Hartleyburn Colliery

[charliemiller77]

Hello all.
This is my first time asking for assistance so not sure how this all works.
I have been building a layout at home to run NER electric 1904 stock on.
Being used to operating layouts with mechanical signalling and interlocking ( Port Solway and Eccleston) I decided I must go down the same route.

I have purchased 3 kits of the Mark II lever frames plus locking and so far I'm finding them a time taking exercise but they go together very nicely with a lot of care taken.
All credit to Howard Bolton for a well thought out pair of kits.

I've had some assistance learning about signalling and interlocking, from John Thompson particularly, but he is not familiar with the GWR 3 or 5 bar system that the kit is based on , so I wonder of those "in the know" could look over the plans and let me know if it is looking correct.?

Signalling%20Locking%20chart.jpeg

Dog chart.jpeg

There are no facing points, and the NER may have still used Harrison Wedges to lock points at the time which worked off the point lever itself.
The siding point no.9 is worked from the box, a.) because I prefer it to, and b). as it's going to be on electrified siding I don't want to kill a shunter.

Hope someone will help me with this!
Charlie

[JFS]

Hello Charlie,

Since you were kind enough to mention my name ...

I have not checked the chart nor the locking in all details, but I have checked that you have avoided the conflicts in the kit's way of doing things and it looks good and you have correctly created the Both-Ways locks 'using' the copnflict - well done to you and John!.

One detail I did spot is that I think there are ways of economising on metalwork: I would personally do the 5,7 R by 6 and 5 L 7 by using a butt and put it lower down where there is plenty of space. The same applies to 8,10,11 and 9 EW - I have a feeling that there is a fair bit of scope for economy here.
Well done BTW for avoiding the pull-between!

I am sure you and John know what a butt looks like, but a pic here for others:-

BUTT 2.jpg

Just a couple of quick queries:-

Is there a particular reason why 6,10 not lock 2 as well as 3? and also why does 13 not lock 5 given that 7,11 lock 4?

Looking forward to hearing how the construction goes - good luck!

Best Wishes,

[charliemiller77]

Hello Howard
Thanks for looking at this and sharing the butt lock which I’ll take a look at and see how I get on.
Signal 2 , I was originally thinking it would operate under rule 39a (not sure where I came across it ), I believe that it means a train passing the distant no.1 at caution would be seen by the signalman near 2 at danger then be cleared to 3 which is still on normal , and therefore be allowed into the station under control if there happened to be a shunt crossing the line ahead. For example an electric parcel van could be departing the dock and reverse over 6 while a stopping passenger approached on the up line ?
Maybe that’s not allowed ?
13 L5 is an oversight but easily put in I hope.
I had it in early versions.
So far I’ve just about made the15 levers , frames and catches but yet to start on the locking !
Signals 1,2 and 13 are all off the scenic section and are there to make the frame more realistic. I might put some led indicators in the fiddle yard to verify they are at danger / caution or clear.
Once I’ve got time I’ll post my revised draft.
Cheers
Charlie.

[Chris Pendlenton]

Charlie,
Good to hear your project moves forward. I'd leave Howard to the locking itself but would only offer a couple of comments re the signalling layout. It is best if such comments were made in rather fuller awareness of the traffic aspects of the layout.

If the green roads are non passenger carrying sidings/ docks then you don't need a full stop board (no 8) controlling the exit, a sub will do as the Up Starter is ther to protect the section ahead. If however there is a colliery branch coming off there through No 9 points then more signalling is needed. You can't really have No 9 points in the frame without associated ground signals. After all this is the NER and the District S&T Engineer has his prestige to think of. If the green road is to act as a bay platform then the signalling needs to be beefed up to reflect this.

Your supposition about an Up train being signalled into the station while a fouling main to main move is in progress is correct. It would be acceptefd from box in rear under Reg 5 Warning Acceptance and be brought almost to a stand at No 2 before being allowed forward slowly to No 3. However the way you have drawn the plan suggests there is damn all platform available before coming up against No 3 protecting the crossover.
As Reg 4 acceptance requires 1/4 mile unobstructed clearance beyond a home board it seems that when the crossover is reversed trains in both directions would need to be accepted under Reg 5.

Signalling layout design is a complex and interesting subject, full of regulations but I used to find many examples where normal practice was varied and operations covered by the box's "Special Instructions", which of course is a gift to the prototype for everything"school! And I once had to discipline a signalman at Castleford who accepted a train right up to the platform starter (there being no home signal) just ahead of a dmu crossing in front of it on a layout just like yours.

I greatly look forward to seeing your electrics in action.

All the best

Chris

[grovenor-2685]

Not being a North Eastern expert these comments are essentially generic.
I think your locking table is causing some confusion/duplication by having the extra column for 'locks N or (R)'. The 'locks N' column is usually just a 'locks' column as the N is implied by definition, and locks R is already covered in the 'released by' column. Some designers do provide a column for 'locks both ways' which may be what you intended? Others would just put the both ways entries in the 'locks' column.
Having both the 'released by' and 'releases' columns is helpful for checking converses and is sometimes done but many designers just provided one or the other.

Particular comments (some already made by others).
2 locking 6 and 10.(and vice versa) With the points so close to signal 3 then it would be usual to include that locking to guard against a collision from ill judged braking and there is no evident benefit from leaving it out. Rule 39A is not an excuse to omit the locking and would apply anywat to any arriving train if line clear has not been obtained and 4 is at stop.
5 locks 13, and vice versa, should be included.
5 should just lock 7, not 7 with 6R as both 5 and 7 are released by 6 (same for 7 locks 5).
7 locks 11 and 11 locks 7, this lock is not required as it is just duplicating '6 locks 10'.
8 locks (10), should not be shown in the locks column, already covered by '8 released by 10' (same for 11).
13 locks 6 and (6), should be presented the same as for 4, ie in the 'both ways' column if you keep it.

For points 9, if you are just putting in the frame for convenience and they should be handpoints then remove the locking on 8. If you believe they should be in the frame then include '11 locks 9 (9)' as well. Or follow Dave's suggestion and include two more signals so 9 is fully protected.

I have not looked through the dog chart yet but I would suggest sorting out the locking table first.

[JFS]

Hello again Charlie, and good to see you here Chris!

Just to say that I agree with what Chris is saying. I had 'sort of assumed' that 9 was in reality a hand point worked from the frame for modelling convenience - I know of others who do such things - in not, then Jeremy has plenty of lever frame kits in stock!!

Just on signal 2, my understanding is that if the points were within 440 yard of it, then it would have to be locked by them - not withstanding the existance of No 3 - but I say that based on the limited number of installations I know personally and none of those are ex NER! Reg 5 would indeed be needed in this circumstance - though I think it would only be authorised if it were really needed to keep traffic moving because, if a warning signal is not proved at the in SB in rear, it puts a lot of onus on the staff. Of course, signal 2 might be 440 yards in rear of the points, in which case, no locking and no Reg 5 needed! And that, of course might be exactly the reason it is provided.

Don't be intimidated by the locking - if you have built the frames, the metal work is no more difficult, and once you have your locking designed you just have to copy your drawing. Only when you get beyond about 25 levers does it start to become a headache! If you have not already seen them, there are a couple of threads in the forum describing people's experiences.

I did wonder if you wanted to do the Sequential Locking by mechanical means? Or even provide a Rotational Lock between 2 and 3? Such things are quite interesting to do!

Best Wishes,
Howard

[grovenor-2685]

Just on signal 2, my understanding is that if the points were within 440 yard of it, then it would have to be locked by them -

If you are accepting up to the outer home, signal 2, at stop then whatever 2 may lock is irrelevant as 2 is not pulled. The block regulations require the track to be clear to the clearance point which is normally 440 yards ahead of the outer home, that may well require the signaller to keep any points normal within that 440 yards but the interlocking can't enforce that. It would be possible to prove the points normal when giving line clear but that would be very unusual.

not withstanding the existance of No 3 - but I say that based on the limited number of installations I know personally and none of those are ex NER! Reg 5 would indeed be needed in this circumstance - though I think it would only be authorised if it were really needed to keep traffic moving because, if a warning signal is not provided at the in SB in rear, it puts a lot of onus on the staff.

I would seriously doubt that the traffic out of a two siding yard would be enough to justify allowing reg 5 acceptance, even if the sidings are storing a couple of EMUs off peak.

Of course, signal 2 might be 440 yards in rear of the points, in which case, no locking and no Reg 5 needed! And that, of course might be exactly the reason it is provided.

Agree about reg 5, but the locking is not there for when signal 2 is at stop and hence reg 5 could be in use, rather it's to protect against an overrun of signal 3 when approached at stop, and signal 3 can only be approached at stop under rule 39A. With the short distance from 3 to the points I would lock them by 2, its safer and I don't see a downside.

[grovenor-2685]

Just to say that I agree with what Chris is saying. I had 'sort of assumed' that 9 was in reality a hand point worked from the frame for modelling convenience - I know of others who do such things - in not, then Jeremy has plenty of lever frame kits in stock!!

Actually it can be done without any more levers. A signal can be added to the end of the gantry leading over 9R and worked by lever 12. Signal 8 can be replaced by two dummies both worked by 8 and operated by a mechanical selector on points 9.

[JFS]

Actually it can be done without any more levers.

... and here is me trying to drum-up trade ...

[charliemiller77]

Well. I had thought there may be a few comments, and I’m pleased to see such learned chaps taking an interest.
There is so much for me to go through that it will take some time to digest.
Below is a fuller plan of the layout.
Signal 3 will need siting on the platform to clear the crossover completely.
I don’t have much space unless I get a big shed ?
The colliery is totally separate and at a little lower level. It will have a junction controlled by the next box along, some distance away, with reception and exchange sidings etc in the intervening space. ie the fiddle yard.
The passenger traffic is purely suburban electric stock but perhaps some diverted excursions may pass through. The curve is tight but my 0-6-0’s have no problem and I doubt I’d go for any large engines.

2A52D963-D3DD-47A0-AEA0-B619B30A0F5D.jpeg

So yes , signal 9, will be a miniature doll or ground signal. The bay is fish or parcels and walled off from the platform never to be used for passenger.
All the colliery points will be hand operated and no signals.
Thanks for all your help so far . .

[charliemiller77]

Sorry I said signal 9 but I meant 8.

[grovenor-2685]

The bay is fish or parcels and walled off from the platform never to be used for passenger.

Taken together with

as it's going to be on electrified siding I don't want to kill a shunter.

Does that imply the fish and parcels will be delivered by an electric parcels unit?

[charliemiller77]

That is the plan.
A loco will also be used for the bakery traffic.

[Noel]

I would have expected the fish and parcels traffic to have been handled on the passenger platform. Both were passenger rated, parcels/mails were normally handled there, and it seems to have been the common practice for crated wet fish, even at large stations such as Cardiff General. It was normal to handle passenger and goods rated traffic separately, and using the platform avoids the delay caused by shunting the van, and the capital cost of electrifying the siding.

[Porcy Mane]

That is the plan.
A loco will also be used for the bakery traffic.

Carricks?

https://flic.kr/p/J7uNg6

P

[charliemiller77]

I’m not sure how to use “Quotes” yet but in response to Noel , yes . . And milk and pigeon traffic etc may also be handled in a similar way directly from the passenger platform, but it's a short siding and the little fish cum general light goods siding is just going to look right to me. ! Thank you for the comments though.
Incidentally I believe the North Shields fishwives we’re banned from certain trains , to keep the passengers happy. ?
And Porcy Mane , thanks for the Carricks suggestion. A good local baker once upon a time . I might keep the name.
I already have started on Chapmans Steam Bakery as seen in the Railways of Sunderland book which was part of my inspiration for this .

[attachment=1]FE8ED537-757B-4041-BCEC-E858D8F41E1D.jpeg

[JFS]

I’m not sure how to use “Quotes” yet ...

Click the box marked " in the post you want to quote from - you can then edit the text down to the part to which you want to refer. Be sure not to edit any bits within the [] otherwise it all goes wrong!

If you post something and then notice a mistake, you can correct it using the "Edit" (the box with the pencil in it) - which only you can see in your posts.

Hope that helps.

Really like the bakery!

Best Wishes,

[JFS]

https://flic.kr/p/J7uNg6
P

Wow - I am not a North Eastern Man but some great pics there - many thanks.

[Terry Bendall]

Looks like a very nice layout Charlie. I like the use of the NE Electrics which always appeal to me even though they are a long way from my main interest. Do you intend to take it to exhibitions or is for home use only?

Terry Bendall

[charliemiller77]

Unfortunately Terry it’s a U shape operated from inside , and maybe if I say it’s in a room 2.22m wide you can see how tight it is , but maybe at some specialist show like Workshopwise perhaps. A few years yet.

[charliemiller77]

[/quote]Click the box marked " in the post you want to quote from - you can then edit the text down to the part to which you want to refer.

This is my attempt to use "quote " ,took a while to find the box as I was looking in the reply section not the original post !
I still don't think I've got it right yet

[grovenor-2685]

If you click the quote icon before starting your reply you will quote the entire post and can then edit it as JFS suggested, eg by deleting those parts you are not responding to.
Alternatively you can start your reply then scroll down to the post you want to quote from, highlight the text you want and then click the quote icon at the top right of that post.
As the 3rd option you can just cut and paste text from the relevant post into yours, then highlight it and click the quote icon above your reply. This last method omits the name of the person quoted.
You can also type the BB codes directly into your post. BB codes are the bits in square brackets that control the formatting etc.
Whichever method you choose the result in your draft will look like this.

Code: Select all

[quote="charliemiller77"]This is my attempt to use "quote " ,took a while to find the box[/quote]
using methods 1 or 2, or this
[quote]This is my attempt to use "quote " ,took a while to find the box [/quote]
using method 3.
Use preview to check you got it right. You can always practice then delete your post before anyone replies.

and will look like this when previewed or posted,

This is my attempt to use "quote " ,took a while to find the box

using methods 1 or 2, or this

This is my attempt to use "quote " ,took a while to find the box

using method 3.
Use preview to check you got it right. You can always practice then delete your post before anyone replies.

[Paul Willis]

https://flic.kr/p/J7uNg6
P

Wow - I am not a North Eastern Man but some great pics there - many thanks.

I love this one - it is perfect to print out, laminate and keep behind the backscene of an exhibition layout...

...Then when you catch your sleeve on a buffer stop five minutes before the show opens, "but it's all prototypical!"

https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishswissernie/28531423218/in/photostream/

Cheers
Paul

[DougN]

Oh I really like that low set Carricks building. the building looks normal until you notice the wagon is almost at the gutter line of the roof!

On another thing is the something I am researching, the sleepers appearing grey as the ballast looks black. Oh for a good colour photo of this type of detail!

[charliemiller77]

Hi Doug
I don’t know if this counts as a good photo but this is my attempt at getting colour right.
I use real NER ballast from the local closed line. It’s a right old mixture of clinker and coke
You need to put it in a heavy gauge plastic bag and bash it with a lump hammer then sieve it and repeat until you have a fine dust. My final sieve is an old tea strainer.
The sleepers are stained with Colron Jacobean dark oak. Rail is steel with humbrol various browns
Hope this helps.

CC1190E9-A8BC-4E09-977A-7D8AF95E766D.jpeg