douple slip turnouts on prototype

[george stein]

The Peco OO double slip is certainly a space-saver, however, how "realistic" is their use? Especially during the Big Four era, were they common (or even used) in, say, a small goods yard? Logical in a big station, but in small yards? Thanks.

[gordon s]

Well here's a track plan of my local station on the Hertford North loop before the goods yard was turned into a supermarket car park. It was a small yard with two double slips, so I guess the answer to your question would be yes....

 

One day I will build a model of this station as it has so many fond memories for me.

 

http://www.signalbox...rams.php?id=655

[Gwiwer]

Many examples come to mind where double slips were (and in many cases still are) used on the main line. Usually as space-savers and often in the approaches to major stations. Brighton has several just as one example and I believe a goodly number exists outside London Waterloo. They existed in many places also at the entry to yards and sidings and within larger yards and loco-shed areas. I'll flag Brighton and nearby Hove as examples here and I recall there was a double slip in the former yard at Worthing Central as well.

[jamie92208]

The Midland used them a lot. They were very common at the exits from Goods yards where they provided a headshunt as well as the exit from two sidings. In the area that I know well there were examples at Settle Junction and Bell Busk. They also used them at terminal stations to give choice of platforms. Morecambe had I think three of them that allowed any incomining train to use any of the platforms while only crossing 2 turnouts. If you are interested I could dig out some trackplans of both situations and post them.

 

Jamie

[RFS]

Here's a picture of Tonbridge station (3rd one down) from 1984 before it was remodelled for the Channel Tunnel trains. Slips and 3-way points galore on the main line. It's going to be the basis of my new layout soon .

 

http://kentrail.org.uk/Tonbridge%20(2).htm

[Edwin_m]

I'd say use of single and double slips at smaller stations was widespread in the steam era. These days they are hardly ever seen except in the throats of major stations, particularly those where space is limited.

[Karhedron]

They were certainly not unheard of, even in relatively minor stations. If the station was in a cutting or on an embankment then sometimes complicated pointwork would be cheaper than the exra earthworks. Not quite the same but Bourne End station used to have a 3-way point leading to the sidings south of the station. The reason in this case was the presence of the river thames.

[Southernman46]

Just have a look on Google Earth (other maps are available !) at West Crossings in Waterloo station approach (and throat area) and the East end of Clapham Junction on the Windsor side - more double slips than you could want (certainly the case for me when I was TSM there - bl**dy things !!)

[Stevelewis]

Perhaps totally off topic, but when I was very young, we were on our way for a day out in Southport and sittng in a train in Manchester Victoria Stn waiting to depart.

 

I was watching the various movements when a 2-6-4T ( no idea what type) which was slowly reversing, entered a double slip and totally derailed all wheels off!

 

I distinctly remember a large amount of steam engulfing the loco, the crewe stepping down and standing surveying the scene, and a rapidly increasing crowd of people gathering on the platfrom opposite!

 

At that point our train departed!

[The Stationmaster]

Double slips in running lines tended to be used only where space was tight and there was no alternative or where speeds were low - this is because they can be difficult and time consuming (=expensive) to maintain where speeds are high from both a perway and signalling viewpoint. And this meant they could commonly be found in the low speed approaches to major stations but far less frequently 'out in the country'.

 

Single slips were very common in running line situations as they at least avoided the complication of having a facing end and the extra maintenance it required to keep it properly adjusted - and of course they avoided having what amounted ti a facing point (and facing points were only used where absolutely necessary).

 

In sidings it was a different matter and, as Gordon illustrated in the link, slips offered major advantages in space saving and, of course, weren't subject to the damage caused by high speed movements through them. So both double and single versions were quite common in yards where space was limited or where they kept connections that bit closer to the operating signalbox.

[melmerby]

Here's Birmingham Snow Hill, single slips, double slips, 3 way points galore. There was a 4 way at one time.

 

http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrbsh1155.htm

 

Keith

[AMJ]

Oakworth yard on the KWVR has a single slip in it.

[D869]

For an example in the running line at a branch line terminus... Swanage. Here it was the turnout at the London end of the run round loop and also the start of a crossover onto another loop line that gave access to the goods yard and bay platform.

 

I struggled to find a photo online - deluged with pics of the station in modern times but eventually found quite a nice one...

 

http://www.time-capsules.co.uk/picture/number1319.asp

[george stein]

Many thanks to all. And, RFS, good luck with an obviously complex project.

[Bibby Line]

Just to add another for good measure.

 

Ilfracombe had several at the station approach. Exmouth had a very prominent one also.

 

Eddie

[Joseph_Pestell]

As the above posts reflect, they were particularly common on the LSWR at the entrance to small termini.

 

They could be found at goods yards, large and small. Just depends on the lie of the land and the relative positions of the buildings to be served.

 

Apart from higher maintenance costs, double slips would be disapproved of on main lines as the Board of Trade (Railway Inspectorate) did not like facing points to be used except where absolutely necessary. But there were cases on L&Y lines (usually at the entrance to a goods loop with space constratints due to the hilly terrain).

 

And back to the LSWR, there was a double-slip at the up end of Tavistock North station leading into the goods yard. Again, that's due to space constraints as the main line climbed away from the station at that point.

[Richard E]

There is at least one double slip at the northern end of platform 5 at Peterborough (for now until the new platforms are built).

[beast66606]

Apart from higher maintenance costs, double slips would be disapproved of on main lines as the Board of Trade (Railway Inspectorate) did not like facing points to be used except where absolutely necessary. But there were cases on L&Y lines (usually at the entrance to a goods loop with space constratints due to the hilly terrain).

 

(My bold)

 

Afraid that's an oft quoted myth, in the early days they weren't keen but later on it wasn't an issue, say from 1900 onwards for the sake of argument.

[The Stationmaster]

Afraid that's an oft quoted myth, in the early days they weren't keen but later on it wasn't an issue, say from 1900 onwards for the sake of argument.

 

The exact words in 1892 & 1902 were as follows;

N.B. Words shown thus were deleted in the 1902 edition - thus

Words shown thus were added in the 1902 edition - added

 

Facing points should to be avoided as far as possible but when used (reference re facing point locks etc).

Second sentence - (amended in 1902 to be a continuation of a revised first sentence)

Wwhen facing points they cannot be dispensed with, they should must be placed as near as practicable possible to the levers by which they are worked or bolted.

Third sentence - (added in 1902 edition)

The limit of distance from levers working points to be 180 yards in the case of facing points, and 300 yards in the case of trailing points on the main line, or safety points from sidings. (this replaced a previous limit of 180 yards which clearly applied to facing points but was ambiguous in the case of trailing points.)

[Colin_McLeod]

The new depot being constructed by NIR at Belfast (Adelaide) has one brand new double slip clearly visible from the footbridge.

[micknich2003]

[Swindon 123]

I knew of at least 2 places where double slips existed on 70MPH running lines. One was on the Up Hereford at Pontrilas which was removed sometime before 1984, and the other was on between Shrewsbury and Wellington the Up line at Allscott at the entrance to the sugar works sidings. A photo taken in early 1985 just before its removal of this double slip is below.

 

 

 

Paul J.

[Joseph_Pestell]

The exact words in 1892 & 1902 were as follows;

N.B. Words shown thus were deleted in the 1902 edition - thus

Words shown thus were added in the 1902 edition - added

 

Facing points should to be avoided as far as possible but when used (reference re facing point locks etc).

Second sentence - (amended in 1902 to be a continuation of a revised first sentence)

Wwhen facing points they cannot be dispensed with, they should must be placed as near as practicable possible to the levers by which they are worked or bolted.

Third sentence - (added in 1902 edition)

The limit of distance from levers working points to be 180 yards in the case of facing points, and 300 yards in the case of trailing points on the main line, or safety points from sidings. (this replaced a previous limit of 180 yards which clearly applied to facing points but was ambiguous in the case of trailing points.)

 

Most main line railways had already been built by this date. To retrofit double-slips would not always have been easy, either because of the distance requirements set out above or because there was not space in the frame to put the lever to control the FPL(which would have to be next to the lever controlling the point)

[beast66606]

Most main line railways had already been built by this date. To retrofit double-slips would not always have been easy, either because of the distance requirements set out above or because there was not space in the frame to put the lever to control the FPL(which would have to be next to the lever controlling the point)

 

FPLs are not necessarily the next lever, and frames can be relocked, a lot of frames had spares or spaces, put in by the original designers to allow for growth.

Track layouts altered over the years, the LMS converted lie-by sidings to loops to speed their use, this involved facing points.

[The Stationmaster]

Most main line railways had already been built by this date. To retrofit double-slips would not always have been easy, either because of the distance requirements set out above or because there was not space in the frame to put the lever to control the FPL(which would have to be next to the lever controlling the point)

I'm not quite with you - I quoted the 1892 and 1902 versions - FPLs had been required on passenger lines long before then so it wasn't a matter of altering frames (or track layouts) to comply with the latest revision (especially as each revision in respect of pointwork tended to relax what had gone before, as was the case here).

 

So I very much doubt if by 1892 there was any question at all of retrofitting FPLs on double slips except where line usage changed - which would in any case usually be accompanied by comprehensive resignalling and a new or re-locked lever frame. And fitting an FPL to part of a double slip wasn't exactly a difficult job running basically to a new front stretcher and associated fittings plus a lock bar.