The subject line says it all. How many of you have signals on your layouts, or would like to, or have any interest in this aspect of operation.
If you don’t have any interest in signaling, your thoughts on why not are also welcome.
Your interest may be for operational reasons or just visual effect.
I use a simplified CTC system that streamlines CTC operations, provides easy to understand and follow trackside signals, snd looks realistic to the viewer.
Your thoughts please.
Sheldon
I like working with electronics
I think I would hate the paperwork associated with TT&TO style operations (but I haven’t tried it)
At least parts of my prototype in my era had centralized control, even if not full CTC and not the entire railroad.
In general, I like ‘animation’ be that actual moving things or just lights changing, like signals, but in a more realistic fashion than just going to red when a train passes and then after a time delay going green again. I plan plenty of lighting animation in structures on my layout as well - everything from a flickery 50’s B&W TV to flickering kerosene lanterns.
However, the CTC part will be easily bypassable, because unless I discover soomething new about myself, I am not one to only run the layout when I have a full operating crew. So if there is just me, or no one to man the dispatcher position and control the CTC panel, I will still be able to freely run trains anywhere on the layout, and operate turnouts at will.
–Randy
Randy,
I agree completely, that is why I designed my system to work with a crew of 8-12, or just a lone operator.
A lone operator can perfom all the dispatcher and route selection tasks from local tower panels as he walks with his train. My signaling does “gloss over” some signal aspects, and is basically all interlocking signals, but it accurately reflects occupancy, route speed restrictions, and dispatched authority at all times.
Sheldon
Well, being interested in short line railroading, we don’t use signals. Typically, what I am familiar with is the short line having to always stop before crossing a class 1 line regardless of schedule, and wait for the class 1 to give the verbal approval to cross (whenever they get around to it sometimes). No signals on the line.
I have signals that are controlled by the dispatcher on my railroad during an operating session. I will be installing a signal system down the road that will work on 2 tracks, bi-directional. This will be in addition to the signals controlled by the dispatcher. Right now they are PRR type signals, but eventually will be changed to a more modern day type signal.
Neal
I don’t use CTC because I model 1900-1905 and it hasn’t been invented yet.
I am familiar with CTC, having worked for a real railroad.
Because most model railroads are so short, they really don’t need all of CTC, there just isn’t the need for stopping distances the prototype has. Because most model railroads have no speedometer for the train crews, they really don’t need all of CTC because there is no way to tell if a train is going 30 mph or 40 mph, or 20 mph or 30 mph.
CTC is also very expensive.
To be clear, true CTC requires a minimum of 2 people, a crew and a dispatcher. If you “automate” CTC what you are really doing is loading a pre-planned sequence of moves into a computer and the computer is executing them in order. The prototype calls this “stacking”. The problem there is that you lose the flexibility of the real system (why real railroads have it).
If you don’t want all the expense, Track Warrant Control, TWC, has the same flexibility as CTC. Just make it entirely verbal, no forms, and you have CTC without the signals.
Ironically the PRR didn’t use much CTC, they used a block control system with tower operators handling the signals for the dispatchers.
There are three types of interlockings.
Manual interlockings require a human being to line the route and signals, that person can either be local, in a “tower”, or remote (typically the dispatcher is the operator). The approaching trains step on a circuit which alerts the operator and the operator lines the signal as traffic allows.
Automatic interlockings are typically those with just a straight crossing, no switches involved in the interlocking. The first train to step on its approach circuit gets the signal. The dispatcher can’t line the signal, he can’t even authorize a train to cross, its all automatic.
The newer the era, the more likely the interlocking will be automatic (if its a straight crossing). Things that affect that are the proximity to a terminal or yard, train density and passenger trains.
Exactly, we don’t need all of CTC from an operations or even from a visual standpoint.
After studying signaling quite bit, I realized several old timers in this hobby had the right idea in modeling just interlocking/absolute signals.
And on top of that I simplified the “steps” the dispatcher must take.
And, the redundant controls on my tower panels allows it to operate like the PRR tower system as well.
Sheldon
My response is kinda similar to Randy’s . . .
I like the electronics. I like the lights and the automatic animation. My layout is completely wired using Digitrax signal and detection stuff. I use JMRI to provide the command logic.
The signal system is set up for ABS, where the signal aspects reflect the position of the turnouts, and vice versa the other way around. Switch position will affect the signals facing both directions at a particular location as well as the next two signals ahead and behind that location. JMRI also allows a dispatcher to set routes and individual signals (and throw and close switches) from a central control panel. There is a provision where smack dab every signal on the layout can be set red-over-red and the dispatcher takes complete control over movements.
Turnouts can be set (and thereby signal aspects can be changed) from the hand-held throttles or by pushing buttons on the fascia. As a lone operator, I can function as dispatcher, conductor, and engineer simultaneously as I walk around the layout. I can set the route from A to B by looking at the imagined path and noting block occupancy with the calibrated Mark II eyeball, by throwing and/or closing switches along the way, and allowing the ABS signal system to set the aspects. Then, just follow the lights.
My system is admittedly a simplified amalgamation based on several published prototypical signal systems. But it is simplified in such a way that my limited abilities can understand.
Robert
Just to be clear, CTC and ABS do not have signals located at the same spots around a switch.
In ABS a siding switch will have two signals, both positioned beyond the points of the switch on the single track, one facing in each direction. In CTC the siding switch will have 3 signals, one on each approach route to the switch, all facing away from the switch.
In ABS the leaving signal at a siding doesn’t indicate the position of the siding switch itself. In ABS all the switches are manually controlled.
Hey Dave-
Thanks for the info.
Like I said, my system is simplified and probably violates a lot of prototypical rules. Not really ABS or CTC. But sorta like, kinda like, and functions a little bit like both; or either; or neither.
There are two 3-over-3 three-color signal towers at each switch. One is on the single main ahead of the switch. The other is between the through and diverging legs beyond the switch and facing so that traffic on either leg can see the lights.
The signal aspects indicate switch position and occupancy of the next two blocks ahead in the direction of travel. Simplified.
Robert
On the Post or Topic that started this one I stated I had CTC but that was an error, I have automatic block signaling. My layout is too small and not designed for multiple operators.
I am interested in signaling. I built my original signaling system using Rob Paisley circuits, it worked very well for many years. The Forum got me interested in Arduinos so I built up a new system using an Arduino MEGA, works great. I went with IR optical detection so track power isn’t needed to make my signals function, even a mouse could operate my signals.
I’m not a rivet counter but I do like my layout to look as realistic as I can. I tried many bi-color and tri-color LEDs for my single target signal heads and wasn’t really happy with any of the results so I made my own version using a 3mm bi-color LED with true red and true green and a micro SMT yellow glued to the back of the bi-color LED. Now I have three true color signals.
Sheldon, I do find your posts on CTC and your layout very interesting as well as very informative.
Mel
i started studying signals and adding them to my layout to help me recognize turnout positions without having to look at the turnout. This may be more pragmatic than prototypical.
i also use signals as an application of my electronics and firmware background
I have operated on a couple layouts with full CTC systems, one N scale and one O scale, but most have some sort of compromises. Most people seem to want more of a “switch indictor” type system when it boils down to it. CTC is really a series of control points with ABS between them. Whatever works.
Another system, that is probably the least modeled, is “rule 251” territory or “double track”. It has two main tracks and operated with current of traffic (all the trains go one way on one track and the other way on the other track. It has ABS in the current of traffic and NO signals for running against the current of traffic. It was one of the most common signal systems from WW1 to the 1970’s or 80’s, especially on routes with a lot of passenger trains. It can handle a HUGE volume of trains (as long as nothing goes wrong or stops on one of the tracks). In the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s the railroads converted most of the double track (each track signalled in one direction) to two main tracks (both tracks signalled in both directions) in order to increase capacity and flexibility.
I model modern, just a fan of the PRR signals. Eventually when I add the new system to the railroad, they will go away. Add to it, these are the old NJ International PRR signals with bulbs! Talk about old. I’ve had them since they came out. I have 12 on the railroad and they are located in strategic ‘interlocking’ areas of my railroad. It does work well with the dispatcher, and we operate regularly.
Neal
Yes, not being blessed with a hanger in which to build my layout, the distances are for the most part too short to have many intermediate signals between interlockings.
Even the club layout is mostly just a series of interlockings. The dispatch panel was created with JMRI and mimics the very latest PC-based dispatcher consoles, it’s not a compter recreation of a USS type machine. WHen no one want sto sit and manage the routes, the whole system can be fleeted and trains can freely circulate, as the signals automatically clear.
I do have a few spaces in my plan where ther eewill be nothing but main line runnign through scenery, with enough spacing between adjoining interlockings to allow for an intermediate signal, but there won;t be many of those. Complicating it all is that it’s all double track, and bidirectionally signaled. Didn’t say I was going to make it easy on myself. Being double tracked it probably has no real need of CTC, but again, I like it. I’ve contemplated making the layout single track, to make it more interesting, and probably fit better in the space, but the prototype had at least 2 tracks and I don’t think it would have the same effect. I’ve also contemplated having oen deck double tracked and the other single, but that seems like it may bottleneck things too much. The mixed mode would have the lower level from staging to the main ya
I can’t see myself going the route of soldering resistors to wheel sets. I would like some automatic animation. It wouldn’t have to absolutely prototypical, only good enough to fool me.
PM sent
You don’t have to solder the resistors, just glue ensuring you don’t foul the leads.
I am intrigued by the bidirectional two track main idea, it’s nice because it retains the operation of a single track main and sidings.