Ground Shunting signals - help request please

[highpeakman]

I would like to request some help please to enable me to use the correct types of signal on Carsingdale which is currently under construction. I know I need to use some shunting signals but, after some research, have become somewhat confused as to what should be used.

 

The layout is loosely based on Wirksworth and Cromford (BR Midland Region) in the early sixties using both steam and green diesels. It is an end to end using a fiddle yard in a tunnel. The diagram is a simplified schematic but is covers the essential exchange sidings which is where I have the problem. Essentially operation is based on BR engines bringing in empties to track A. The engine will then uncouple and move via track B to the headshunt near the tunnel mouth. Private owner engines will then take the wagons to the quarry area (a "mini" layout in it's own right). When ready a full train will be reassembled on track A and the BR loco will emerge from the headshunt, use the crossover, set back onto the train and take the train out when ready.

 

I have assumed that both tracks A and B will require starter signals in the positions shown. I also assume that shunting signals will be required to enable 1) the BR loco to work past the track B starter into the headshunt, 2) to allow the BR loco to work past the track B starter over the crossover into the tunnel mouth before setting back on to the train on track A.

 

I had assumed that normal red ground signals would be used but have just "discovered" that there were also yellow ground signals which I believe were used in such circumstances (accessing headshunts). I would really appreciate some advice on this please.

 

Would a "double" ground signal be used on track B - one for the headshunt and one for the crossover? So would it be one red and one yellow?

 

Space constraint may mean that the BR loco could foul the crossover while waiting to leave with a full train - i.e. it would be standing beyond the track A starter - would that be allowed and how would it be dealt with?

 

A further question arises regarding the quarry end of the diagram as the BR loco will have to use the quarry line for a short distance before setting back over the double slip to access track B. As that end is essentially dual BR/private owner would it also require signalling? My assumption is that as at least two locos (one BR, one private) would be operating in this area then it probably would? I have not been able to find how other exchange sidings operated in this respect.

 

One last query is that I may choose to operate the occasional passenger (single carraige push-pull) on to a platform on track A. Would the use of passenger trains change any of the signalling compared to pure freight use?

 

Sorry about the list of questions but I suddenly discovered the complexity of signalling issues now that I have completed the trackwork. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

[highpeakman]

Sorry, image seems to have gone AWOL. Will try again shortly.

[highpeakman]

Having trouble putting image up.Kindly bear with me. Sorry.

 

Trying to post 50k jpg file (or bmp) but unable to paste or attach. Trying to find what to do.

 

Finally suceeded! See above.

[The Stationmaster]

Is that a double slip at the right hand end?

 

And one point before going any further - it was logically impossible to micx red and yellow discs on a single mounting and applying to teh same line - eirther all the discs on the mounting (it was hardly a post) would be red or they would all be yellow and where there was a choice of two route sith one leading to a headshunt you would in any case only need a single yellow disc.

[highpeakman]

Yes, that is a double slip at the "quarry end".

 

I happily accept your point about mixing colours of ground signals on same mount. I guess the second part of my query related to what happens if the light engine on track B is moving over the crossover to enable it to set back on to a train on track A. Would the same shunting signal be used for that as for calling the loco on to the headshunt?

[The Stationmaster]

Yes, that is a double slip at the "quarry end".

 

I happily accept your point about mixing colours of ground signals on same mount. I guess the second part of my query related to what happens if the light engine on track B is moving over the crossover to enable it to set back on to a train on track A. Would the same shunting signal be used for that as for calling the loco on to the headshunt?

I'm not sure which end you're talking about in relation to that question - if it is the left hand end then the answer is 'yes' - if it is the right hand end then there could be a triple yellow disc reading from track (I did say 'could' - it might not be, but it could be).

[TheSignalEngineer]

Firstly, what is your proposed method of working from the left hand end? Will there only ever be one BR loco (or a pair coupled) arriving at the sidings then going back before another train comes in? If so, do you actually need any signals?

 

Introducing a regular passenger train would change the scenario completely, but a one-off Crankex could be dealt with by special instructions.

[highpeakman]

I'm not sure which end you're talking about in relation to that question - if it is the left hand end then the answer is 'yes' - if it is the right hand end then there could be a triple yellow disc reading from track (I did say 'could' - it might not be, but it could be).

Double slip at right hand end.

 

However the question relates to the left hand end headshunt and crossover.

[highpeakman]

Firstly, what is your proposed method of working from the left hand end? Will there only ever be one BR loco (or a pair coupled) arriving at the sidings then going back before another train comes in? If so, do you actually need any signals?

 

Introducing a regular passenger train would change the scenario completely, but a one-off Crankex could be dealt with by special instructions.

Mostly that would be true. There may be occasions when other trains (engineering, other light goods, etc) might arrive between arrival of empties and departure of full stone trains.

 

I guess I assumed that, as it was BR operated then it would have to be signalled but would happily accept the situation if that does not need to be the case. I also accept that this would only apply to freight only operation. Presumably trains would be under control of the Shunter?

 

However, it would be nice, however, to operate a "regular" passenger train, even if it is only one a day. Either push-pull steam or DMU.

[Grovenor]

Looking here, http://www.norgrove.me.uk/signalling/plans/Derby.gif you can see the arrangements at Duffield Jcn for access to the Wirksworth branch. The branch had a 'No-signalman' key token operated by the train crew and released from Derby Panel. If freight only then all you need at Wirksworth is a fixed distant and a stop and proceed on instruction board at the first points.

For a passenger then the first crossover needs a ground frame released by the token, to provide the facing point lock and trap, the stop and proceed on instruction board would move to the end of the platform where the passenger stops, the ground frame should also lock the double slip set for road B.

Keith

[highpeakman]

Looking here, http://www.norgrove.me.uk/signalling/plans/Derby.gif you can see the arrangements at Duffield Jcn for access to the Wirksworth branch. The branch had a 'No-signalman' key token operated by the train crew and released from Derby Panel. If freight only then all you need at Wirksworth is a fixed distant and a stop and proceed on instruction board at the first points.

For a passenger then the first crossover needs a ground frame released by the token, to provide the facing point lock and trap, the stop and proceed on instruction board would move to the end of the platform where the passenger stops, the ground frame should also lock the double slip set for road B.

Keith

 

Thank you very indeed for your suggestion.

 

I assume that this set up would be for one engine in steam only operation? As I will probably want to operate more than one BR loco sometimes it may not be applicable.

 

That signalling plan is fantastic though and I really appreciate it. I lived in Derby between the ages of five and eleven (Late fifties - I can still remember the view and smoke and oil smell that you got when passing the works on London Road bridge) and the names on it brought back many memories. The plan shows signal 548 which I assume was the colour light signal which still glowed red years in the trees after the branch closed. Do you know what year was that plan made?

 

Don

[The Stationmaster]

I think things are becoming a bit clearer, I'll try to sum up

 

1. Freight only, BR is left hand end, quarry is right hand end.  In the period you have in mind there might have been a ground frame and a couple of noticeboards (but no signals) and hut for the token machine by the crossover at the left hand end - or that end might simply have been handpoints (and still possibly a hut for a token machine.

The right had end is all 'private' sidings and totally handpoints and everything is under the joint control of a BR Shunter or Chargeman and the quarry people.

(the presence or otherwise of a token depends almost on the level of traffic.)

 

2. You introduce a passenger train element on a regular basis.  In very simple terms little changes - the left hand end crossover definitely has a ground frame and there will be a hut for the token machine, assuming the passenger platform is on Track A you know need a 2-way trap point between teh quarry lines and Track A at the double slip end of the platform.  It will have a ground frame but probably no token hut.

 

3.  If you really, really, want to add signals you can but they are not essential at such a simple location.  You could possibly assume that the signalbox which was, maybe, once there has survived but there is no need for one.  Decision is yours.

[highpeakman]

I think things are becoming a bit clearer, I'll try to sum up

 

1. Freight only, BR is left hand end, quarry is right hand end.  In the period you have in mind there might have been a ground frame and a couple of noticeboards (but no signals) and hut for the token machine by the crossover at the left hand end - or that end might simply have been handpoints (and still possibly a hut for a token machine.

The right had end is all 'private' sidings and totally handpoints and everything is under the joint control of a BR Shunter or Chargeman and the quarry people.

(the presence or otherwise of a token depends almost on the level of traffic.)

 

2. You introduce a passenger train element on a regular basis.  In very simple terms little changes - the left hand end crossover definitely has a ground frame and there will be a hut for the token machine, assuming the passenger platform is on Track A you know need a 2-way trap point between teh quarry lines and Track A at the double slip end of the platform.  It will have a ground frame but probably no token hut.

 

3.  If you really, really, want to add signals you can but they are not essential at such a simple location.  You could possibly assume that the signalbox which was, maybe, once there has survived but there is no need for one.  Decision is yours.

 

Thank you very much indeed for your response.

 

It is very interesting to know that I can make the signalling very basic. I hadn't realised how simple it could be in such a situation.

 

You did, however, hit one key point and that is that I now have a choice in the matter. Originally, when planning the layout, I would have welcomed and been pleased that the signalling could have been basic. I know hardly anything about the subject apart from the basic and simplest rules on block operation. However, like many of us I suspect, when I started to try to research the detail of the operation I became more interested in the signalling aspect. For example, in spite of my interest in railways over (too) many years, I do not recall ever seeing yellow ground signals (although I probably did but have forgotten). I do have a couple of books on the subject but found they did not include anything much relevant to this sort of detailed operation of ground signals in particular, hence my questions here. As I proceed with building the layout it is raising new queries continously which is part of the fun.

So, as you rightly say, I now have to decide how far to go with that. The problem, I guess, is that if I decide to signal the left hand end of the layout then I will have to also signal the right hand end which could get a lot more complicated.

 

Rather than ground signals I know that in some stations "calling on" semaphores were used attached to the starter signal posts - might they also have been used in locations like this? I wondered about side by side calling on arms mounted with the starter on track B. One for the headshunt and one for the crossover. I honestly have no idea if this was ever used in this way.

 

If we go back to the original question - If I stay with ground signals then I would like to know how it would have been arranged.

 

Thank you again for taking the time to answer.

 

Don

[highpeakman]

I think things are becoming a bit clearer, I'll try to sum up

 

1. Freight only, BR is left hand end, quarry is right hand end.  In the period you have in mind there might have been a ground frame and a couple of noticeboards (but no signals) and hut for the token machine by the crossover at the left hand end - or that end might simply have been handpoints (and still possibly a hut for a token machine.

The right had end is all 'private' sidings and totally handpoints and everything is under the joint control of a BR Shunter or Chargeman and the quarry people.

(the presence or otherwise of a token depends almost on the level of traffic.)

 

2. You introduce a passenger train element on a regular basis.  In very simple terms little changes - the left hand end crossover definitely has a ground frame and there will be a hut for the token machine, assuming the passenger platform is on Track A you know need a 2-way trap point between teh quarry lines and Track A at the double slip end of the platform.  It will have a ground frame but probably no token hut.

 

3.  If you really, really, want to add signals you can but they are not essential at such a simple location.  You could possibly assume that the signalbox which was, maybe, once there has survived but there is no need for one.  Decision is yours.

 

With regard to point 2. I had not realised that the trap points would be needed there - such is the learning process!. A bit late now unfortunately although I could possibly fettle something to make it look like they were there (non operational). Will have to look at that. Was that always the case at exchange sidings to separate private from BR?

 

Don

[Grovenor]

 

The plan shows signal 548 which I assume was the colour light signal which still glowed red years in the trees after the branch closed. Do you know what year was that plan made?

 

Derby power box was commissioned summer 1969, my last job before I left BR. The plan would have been drawn up a couple of years earlier. The no-signalman key token did allow more than one train, when the crew reached Wirksworth they inserted the token in the machine there. The panel could then release either machine for the next move.

With regard to point 2. I had not realised that the trap points would be needed there -

The trap points need not be a separate point, the double slip will act as a trap when it is set to road B, it just has to be lockable in that position whilst the passenger train is arriving or present. The lock could be achieved by a separate ground frame or a lever on the same ground frame that controls the left hand crossover. An existing signalbox could be downgraded to groundframe status and used for the above purpose without its signals removed. I don't remember now what was done at WIrksworth, I'm pretty sure it was freight only when Derby was commissioned. Matlock still had passengers and you can see on the plan that Ambergate was treated differently and needed a signalman at Matlock.

 

Regards

Keith

[highpeakman]

Derby power box was commissioned summer 1969, my last job before I left BR. The plan would have been drawn up a couple of years earlier. The no-signalman key token did allow more than one train, when the crew reached Wirksworth they inserted the token in the machine there. The panel could then release either machine for the next move.

The trap points need not be a separate point, the double slip will act as a trap when it is set to road B, it just has to be lockable in that position whilst the passenger train is arriving or present. The lock could be achieved by a separate ground frame or a lever on the same ground frame that controls the left hand crossover. An existing signalbox could be downgraded to groundframe status and used for the above purpose without its signals removed. I don't remember now what was done at WIrksworth, I'm pretty sure it was freight only when Derby was commissioned. Matlock still had passengers and you can see on the plan that Ambergate was treated differently and needed a signalman at Matlock.

 

Regards

Keith

 

Your comments are much appreciated and I think you might have provided the answer with regard to the double slip - Thank you. (It will certainly save me a lot of work trying to replicate trap points on existing track!).

 

I know that the Wirksworth branch was operated by key token for many years. At first there were several sections to allow for more flexibility but after your resignalling in 69 it was reduced to a single token, as described above, for the whole branch I think. It became "one train working" in Nov 1989 until closure very shortly after. I have the excellent book about Wirksworth by Howard Sprenger which gives quite a lot of detail.

 

I have felt for many years that Wirksworth was a great basis for a model as it had so many quarry feeders using private owner locos (at one time even including NG), a connection to the Cromford & High Peak (almost) and it was also used as a "Test Track" for Derby works through its life so almost anything Midland and early BR could have worked it at some stage. The range of locos and stock recorded there was wide even including the Midland Pullman and later class 150s visited. Admittedy such use was rare but as modellers we can use any small excuse to run what we like I guess.

 

I should note that while Wirksworth, and the close by Cromford and High Peak, are my inspiration (part of the quarry section of my layout has a "Hopton" type incline with J94s storming up it) I am not trying to make an exact replica layout of either- just the flavour. However I am taking careful note of how things actually worked at Wirksworth, and the comments made on here today, and am now thinking that tokens and ground frames, etc. are very helpful and probably the way to go.

 

While the books provide a lot of information I find there is always some small fact on oprational missing which leaves a hole and the real details come from people who actually built, designed and worked the railway. Thank you and others for all your help.

 

Don

[The Stationmaster]

With regard to point 2. I had not realised that the trap points would be needed there - such is the learning process!. A bit late now unfortunately although I could possibly fettle something to make it look like they were there (non operational). Will have to look at that. Was that always the case at exchange sidings to separate private from BR?

 

Don

Dummy trap points could be added without too much trouble. (The double slip could be used to trap protect Track A but a trap would have to be added to protect the private siding from Track A if it becomes a passenger line although I suspect not all parts of BR might have gone in for trapping both ways

 

Adding signals wouldn't be difficult if you want to go to that extent - just let us know if you decide that's what you want.

[highpeakman]

Dummy trap points could be added without too much trouble. (The double slip could be used to trap protect Track A but a trap would have to be added to protect the private siding from Track A if it becomes a passenger line although I suspect not all parts of BR might have gone in for trapping both ways

 

Adding signals wouldn't be difficult if you want to go to that extent - just let us know if you decide that's what you want.

 

Stationmaster

Thank you very much indeed for your comments and help.

 

However I am now begining to realise that I may have complicated matters even more and not given enough information. I had originally thought that only the exit (to the left) would need to be controlled by signals but now I realise there is much more to it than that.

 

What you cannot see on my diagram is that both lines from the double slip on the right hand side marked "to the quarries" head to two separate siding fans but they also have another link between the two, so that a loop is formed. This was designed to allow the PO shunting engines to run round the wagons when moving them under the filling hoppers, etc without needing to foul the BR tracks A & B. Also from one of those sidings a private owner branch line feeds off climbing up at 1 in 16 (my mini Hopton) to cross the mainline near the tunnel mouth and into the fiddle yard at the left hand end.

 

I have put in a catch point at the bottom of the incline (non-operational) and intended to "signal" the incline using some form of "industrial" signal to show the catch point is set correctly. Just a "local" safety feature but not to mainline rules.

 

The other thing that makes it even worse is that the PO locos will need to cross the double slip in order to gain access to the private owner Loco siding south of track B. The concept was that in previous eras the whole of the above track diagram would have been BR owned and operated with branches off to the quarries but, over time, the quarry company took over more of the track. Another reason to make it ground frame worked I think.

 

While I would be very interested indeed to know what would have had to be done if the BR only lines were fully signalled, I really would not want to waste your time giving consideration to something that may be totally unrealistic and that I may not be able to use. I fear that I may have made things just too complicated. So, while curiosity and interest drives one train of thought, practicality is driving the other. I think the only way I can do it is based on BR reality and so I propose to "use" token keys and groundframes.

 

Thanks to you and Grovenor again for your responses. I always read your comments in this section with great interest.

 

Don

[The Stationmaster]

Sounds quite alright to me Don - but in the circumstances you describe you can't use the double slip as a trap point - the traps would have to be further back towards your fans of sidings.  the rest of it is easy believe it or not.  The only complication is if you have passenger trains running to Track A which will require more safety precautions but if it is just freight then signals at the left end if you want them, but not compulsory, probably avoid any signals at the double slip end if at all possible because in the real world it would add a lot of expense to no real advantage and the whole thing would be worked by folk talking to each other (most of the time, with the occasional 'unintended consequence').

 

I think your 'tokens and ground frames' decision is sensible for the layout you have in mind and is realistic.  Speaking from 1970s experience (when things were a bit different) that would give you a probable practical limit of around 30 trains a day on your BR branch line to the left, we certainly ran 27 on such a line on several occasion (that is 27 in each direction btw).

[Grovenor]

The double slip could be used to trap protect Track A but a trap would have to be added to protect the private siding from Track A if it becomes a passenger line although I suspect not all parts of BR might have gone in for trapping both ways

Now you have me puzzled, the requirements were/are to protect passenger lines from goods lines and sidings by a trap, not VV. So what do you mean by 'both ways'?  On this layout the double slip will divert anything from the sidings onto road B clear of the passenger on road A, then the left hand crossover provides a trap at that end.

Regards

Keith

[TheSignalEngineer]

At the time when BR was still running into the sugar works at Foley Park there was double trapping between the SVR and BR. This is a special working going through from Kidderminster to Bewdley  in 1979

 

Photograph Copyright C E Steele

[highpeakman]

The SignalEngineer: I do not have the knowledge to comment on that I'm afraid.

 

While I have plans of Wirksworth station and yard in 1940 and 1982 I do not have track layout plans of the Middlepeak exchange sidings which were further up the branch beyond the main yard so I do not know of any trap arrangements there (if any). However there was a trap point in 1982 on the line down from the MIddlepeak exchange sidings before it entered the main BR yard. In 1940 the exchange line came in on a loop to the yard giving protection that way. I assume that this link up to the exchange was worked by BR only but am happy to be corrected. While in 1940 there was still one quarry line directly into Wirksworth yard it fed into loops from the "wrong direction" at the end of the yard (i.e. facing away from the BR yard exit) so was not a problem with the loop again giving protection - any runaway would not have gone in the direction of the yard or passenger area. Passenger trains never went beyond Wirksworth itself of course so I can only assume that, at this particular location, double trap points would not be required.

 

As my layout is not the same as Wirksworth it is possible that the track design might require it but I am reliant on expert advice.

 

This is probably a silly question that further serves to demonstrate my own lack of knowledge but, in the photgraph above, it appears that there are two levers to each trap? I am guessing that each lever frame shown operates one trap but that is not clear. If my assumption is correct why are two rods required for one trap? - is the second lever a lock? If so, are most traps locked in this manner?

 

Don

[RailWest]

My guess would be that each GF has one lever for the trap and one for the FPL, given that passneger trains would be run over the link.

 

Much the same exists at Motala on the Swanage Branch, where NR and SR meet, except that there it is all combined on one GF.

[TheSignalEngineer]

My guess would be that each GF has one lever for the trap and one for the FPL, given that passneger trains would be run over the link.

 

Much the same exists at Motala on the Swanage Branch, where NR and SR meet, except that there it is all combined on one GF.

IIRC each frame had the FPL lever released by the train staff for the line it was protecting.

[Grovenor]

This scenario of double traps with Facing point locks has nothing to do with the normal trapping to protect passenger lines from goods lines and sidings, it relates to protection of lines linking two passenger lines under different management and for the most part would be a preservation era issue.

Some of the trapping within the yard at Wirksworth probably would be better described as catch points due to the rather extreme gradients of some of the quarry lines.

Keith