only were the trains there but the Editors of the magazines (Stephen-Stratten for one) had close railway experience and regularly found their way into signalboxes, MPD and anywhere else appropriate.  There were regular articles on what actually went on and people would soon pck up on obvios errors.  From the US mags I've been able to get -"Railroads" for the 50s and various mags like MRR and RMC from the late 60s on - this also applied in the USA.  I do accept that because of security it is much harder these days BUT too many modellers want to go with image, layouts they have seen and quick fixes.  I gave up on the UK scene primarily because i got fed up with people nit-picking over colour and rivets before turning to me ans wanting to know "where to put the signals"... but refusing to even contemplate the relevance of Block Signalling and/or traffic.  Regardless of the 1,000% precise detail they argued over on locos and stock they just wanted to plant non working signals of any kind and run trains.

That said, anyone that can get to an Epsom and Ewell Model Railway Club show and see their Ruxley Branch correctly worked by Electric token Block should do so.

One thing that is little wrtten about these days (and Editors don't want) is the feel of working the job.... but this is the essence of rail.  Would we ever bother to model the trains if we hadn't bothered to get line side and experience the real things?

[boxcar_jim]

Oh, that signalling stuff's just what I wanted, so it's OK by me. 

I'm interested in your description of the kits - what makes them different from American craftsman kits?  Extra machining required, building up components that are typically cast from smaller pieces? 

Maybe I've just been looking in the wrong places, but for example, appart from a couple of 60's era pieces I haven't even seen a modern day HO scale (I suspect that if you looked hard enough in O or S there may be some) US loco kit of the type one might expect in the UK. 

The type of "kits" I see many British modellers making can be little more than what could be described as a set of "scratch aids" i.e. a pile of photo etched brass and may be some cast parts - the rest is experience and modelling skill. And I'm talking from build or supply your own drive train, gearbox and wheels, make a fully operating compensated chassis from component parts, roll your own boiler from sheet, punch your own rivet detail, multiple layers of etched parts to solder, and so forth ... 

Even many rolling stock kits can be more complex than those offered say, by Funaro & Camerlengo or Westerfield. Again I am not saying this is wrong, its just a very different emphasis in the hobby. I have a few theories why this might be but I'll save that for later ...

I think Dave is quite right about the "rivet counting" mentality of a certain section of British modellers. One modeller I know recently built a 4mm scale photo etched "kit" for a LSWR platform sack barrow - it took him several hours to complete - I had difficulty even seeing some of the parts he was folding and soldering together. Yet to him it was important to build an accurate replica of a miniscule station platform detail.

Like Dave I found that some of these highly skilled modellers will argue furiously about minute construction details - like how many rivets there were in the side of a particular loco's tender, please not the "what colour was Midland Red" discussion again - but then totally ignore accuracy in some aspects of their modelling of which opertaion is a prime example.

There are several reasons I swapped to US modelling:it is possible to create a fairly accurate model using RTR and kits at a fraction of the cost of British or European models; generally it is about modelling the whole railroad in the landscape, including aspects such as operation, and finally I have no particular interest in (standard guage) British railways, maybe familiarity bred contempt ...

[Dave-the-Train]

But... Just what colour was Midland Red?

Did you know that Wolverhampton, Great Western Green was a more blue green than Swindon's?

And, as everyone know's, the yellow ochre colour used on LBSC locos was called "Improved Locomotive Green".

[Eddie_walters]

The type of "kits" I see many British modellers making can be little more than what could be described as a set of "scratch aids" i.e. a pile of photo etched brass and may be some cast parts - the rest is experience and modelling skill. And I'm talking from build or supply your own drive train, gearbox and wheels, make a fully operating compensated chassis from component parts, roll your own boiler from sheet, punch your own rivet detail, multiple layers of etched parts to solder, and so forth ...

I'd say calling them "scratch aids" is perhaps unfair. Kits from someone like Martin Finney (http://website.lineone.net/~cbwesson/4mm.htm) are very cleverly designed, and if assembled to the instructions will produce a fine model the equivalent of any brass model available in the US. There's a lot of work in it, but you're not given a pile of parts and told "get on with it".

[MidlandPacific]

Those Drummond T9 4-4-0s are real beauties - that Drummond wasn't Dugald Drummond, the Loco Superintendent for the North British, was he? 

As a matter of interest (Dave or Devils), do you know of a good book on constructing interlockings?  I have decided to start by designing one for a junction on my model railroad, but the instructions in the model railroading literature here in the States are a bit sketchy.  The guy at MSE recommended a couple of older engineering texts, but so far, I haven't been able to find them anywhere.  Is there a good book for the modeler in Britain?

Another reason British railways are so fascinating for the American - the scale of the civil works.  In the States, you usually find massive masonry works only on in the Northeast - Starrucca Viaduct, or the Pennsy's Main Line. 

http://www.forgottenrelics.co.uk/index.html

 

[Eddie_walters]

Yes - it was the same Drummond! Those kits are beauties - there's a large investment of time, but you'll end up with a superb result when you're finished. Did you notice there's working inside valve gear available for them?

[MidlandPacific]

Yes, I did see that - remarkable - the inside motion gives the engine a very clean appearance, but it must have made maintenance a real bear.  I saw the Duke, 4-4-0, and thought for a second that it was the Highland Railway's engine of the same name, before I realized it was a GWR model. 

Time is the one thing I'm short of right now - got a toddler and another one on the way, so it's an hour or two in the evening, most days.  I'm thinking for right now that I'm going to concentrate on putting an interlocking into my existing system, and perhaps build a few British models to learn something about the differences - I picked up a secondhand copy of John Ahearn's "Miniature Locomotive Construction" awhile back, and it was very instructive - the differences between British and American practice are fascinating. 

BTW - anyone know of any good publications from the UK on interlocking construction?  Andrew Hartshorne at MSE recommended a couple of reprints of professional manuals on the subject, but I'm still looking for them.  Is there anything out there for the hobbyist?

[Dave-the-Train]

I've never seen any publication telling anyone how to make an interlocking... which is partly because I've never bothered to look.

My Dad had two small frames (in about 1/10 scale) that were interlocked... he bought them from the estate of someone who died about the same time he completed a life's work filing up the parts...

I have got all sorts of stuff hidden away on numerous designs of interlocking.

The bad news for you is that almost every major railway had its own Chief Signal Engineer who designed his own patent system.  Then there were numerous Signalling supply companies like Mackenzie and holland... who had their own systems... followed later by people like Westinghouse.

Most larger books of pictures of British railway signalling will have shots in the underframe and of the locking trays.  These should go a long way to scaring you off.

The most common type of interlocking was (I believe) tappet interlocking... good luck if you go that way... you'll need it.

The design that looked easiest for modellers to adopt to me was one for which I have never been able to find any name or drawings but that I have a heap of photos of SOMEWHERE.  This used rotating segments on shafts perpendicular to horizontal rods that came out under the face of the frame below the signalman's feet.  Access was by trap doors in the Box floor.  I suspect that this system was very early and probably unique to the SECR.

You say that you are thinking of interlocking what you already have... is this a US layout or a UK layout?  There is a HUGE difference both in layout design and interlocking practice.  IIRC apart from Westinghouse (and predecessors) you would want to search looking for "Railway Signal Supply Co." for US stuff.  I'll see what else I can find/recall.

Can you post your track plan?  (Specifying whether the layout is UK or US.

Most UK track plans for conventionally interlocked layouts would be pre 1980 and would have an absolute minimum of facing points - very likely none.  Looking at pics will give you a general impression.  IIRC there were three books on GW Branch Line Modellling published c1985-90.  GW practice is distinctive but within the broad guidelines of the BoT/MoT.  Reading these and studying the pics would be an excellent place to start... all you'll need to do then is to learn Single Line Working by Electric Token Block.

I'd suggest staying clear of Sykes Rotation interlocking and Sykes interlocking of Block Instruments with the Signals

If I went down the interlocking path I would find someone with electronics knowledge and do it by solenoids and circuits rather than mechanically.

Once you've got a layout right you then have to figure out the interlocking chart.  This can take months for a medium sized layout if you aren't familiar with what you are doing... and everything has to be checked and re-checked.  You not only have to be able to lock things you have to be able to release things...

A book to look for (if you can afford a copy) Would be "Rayner Wilson" (Or Raynar Wilson) "Railway Signalling" of c1905.  You might get a copy for £100+ at Sotherby's if your lucky.  If you can find "The Engineer" or "Engineering" - published in the UK - (don't recall which) everything in the book was serialised over a couple of years in whichever one it was... the former I suspect.  One of your older university libraries might have it.  (Or library of Congress).

If you were in London and contacted them first the Inst. Mech Engineers in Birdcage Walk might let you look at their copies.  A "Keeperage" fee would probably be payable these days.

[Dave-the-Train]

IIRC Stroudley of the LBSCR came from the Highland -or went there? - Look at the "trade mark" cab roofs on his locos.  Stanier went from Swindon to the LMS and moved the Walscharts (spl?)Valve Gear from inside the frames to where it belonged on the outside for his Black Fives which resulted in the classic BR Standard Classes up to and including the 9Fs.  The GW had the gear in the wrong place because Churchward designed a perfect valve scissors gear of his own which only had one fault... it could only be adjusted with the boiler off the loco.  (Don't say "typically British"  NASA do the same sort of thing - or spend billions on a pen that will write in space while the Soviets keep using pencils).  Anyway... the quick solution to the valve gear problem was to stick in a tried and tested linkage while nobody was looking.  Shifting it back outside where it belonged would have given the game away.  I suspect that it was a real pain to work on... but - unlike the A3 Pacifics on the LNER the GW 4-6-0s didn't keep running hot bearings. (Yes, I know the Pacifics were 4-6-2s).

[MidlandPacific]

Kalmbach actually published a book called "The Model Railroader's Guide to Junctions" a couple of months ago, and they have instructions on how to build a tappet interlocking.  It was complex, but it didn't look like it was impossible.  There was only a brief section on what they called the logic of it, the business of figuring out which signal and switches are interlocked.  I wanted to see whether I could accomplish it with the relatively simpler American practice first.  The biggest difficulty is planning, particularly getting the interlocking logic right. 

The junction I have is not large, but it's a bit more complicated than is perhaps ideal - two lines converge, then diverge, so there are four routes into the plant.  There eight possible routes through the plant (and there's a passing siding incorporated, so that eight rises, in terms of movement through the plant, to twelve possible routes).  On the diverging route, there's a trailing-point crossover that connects with the original main, making both a passing track for the diverging route, and a second point of departure from the main, if that makes any sense - four switches, all told.  I've been experimenting with plans, and I think (with some simplifications for the model railroading world) that it's going to settle at 21 levers, two for each switch, one for a crossover, and one for each distant and home signal.  I know you would really want a signal arm on the home signal for each possible route, but I'm thinking I'm just going to simplify it so that a clear board means a clear (i.e., opposing signals set and switches locked) through the plant. 

[jon grant]

But... Just what colour was Midland Red?

 

 

The same colour as North Eastern 'red' - Duhhh!!!!

 

BTW - nothing in the photo is RTR. There's an awful lot more to British outline modelling than Hornby and Bachmann (UK) 

 

Jon

[Dave-the-Train]

GOOD LUCK! MP

First stage of the logic is

• that Distants cannot pull without all the Stops they apply to having been pulled.
• you can't pull for a route without it being set - and probably proved
• you can't pull an opposing route
• you can't pull a conflicting route (i.e. no sideswipes or centre-punches)
• Before you set some routes you have to set some routes that would oppose or conflict - this is part of what is called "flank locking"... in other words you can't creep in from the side.
• once a signal is cleared any switches on the route it is cleared for are locked as they are.
• once a signal is cleared opposing and conflicting routes are locked so that they cannot be moved to allow an opposing or conflicting movement
• Ground discs for back-up moves are locked the same as Stops - just going the other way.
• ground discs are as much locked for opposing and conflicting moves as Stops.
• any route to/from or between main tracks is as much locked up as any route in or between main tracks.

 As far as I recall my locking charts had columns reading L to R -

• lever number
• lever name
• lever job
• locks levers - normal*
• locks levers - reversed*
• requires levers - normal*
• requires levers - reversed*
• You can duplicate the last four by listing for "lever normal" and "lever reversed".

 * some levers will want combinations of locking that vary... so a ground disc for a back up move may allow moves on more than one route... in this case it will require certain levers N and others R and will lock others N and R when pulled ... on one route - but the combination will be different for a different route.

This is just off the top of my head after years of not looking at the subject.  i don't even know if the work I did survived two house moves and various "stuff" purges.  Every locking chart is specific/unique.  We didn't have forums like this back then and I wasn't aware that anyone would be interested so the stuff has probably largely gone.

[Dave-the-Train]

But... Just what colour was Midland Red?

The same colour as North Eastern 'red' - Duhhh!!!!

 

BTW - nothing in the photo is RTR. There's an awful lot more to British outline modelling than Hornby and Bachmann (UK) 

Jon

You'll be burnt at the stake if they catch you!

Care to explain that nice array of signals for MP?

[MidlandPacific]

AH, see - there you go.  You've already given me more than I had before.  The Junctions book just listed the stuff that was locked when you reversed a signal from the default "danger" setting.  Some of this I figured out trial-and-error (for instance, switches when set in their normal (i.e, not reversed) settings need to lock converging routes, but the locking chart you suggested is very helpful.

Oddly enough, I find this all very interesting.  Probably should see a doctor or something. 

[MidlandPacific]

AH, Jon - was that you that posted the photo some time back of the WWI-era soldiers crossing a bridge in the snow?  If so, you've come to the right discussion - I'm interested in the pre-Grouping era.

[Dave-the-Train]

AAAAAAAAARGH!

 Okay... quick approach.

1. line draw your track plan and signals.
2. decide location of signal box.
3. decide whether the frame is a front frame or a back frame (see above).
4. Put in blob for signaller... this is you.
5. Left most lever is 1 and corresponds to the furthest left signal.  Usually the Distant for trains coming from the left.
6. run through the signals on the primary route to the last one on that route.
7. If it's a facing junction going L to R you now do the Stop signals starting at the left most for the diverging route which will be the bracket signal (or equivalent).
8. Go through to the last signal for that route.
9. All the above have been Stops except #1.
10. Now go to the other end and repeat the exercise counting down R to L.  NB the highest number will be the R to L Distant on the Main. PLUS you may get a second Distantseveral levers into the frame as you start the signals coming in on the converging route.
11. All your point and FPL levers are going to be clustered in the middle - in the majority practice - although... just to be awkward, I did have a Box (Crowborough) where the Running Signals were in the middle and the varios yards at both ends.
12. You would get clusters for crossovers, yard connections and their related dummies in groups either side or all one side or the other of the points-in-the-main levers.  For your purposes you decide - you might end up making some adjustments.
13. What you are setting out to do is walk through the frame to go from all levers N to set a route (if not already set) to evers reversed to set and clear the route you want.  You need to imagine yourself standing at the frame and moving up and down to stroke the levers - i.e. pull them from N (back in the frame) to R.... HOWEVER some levers at a junction will usually sit R... this applies especially to FPLs.... An FPL conventionally MUST be pulled/R to lock the FPL on the ground... so to pull for the Main it must be R and to pull for the Branch it must be R.  A signalman will leave it back in the frame if he has to keep setting the route unless his SBIs tell him it must be set for the Main.  Where most trains go through the Main he will usually have it pulled/R locking the points set for the main.  this means that to set for the branch he must forst replace the FPL lever to N, then pull the points and then re-pull the FPL lever.  With the FPL R for both routes it is the points lever that must lock or release the appropriate Stop Signals. On your locking chart you will get the FPL number in the "required Normal" column to allow any movement of the points.  The FPL lever will also also show the points as locked by it in both positions.
14. Are you with me so far??????
15. Once you've worked through the Main one way round you work the other way.
16. then you do the branch one way.
17. then the other
18. then crossovers one way
19. the other way
20. then other connections one way
21. the other
22. where possible a crossover (trailing) will have a dummy numbered one side, the crossover lever and then the opposite dummy number.... but then you get the arrangement of a trailing point in one road... movement back acrosss it allows a route into a single switch which will put you onto the opposite main or into a yard.... so you need to control the single set of slips and the points in the yard... and all their signals...

have fun.

[Dave-the-Train]

On a crossover or a slip worked by one lever the end near the box is the A end while the far end is the B end.  If you have three ends they are A,B C working from the box.  4 ends A-D etc.

Of course when you get into the yard you might have a Double slip worked by the Box...

Enjoy!

[Dave-the-Train]

Have you considered the effect of adding a gated (or barrier) level crossing next to the box?

[MidlandPacific]

I will - I think your suggested table will help a lot. 

No double slips - this is complicated enough as it is!

[MidlandPacific]

Have you considered the effect of adding a gated (or barrier) level crossing next to the box?

NOPE!  It's complicated enough as it is.  I don't think that was ever common practice here; mostly just crossing shanties with a watchman in the city, and a pair of crossbucks out in the country.  Even now you can find a lot of crossings without protection in rural areas.   

I think even the biggest interlockings here were pretty small by British standards - Zoo interlocking in Philadelphia, which was pretty big, had 99 levers. 

[jon grant]

Of course you can always mix-and-match - American on British layout

 

Jon

[andrechapelon]

Of course you can always mix-and-match - American on British layout

 

Jon

Kinda reminds of an exhibition I went to some years ago. IIRC, it was in Horsham. There, right before my eyes, was an Athearn SD40-2 painted up in Network Southeast livery. Looked pretty good too. 

Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow?

Andre

[CAZEPHYR]

The dominant scale here in the UK is OO-4mm to the foot but the more recent models should run on smaller code track,say 75 or 83.Code 100 should allow anything OO to run.

Don't expect really detailed models like you get in the States,that has'ent really happened over here yet,one of the reasons I changed to HO American some 10 years back.

Regards

Steve

 The track is about the same except the scale is not 1/87, but 1/76 if I remember the scale correctly.  The smaller sizes of their prototype locomotives still look fairly large since the scale is larger.  The detail for most UK models is fair but not highly detailed. 

 Most of the UK locomotives are about eleven to twelve feet in height, compared to most of our locomotives being about 15" to 16' 6" for the tallest locomotives.  

We toured the UK and rode behind one of their A4's and several other classes.  They are really great engines and most of the branch line museum type railroads really are interesting.    I went to a model train show at the Expo in Birmigham UK a few years ago and really enjoyed talking to the modelers and vendors at their show.  

 

[jon grant]

 

Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow?

 

Howzabout Stephenson's Rocket in Conrail Blue

 

Jon

[andrechapelon]

 

Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow?

 

Howzabout Stephenson's Rocket in Conrail Blue

Jon

 Now that's just sick. You should have painted it in Chessie colors.

Andre

[MidlandPacific]

 

Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow?

 

Howzabout Stephenson's Rocket in Conrail Blue

 

Jon

Didn't the original come with the actress on the footplate?