Mr. Tact wrote:So, here is your solution on the left and mine on the right, is there a functional difference? If so, what is it?
That's not my solution on the left, you've used the same signals but on the wrong side of the track which introduces some minor problems. Basically instead of chain signals on the exits (as I said this can potentially cause problems if there is a nearby signal) you've got them on the entrances which unnecessarily stops trains approaching the junction when it's occupied.
As for the differences between my
actual intersection and yours, there isn't much difference. I've basically used less chain signals so the trains wait further along the rail if the intersection is blocked, which is only a very minor advantage though it does allow more "wait" room on the tracks.
Miravlix wrote:Chain signals is a efficency trap, don't use them if they can be avoided and if they can't be avoided you should look very closely at whatever your track layout is messed up.
[snip]
There is only one way to deadlock an improperly signalled three-way intersection and as long as your rails are laid out accordingly it's not a problem, HOWEVER if you bolt a loop with a train stop directly onto one of those directions, then send three 1-loco 2-wagon trains to it, you'll get deadlocked. The trains will queue up over the intersection and block the first train from leaving. Might not sound like a big problem but more trains will block a bigger loop. Sure this will work for a little train network utilising waiting bays but it should not be advertised as a sturdy junction.
Chain signals are to prevent trains from stopping on a junction that other trains may pass through unhindered, while allowing two trains (whose paths do not intersect) to pass each other, for example a train going east and a train going west. I guess you could look at them like "filtered" signals that only separate the rail block where the train is not going.