Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2012 5:13:02 GMT
Is there sufficient information available to draw the layout of the trailing crossover and reversing siding that were planned for the Fleet/Jubilee Line station at Fenchurch Street? THIS THREAD has some discussion of the changes that would have been made to IMR 'TG' when the second stage of the Fleet/Jubilee Line was started, and that got me wondering if any planning was done for the signaling of the proposed infrastructure at Fenchurch Street. |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 30, 2012 12:40:40 GMT
I'm not Harsig, but I do have a schematic.
Watch this space.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 30, 2012 14:46:09 GMT
This is the information I have on Fenchurch Street, hot off the press and freshly drawn this afternoon:  This picture might also be of interest:  The keen-eyed and signalling-interested amongst you will note the similarities between the proposed layout for Fenchurch Street with the new siding at West Ham (and to a certain degree) Hammersmith. It would be quite straightforward to come up with a signalling schematic - the major difference with these locations is the additional turnback on the middle siding. If I get chance, I might have a quick doodle, but it is relatively easy to work out. The one thing that will be constant, I think. is that the IMR would be built with the frame facing the track - so the operator has their back to the track. In other words Lever No 1 would either be the home signal for trains approaching from Surrey Docks or the home for trains approaching from Ludgate Circus. - 4 points/crossovers/traps
- 4 EB Main signals well if there isn't an EB Advanced starter it would be 3 on the EB:
- Platform Home
- Platform Starter
- Junction Home for easternmost crossover
3 WB Main signals - Outer Home
- Junction Home
- Platform Starter
- Shunt signals
- EB platform to loop
- EB loop to main or siding
- WB siding exit
- WB loop to platform
- WB platform to loop
Clearly there are also other design variations that can be incorporated (some are patently historical or don't directly affect the frames): - X signals
- Homes A/B (think pre-WWII New Works)
- selection of main diverging routes (post-WWII New Works)
- selection of main and subsidiary routes
so there are plenty of variations that would keep someone interested - there are also subtle variations (say) using Willesden Green and West Hampstead as comparision points. I suspect South Harrow, Rayners Lane and/or Hammersmith would provide inspiration. Hammersmith in particular as it has a selected main with feathers and selected subsidiary (all done off the same lever) - I reckon you'd be looking at a 20 lever frame with 3 or 4 for spares with a release lever. |
|
|
|
Post by JR 15secs on Dec 30, 2012 15:07:37 GMT
This is the information I have on Fenchurch Street, hot off the press and freshly drawn this afternoon: This picture might also be of interest: The keen-eyed and signalling-interested amongst you will note the similarities between the proposed layout for Fenchurch Street with the new siding at West Ham (and to a certain degree) Hammersmith. It would be quite straightforward to come up with a signalling schematic - the major difference with these locations is the additional turnback on the middle siding. If I get chance, I might have a quick doodle, but it is relatively easy to work out. The one thing that will be constant, I think. is that the IMR would be built with the frame facing the track - so the operator has their back to the track. In other words Lever No 1 would either be the home signal for trains approaching from Surrey Docks or the home for trains approaching from Ludgate Circus. - 4 points/crossovers/traps
- 4 EB Main signals well if there isn't an EB Advanced starter it would be 3 on the EB:
- Platform Home
- Platform Starter
- Junction Home for easternmost crossover
3 WB Main signals - Outer Home
- Junction Home
- Platform Starter
- Shunt signals
- EB platform to loop
- EB loop to main or siding
- WB siding exit
- WB loop to platform
- WB platform to loop
Clearly there are also other design variations that can be incorporated (some are patently historical or don't directly affect the frames): - X signals
- Homes A/B (think pre-WWII New Works)
- selection of main diverging routes (post-WWII New Works)
- selection of main and subsidiary routes
so there are plenty of variations that would keep someone interested - there are also subtle variations (say) using Willesden Green and West Hampstead as comparision points. I suspect South Harrow, Rayners Lane and/or Hammersmith would provide inspiration. Hammersmith in particular as it has a selected main with feathers and selected subsidiary (all done off the same lever) - I reckon you'd be looking at a 20 lever frame with 3 or 4 for spares with a release lever. My notes show that there were 2 options the layout you show was what originally planned then consideration to just a centre siding 1. Centre siding 12 shafts 2. Your layout 24 shafts |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 30, 2012 15:39:51 GMT
My notes show that there were 2 options the layout you show was what originally planned then consideration to just a centre siding 1. Centre siding 12 shafts 2. Your layout 24 shafts How many shafts at S. Docks/Canal Junction, just out of interest, please? There would need to be at least 8 for points &c at SQ SD and 5 for similar at Canal Junction. |
|
|
|
Post by JR 15secs on Dec 30, 2012 16:11:34 GMT
My notes show that there were 2 options the layout you show was what originally planned then consideration to just a centre siding 1. Centre siding 12 shafts 2. Your layout 24 shafts How many shafts at S. Docks/Canal Junction, just out of interest, please? There would need to be at least 8 for points &c at SQ SD and 5 for similar at Canal Junction. My notes show 24 shafts at each. |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 30, 2012 16:16:15 GMT
How many shafts at S. Docks/Canal Junction, just out of interest, please? There would need to be at least 8 for points &c at SQ SD and 5 for similar at Canal Junction. My notes show 24 shafts at each. Lovely; thank-you. |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 30, 2012 19:01:59 GMT
A bit of tweaking this afternoon has produced this:  It is mildly annoying that you produce a really crisp .pdf and it all goes fuzzy as a .jpg or .tif. |
|
|
|
Post by revupminster on Dec 30, 2012 19:33:40 GMT
The signaling needs to allow colour light reversing west to east through the siding and idealy allow eastbound movement by colour light signalling east through the siding like a passing loop.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 30, 2012 20:04:01 GMT
The signaling needs to allow colour light reversing west to east through the siding and idealy allow eastbound movement by colour light signalling east through the siding like a passing loop. Possibly, I think that there would have been more programme machines allocated to the site if that route were to be offered as a passenger route in the plan; of course with 24 levers for the site then there would be plenty spare. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2012 21:31:45 GMT
A bit of tweaking this afternoon has produced this: It is mildly annoying that you produce a really crisp .pdf and it all goes fuzzy as a .jpg or .tif. Great diagram! Thanks. |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196 
|
Post by Tom on Dec 30, 2012 22:17:59 GMT
This is the information I have on Fenchurch Street, hot off the press and freshly drawn this afternoon: This picture might also be of interest: I've never seen a paper copy of that drawing, only ever the Microfilm. Nice to see a paper copy still exists! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2012 22:54:08 GMT
The paper diagram poses some interesting questions. Why are some of the codes already crossed out and what sort of modifications would need to be made to the existing interlocking (other than the replacement of 'MK' with IMR 'JL') to justify a code change?
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Dec 30, 2012 23:07:23 GMT
I'm not sure. TI, TO would be excluded straight away to prevent confusion with 0 and 1. I suspect some of the others may have been avoided to prevent any confusion with other signalling terms, particularly TD, TP, TQ, TR, TV and TX?
As for reasons behind a code change, there doesn't need to be any change to the interlocking required to initiate a code change. Obviously a lot of re-labelling would need to take place!
Mansion House was one such site where a code change took place, it changed from EI to EG in 1972.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Dec 31, 2012 3:06:41 GMT
M: fantastic to see another 'what could have been'. Thanks very much.  |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 31, 2012 12:31:06 GMT
This is a guess at what it would look like if signalled for passengers in the loop:  |
|
|
|
Post by JR 15secs on Dec 31, 2012 14:55:59 GMT
This is a guess at what it would look like if signalled for passengers in the loop: I think you need to alter the signals the ones in what would be between the step plate junctions the distance was not long enough for a train, perhaps there would have been a route from the EB via the entrance to the siding and back EB you also need a shunt from the EB. There was not any trap points at the siding well not on the plan I've seen. One that does need to be added would be a wrong road starter from the WB through the loop. The IMR was proposed to be at the East end of the platforms, Surrey Docks IMR had two locations North end of the ELL platform or by the points to the depot. |
|
|
|
Post by mrjrt on Dec 31, 2012 15:56:36 GMT
It is mildly annoying that you produce a really crisp .pdf and it all goes fuzzy as a .jpg or .tif. Either reduce the JPEG compression down to minimum when exporting (i.e. none), or use PNG or GIF - They're ideal for diagrams with big blocks of continuous colour (and they're lossless), whereas JPEG's compression is optimised for photographs with few identical pixels (why you normally wouldn't notice the loss of fine detail and additional blockiness appearing as it's a lossy compression format). |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 31, 2012 16:01:34 GMT
I think you need to alter the signals the ones in what would be between the step plate junctions the distance was not long enough for a train, perhaps there would have been a route from the EB via the entrance to the siding and back EB you also need a shunt from the EB. There was not any trap points at the siding well not on the plan I've seen. Bingo. I've not got any sense of scale in the diagram that I've got, just proportions. If I've understood you right. then it was intended to be something similar to Marble Arch, but with an extra trailing crossover. Looks like I was much closer with my original thought. One that does need to be added would be a wrong road starter from the WB through the loop. Got it. I shall have a little tinker in a bit. The IMR was proposed to be at the East end of the platforms, Surrey Docks IMR had two locations North end of the ELL platform or by the points to the depot. Lovely, thanks for that. Which ELL platform? |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 31, 2012 16:24:17 GMT
It is mildly annoying that you produce a really crisp .pdf and it all goes fuzzy as a .jpg or .tif. Either reduce the JPEG compression down to minimum when exporting (i.e. none), or use PNG or GIF - They're ideal for diagrams with big blocks of continuous colour (and they're lossless), whereas JPEG's compression is optimised for photographs with few identical pixels (why you normally wouldn't notice the loss of fine detail and additional blockiness appearing as it's a lossy compression format). I shall have a tinker with one of the existing drawings - they go: .ai > .pdf in Illustrator open .pdf in Paintshop or PSE and save as a .jpg. Saving as a .png or .tif results in rubbish results: perhaps I'm doing it wrong. Drawing gets drawn at 800px wide, then imported as a .pdf into PS or PSE at 600dpi and ends up at about 6500 - 7000px wide. Image is flattened then resized to 800px and saved as a .jpg. If I change the order of things and resize the image at the point of import then the drawings end up marginally worse. If I save either route at the end as a .png or a .tif they just descend into blockiness at anything above 150 - 200% - an uncompressed .jpg retains the smoothness, if a little fuzzy round the edges above 300%. What would you recommend as an alternative to get from .ai/.pdf to a crisp image file? Is my import route wrong? |
|
|
|
Post by JR 15secs on Dec 31, 2012 16:54:29 GMT
I think you need to alter the signals the ones in what would be between the step plate junctions the distance was not long enough for a train, perhaps there would have been a route from the EB via the entrance to the siding and back EB you also need a shunt from the EB. There was not any trap points at the siding well not on the plan I've seen. Bingo. I've not got any sense of scale in the diagram that I've got, just proportions. If I've understood you right. then it was intended to be something similar to Marble Arch, but with an extra trailing crossover. Looks like I was much closer with my original thought. Got it. I shall have a little tinker in a bit. The IMR was proposed to be at the East end of the platforms, Surrey Docks IMR had two locations North end of the ELL platform or by the points to the depot. Lovely, thanks for that. Which ELL platform? I would not say Marble Arch but no extra crossover. There would have been only one platform cross platform interchange with SB Fleet line being provided. |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 31, 2012 17:44:35 GMT
How about this then:  I know exactly where you mean at Surrey Docks. Was the Depot site near to Canal Jn or on the Whitechapel side of the depot tracks? |
|
|
|
Post by JR 15secs on Dec 31, 2012 18:01:11 GMT
How about this then: I know exactly where you mean at Surrey Docks. Was the Depot site near to Canal Jn or on the Whitechapel side of the depot tracks? That's it other than the siding outlet might have an indicator so as to go to either platform but not all sidings read to both platforms. The depot site was almost by the depot scissors also access by foot from Rotherhithe New Road. I should have said I'm about half way through what I'm doing for you will finish tomorrow all being well. |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Jan 3, 2013 10:44:11 GMT
MRFS:
In Illustrator, on the file menu, look for 'Save for Web & Devices...', and/or 'Save for Microsoft Office'.
The latter does .png, the former .jpeg and other formats.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrjrt on Jan 3, 2013 12:25:40 GMT
I shall have a tinker with one of the existing drawings - they go: .ai > .pdf in Illustrator open .pdf in Paintshop or PSE and save as a .jpg. Saving as a .png or .tif results in rubbish results: perhaps I'm doing it wrong. Drawing gets drawn at 800px wide, then imported as a .pdf into PS or PSE at 600dpi and ends up at about 6500 - 7000px wide. Image is flattened then resized to 800px and saved as a .jpg. If I change the order of things and resize the image at the point of import then the drawings end up marginally worse. If I save either route at the end as a .png or a .tif they just descend into blockiness at anything above 150 - 200% - an uncompressed .jpg retains the smoothness, if a little fuzzy round the edges above 300%. What would you recommend as an alternative to get from .ai/.pdf to a crisp image file? Is my import route wrong? Off the top of my head that seems fine, though I'm not sure why the PDF step is needed? I don't use Adobe products (Inkscape FTW!  ), but the only important point being that baking the image from vector (scalable) to bitmap should always be the penultimate step, with the last being compression (although when the file format is lossless this doesn't matter). When you say Paintshop, which version do you mean? I have Paintshop Pro 7 & 8. 7 opens AI files, 8 opens PDF and AI files, and both have very good PNG exporters. |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Jan 4, 2013 3:10:46 GMT
MRFS: In Illustrator, on the file menu, look for 'Save for Web & Devices...', and/or 'Save for Microsoft Office'. The latter does .png, the former .jpeg and other formats. Yes - thanks, Ben. I use the .pdf through habit, as it's easier to send a .pdf for review than a .ai file; and I'm so used to lovely crisp lines at $mega%ge that I get irkedby little bits of fuzziness. Anyway, back on subjectish - I'm drawing out the layout for Surrey Docks, which some should find interesting. |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Jan 5, 2013 17:14:30 GMT
Looking forward to it. Just out of interest, is there enough, then, to make a complete track/signalling diagram of Charing Cross - Lewisham?
Was any time spent on Phase 4 to Hayes/Addiscombe/Beckenham Junction atall? Not necessarily drawings but text or spreadsheets?
Is this kind of stuff available in the Museum archives?
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Jan 5, 2013 17:42:58 GMT
The depot site was to be in the area now between the ELL tracks beyond the junction to the south of the station.
A police car pound/storage area in the triangle with the Southeastern tracks to the south.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Jan 5, 2013 19:12:25 GMT
Looking forward to it. Just out of interest, is there enough, then, to make a complete track/signalling diagram of Charing Cross - Lewisham? I have a track diagram, and small hints to the signalling, but no real detail on the signals. Was any time spent on Phase 4 to Hayes/Addiscombe/Beckenham Junction atall? Not necessarily drawings but text or spreadsheets? Never found anything beyond Lewisham, I know Mackenzie is doing a lot of research on the Fleet and its developments. Is this kind of stuff available in the Museum archives? Well, not really is probably the best way of putting it - I found these when sorting through many thousand drawings for the Northern Heights signalling diagrams, but they are uncatalogued AFAIK and not easy to find even if you know where to look for them. |
|
|
|
Post by JR 15secs on Jan 18, 2013 10:36:55 GMT
Looking forward to it. Just out of interest, is there enough, then, to make a complete track/signalling diagram of Charing Cross - Lewisham? Was any time spent on Phase 4 to Hayes/Addiscombe/Beckenham Junction atall? Not necessarily drawings but text or spreadsheets? Is this kind of stuff available in the Museum archives? Done some digging and these are some of the civil drawings that exist. N30181 Addiscombe N30182 Hayes N30183 Elmers End N30184 Elmers End N27247 Surrey Docks Depot All of these are dated 1968 there are lots more. There must be some sort of signalling diagrams it was always the case LT would do drawings on proposed schemes many of which fell by the wayside. When MRFS does his Surrey Docks plan perhaps more will come from that. |
|
), but the only important point being that baking the image from vector (scalable) to bitmap should always be the penultimate step, with the last being compression (although when the file format is lossless this doesn't matter).
