Lacathedrale

37057 would make sense, and explain why in theory it was running light engine too. Thank you both, I'm so pleased!

Motive power finally arrives for Katharine Street courtesy of @justin1985 - I'm not wholly convinced by Dapol's BR Blue, so a repaint is forthcoming: Additionally, the latest Brighton Circle has a photograph of East/New Croydon showing the only picture I know of which depicts the PW yard in Fair field: The AC overhead gantries date this view to post-1923 and pre-1935ish (the gantries remained after cessation of OHLE in 1929 for a short period). We can still see a train of covered wagons in the approach of Central Croydon. The long building with roof vents behind the tracks is visible in the ground-level photograph up the page of this thread is visible, as is the tall signal gantry over the bridge on the main lines.

Thanks @hayfield - your turnouts (via eBay) were spoken about with glowing words at the Wealden P4 area group so I'm going to follow your advice to a T! I have re-read the section about chaired wing rail fixing and I think I get it better now: if fitting the diverging wing rail, you only fix the two S1 and one X chair which are parallel with the straight road, gauged up against the straight stock rail. When that's set, you then use a flangeway gauge to slide the rail towards or away from the vee to get the relevant gap, and then fix the diverging half-centre-check-chair-masquerading-as-a-B-chair to hold it at that position. I am pleased that there's enough grip in the chairs to hold the vee in position, I would have thought naively that the shallow angle would mean the rail could slide around and dislodge the location of the knuckle? The wing rail radius for my chosen prototype is between 14' and 21' - I'm not sure if that's practical to bend, I can't quite see how I'd manage to get such a shallow radius over such a short distance - one of those things that gets lost when scaling down?

Got the set put in and the other stock rail down. For now it's only fixed opposite the vee and on the plain track past the toe: Next job is to get the wing rails in - wish me luck!

I soldered up some 20 thou brass shim to the bottom of the blades under where the chairs will sit, then filed it flush with the inside edges of the rail: I understand it's common practise to leave these extended and use them to fix the wing rails in place, but unfortunately I do not have a jig to hold the vee in alignment with the wing rail while soldering, and I am using plastic timbers so can't do this in-situ on the turnout. Threading on the chairs for the plain rail, the check rail was bent up and referenced against the spare print out on the workbench: Though difficult to see, I soldered an etched fishplate to the end of the rail to carry contact to the exit road of the turnout from the straight stock rail. I used a steel rule onop of the chairs and against the head of the rail to keep that nice and straight Lastly, I threaded on some chairs (I am not using L1 chairs for my 'real' layout, so decided to not buy any - the ones shown are S1 chairs cut down), and using the S4S triangular and check rail gauge, aligned it with the stock rail. I nudged it around a little until I felt the blunt nose was in the correct position on the timber relative to the line printed on the template underneath, then fixed all with Mek Pak and superglue (for the nose)

It wasn't my intention to restart the thread, sorry - but since it's going ahead anyway, I may as well ask - On the first page you show a vee being constructed with various shim strip under where the crossing chairs will cover. On the top of Page 3 you show a monolith of copperclad soldered onto the vee. Is there a material difference in this? How you handle soldering the shim to the bottom of the vee without it desoldering the joint of the vee rails? in 2mmFS there's a handy jig to hold everything in place while the shim strips are attached. I notice in some builds you extend the shim wide enough to accomodate the wing rails, and built the assembly off the turnout, but in others you fix the vee and use functional chairs to set the wing rails - is there a method you would recommend?

Sorry for the thread necromancy! ignore this!

I'm not sure that I can explain P4 as Imperial except as the target of representation.. REA B8 using exactoscale components, 45' panels of 9' x 10" sleepers and a series of 12" timbers for the turnout. 1:8 bullhead, filed bent and filed again to ensure the web is central, held in a jig with an aluminium hair clip for Z-axis alignment Soldered up - needs a bit of tidying. The angle across the top is a reflection as I've attempted to put a very slight angle in the head of the rail as per prototype.

@Siberian Snooper - not a bad shout, not least because then you could see into the box instead of it being a plain wall!

I have built track with copperclad, with copper + etched chairs, and with plastic chairs in 2mm, 4mm and 7mm. The best solution IMO is copperclad with etched chairs, but I have only seen and tried this in 2mm and it is by far the most fiddly. I think there is a false sense of security with plastic components since they are familiar materials to a scale modeller and wagon-kit-basher. Generally one can de-solder and shove around rail and etched chairs on PCB fairly easily if they are out of gauge or alignment but the same can't be said of plastic. The 2mm Association have a book 'track: what it is and how to model it' which is very useful for any gauge and quite exhaustive, but @hayfield has put together a fair few series of photo essays on building them.

,,,and there goes another 40 minutes. I swear, I could watch videos on Buckingham all day.

Thank you Michael - the simple logic of the block indicators (as opposed to releasing levers) makes sense fairly directly to me. I have edited the order of actions in the original point becasse - parsimonous or no, I think I would like to include the relevant shunt signals as per Buckingham they can also be used as section and controller swtches? Obviously I'm not at that stage yet though...

Limit of Shunt - makes sense. Since we have the up main, there's no need for the shunter to use the down main. Re: slotting - so the red distant is released by the red home signal, but also slotted with the blue starter signal? Re: setting the home back to danger - for our purposes then, this means that the train should be past the signal box and essentially in a platform road before the home is re-set. Updated the list of tasks to swap the train out and home signal re-setting, and adding the acknowledgement of Train Out by Blue. Does 'Train on Line' lock any signals for either box? If 'Normal' locks the Blue starter and Red home/distants, what's to stop the Blue starter from already being in the wrong position?

Right - so I've got the order of home signal-line clear wrong. Thank you! I've updated the original entry to reflect that. In regard to your last point about a vehicle standing at the stops - in my era wouldn't this be controlled by a calling on signal (pulled off when the locomotive had come (nearly) to a stop at it?

The one defining event for me getting into model railways as an adult was getting off a Networker at Lee station just past Hither Green and being almost blasted off my feet by a burgundy EWS Class 37 powering through on the up line. I didn't take the number down, but in my mind it was something repettiive like 37037 or 37370 - though we are now talking almost twenty years ago so may have been completely different to that. I have in my possession an old 4mm/ft Class 37 and a set of detailing parts, and I thought it would be fun to try to model this locomotive - but I don't know anything at all about it - not even if it would have had a split headcode or what livery variant it might have been in. I appreciate this is vague as anything, but if anyone has any clues I would be most grateful.

May I please ask what the socket or connector going through the baseboard joint looks like? It's a simple hook and loop or something?

I posted a thread in the Signalling subforum to clarify the block sections for the layout plan and to confirm the specifics around pulling off home signals at a terminus - if you have to do it before you set line clear to allow the signal box in rear to pull of their starter signal - why bother having home signals at all?

Maybe 2019? Everything is blurring into one As you know, this layout has all the turnouts in one board also, so mechanical actuation would (hopefully) be fairly straight forward - but the signals are a little more widely spaced to unless I can figure out a reliable mechanical join for the runs will have to be servo operated.

I'm building a Minories station based on late 19th Century LNWR ex-LCDR SE&CR practise, and hoping to include some signalling on the layout. Cyril Freezer detailed his view of the signalling for Minories in his book Model Railway Signalling: However, I am looking to model beyond the platform home signals (1) and shunt signal (5) depicted in his diagram, as my layout will have a train-length curve between the throat of the station and the fiddle yard. I'm not sure which main line is better for the station's block section to extend into. Without further information, I believe the breakdown of block sections would look like this: A. Station Signalbox Block extends onto up Main I have made the following assumptions, please let me know if I'm mistaken! Due to the location of the two sidings, extending the block onto the Up Main makes the most sense, so the signal boxes do not have to negotiate a 'shunt into forward section' every time. The length of the block section and the provision of an advanced starter is to provide a full train length for the station pilot to shunt into. Because the advanced starter is present, there's no need for a limit of shunt board on the up Main, since a shunt signal from the two red sidings would only permit movements up to that section signal anyway. Cyril Freezer's signal gantry with the calling on arms would work for light-engine movements from the fiddle yard, but another shunt signal for backing movements from the Up Main into the platform roads by the station pilot will be required. Blue (FY) sending a train to the station: A Blue starter and Red home/distant signals are at danger by default Blue sends the relevant call to attention and train bell code, which are acknowledged by repeating by Red. Red sets 'line clear' which in modern times would unlock the red home and distant signals - but just by following rules in earlier periods - and sets route and signals. Blue signal box may now pull off its starter signal, and the Red distant signal may come off due to slotting if pulled by Red in the previous step. Blue signalbox sends a 'train entering section' bell code as it passes the starter. Red acknowledges by repeating the bell code and sets commutator to 'train on line'. Blue restores their starter to danger after the train is clear. After train is clear, Red restores his home/distant to danger and sends 'train out of section' bell code to blue. Blue acknowledges by repeating bell code. Red sets the commutator to 'normal', and the process can start again. I'm not 100% on the order of operations in the last few items, and what they block or permit, or are blocked by - it would be easy to make sweeping statements but I just don't know even after all the bloody books I've read! EDIT: I will put together a more detailed signalling diagram in due course for review, but for now I'm mostly focused on the location of the block sections and the handing of trains between them!

It pains me to know that you must have been standing behind Leighton Buzzard at the LFRM in 2020 and I didn't join the dots at the time, so you'll have to excuse that. I dearly wish one day I could see Buckingham in the flesh, maybe I can ply you with gateaux one of these days. RE: operator interaction, I think if you've got buy-in from both then that makes alot of sense. I've joined the local finescale group so between that and a few current friends, hopefully I may find some who are sporting enough. I think interlocking is definitely one of the things that would be added AFTER the layout is 'finished' as a way of extending the modelling and construction opportunities on an otherwise complete system. If I remember correctly there's an arduino sketch which you enter in a table similar to that shown in the original blog entry and it handles the locks and releases (albeit with flashing red lights and nothing happening, rather than a physical lock).

Yes, I follow Plumpton Green on YouTube and there's an awful lot of ringing. I think with an. accurate track plan, you can choose to add or omit signals, and with signals you can choose to add or omit bells - so you may as well see how it lands!

Thanks Andy, always learning on this one!

It's no secret that I have found a great deal of pleasure in talking with the frequent offenders of the 'Theory of General Minories' thread, one of the foremost contributors is @Harlequin, to whom I had the pleasure of sending some of the SECR stock from a prior layout attempt, via an ebay sale. He states an eloquent case in a completely unrelated Track Design & Layout Planning thread: I think we have covered the track plan to a greater or lesser degree fairly well already in this entry. But we haven't spoken much about the other - and one thing I absolutely did not expect out of railway modelling was the interest I've found in signalling, interlocking and the operation thereof. I'm sure many people are about to stop reading at the thought of signalling, but I think it is actually something of an unsung hero - you see, if you are to have correct signalling then your track plan will have had a certain degree of rigor applied to it. If you follow your signalling design, then you will by nature be operating authentically. Block Signalling as a way to operate calmly Think of the following scenario of an inbound train at Minories sans signals; your train pulls into a platform from one of your double track entry roads as it coasts to a stop the station pilot that was waiting on the other main line road catches up, couples up and pulls off the coaches, immediately pulling back and shunting them into an adjacent platform The pilot then uncouples and heads to the loco pocket again. The main line loco trundles up the platform and out back onto the mainline. Perfectly adequate but completely un-prototypical, but with signals and block working: The FY signal box calls attention to the Slaithwaite box with a single beat, then 3-1 bells (is line clear for an ordinary passenger train?) The slaithwaite box reviews the timetable, notes the platform allocation, train length, etc. and sets the route to the relevant platform road via lever frame, noting that the signals cannot be cleared until the turnouts are set, any facing point locks are also set. This blocks any potentially conflicting moves (and also the signals related to them), finally the slaithwaite box then replies with the same 3-1 bell code to accept the inbound train, and moves block indicator to 'line clear', allowing the FY signal box to pull off its starter signal and the Slaithwaite box to pull off it's home signal. As the train passes the FY signal box, the signalman calls ahead 2 bells (train on line) The slaithwaite box sets repeats this back, setting the block indicator to 'train on line'. The FY box is now blocked from clearing his starter signal (i.e. sending more trains) After a few minutes, the slaithwate box observes the train arriving, and once past its home signal, the signal is re-set to danger and the signalman sends 2-1 (train out of (your) section) to the FY box. The FY signalman acknowledges this by repeating it, the slaithwaite box now sets the block indicator to 'normal', so the process can be started again for another incoming train. In the meantime, the train now at the platform is uncoupled by the loco crew while passengers disembark. The train brakes are now fully engaged with no vacuum. Another series of levers are pulled to orient the pointwork for the pilot locomotive to come out of the loco pocket onto the down main up to the limit of shunt, and a shunt signal is cleared for that to happen. The LNWR used calling-on signals from the 1870's, so this is cleared to permit the shunter to enter an occupied section, and the couples up to the rear of the carriages, including building up the vacuum for the brakes to be released. More lever twaddling and a subsidiary shunt signal on the platform starter post is cleared, and another shunt move is permitted to the limit of shunt board on the main line, and as the shunter pulls back, the train locomotive also drifts backwards up to the platform starter, in clear view of the signal box. A final lever flourish sets the route and signals for the pilot locomotive to deposit the carriages in another platform road, before returning to the loco pocket. The main line loco needs coal and water, so the Slaithwaite signalman calls to the FY signal box 2-3 (is the line clear for a light engine?) and the first few steps are repeated in reverse for the light engine to dissapear up the line to the engine shed. I'm sure a cacophony of bells would drive even the most hardened operator to tears, so I am assuming a very soft tapper sound. The beauty of this system is that all the essential information for the exchange is provided: are you ready? what kind of train is it? are the points set correctly? Oh no, don't send another train - I'm still halfway through dealing with this one! In addition, the tempo of movement is kept leisurely and consistent - there is no speedrunning of the sequence. Signalling for Slaithwaite Road CJF in his book 'Model Railway Signalling' handily puts forward a suggested signalling plan for Minories: Model Railways Signalling credit CJF Slaithwaite Road obviously has an additional siding, this wil be controlled by the similar ground signal to No. 5 as noted above. Rather than a semaphore however, 4, 5 and 6 (the notional pilot loco spur) will be the LNWR Crewe 1881-pattern revolving type as pictured here : Greenfield circa 1954 credit to @coachmann Model Railways, June 1910 p185 Interlocking Interlocking as described above is the process by which moving a lever in a signal box may lock or unlock other levers. For example, in the diagram below, signal 1 is a distant signal - it can only be pulled off if both signals 2 and 3 are already pulled off. While it is clear, it locks 2 and 3 in their off position as well. Signal 3 and 13 are mutually exclusive, and pulling Signal 3 locks 7 or 12 in whatever position they're in. 7 and 12 both lock Signal 2 (the down home). Therefore, it is not possible to clear the down main home or distant, while either the branch connection or the crossover to the down main are in use. You can follow the chain of cause and effect around here and it's fastincating: Model Railways, June 1910 p186 The design of interlocking is also interesting - how to determine what blocks which movement and releases what others. It sounds straight forward, but it's not! The grouping of the levers is deliberate - note the down signals at one end, and the up signals at the other, with spare levers bracketing the up and down main turnouts away from the rest of them. Lots to figure out on that one!

Incase it didn't ping you, thank you @DavidLong @scottystitch and @Izzy for that feedback. Sometimes being in the weeds makes it hard to see how it's really taking shape. @Donw the layout is/was always going to be pre-grouping, so that is going to mean a fair bit of kit building and bashing whatever happens, Even someone like the SECR who are now well served by RTR are missing key locomotive types such as the Large and small Scotchmen, a Q, and all of the various SER and LCDR types which would have still been extremely common across the system, to say nothing of meaningful NPCS representation.

They didn't have it ready to go, but took it in their stride, @Jub45565 - I had originally considered a board that was double height, with the front and rear cut away to leave a viaduct/embankment base along the middle at the original track level, and they seemed prepared to do this - but I realised that was going to end up meaning paying for alot of laser cutting and CAD time that I could replace fairly with some celotex and ply.