Jump to content

RailWest

Members
  • Posts

    1,746
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.railwest.org.uk

Profile Information

  • Location
    West Country

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

RailWest's Achievements

1k

Reputation

  1. What about the alternative, where the block section is actually the stretch of line past the platform? In other words, the 'Home' at the entrance to the platform is West's 'section signal' for the line to East, and the 'Starter' at the exit from the platform is actually East's Home signal. Neither signal would be slotted by both boxes.
  2. Different railway companies had different colour schemes, and also at different times. For example, level-crossing locks were blue on some lines at one time, but then became brown in later years. Could the OP be more specific about his chosen period please?
  3. It is certainly the case AFAIK - and from all the examples which I have seen - that GWR block bells used for block working on double-track lines did contain relays driven by the line wire circuit, which switched current to the bell coils from a local circuit. The block bells used with electric train staff or electric key token circuits had no tappers (worked by the plunger in the staff/token instruments) and no relays of their own, usually being controlled from relays in the instruments instead. AIUI the bell coils local circuit was usually about 6V.
  4. Now, here's a puzzle.... The signal-box at Burnham had a door and two windows in the end nearer the pier. The end near Highbridge had merely two windows (as seen in this photo dated 1960 https://thetransportlibrary.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=166290&search=Burnham-on-Sea) and appears like that in all the pre-BR pix which I have seen. BUT...this photo is dated 1952 and clearly shows 3 windows !https://thetransportlibrary.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&category_id=65&page=1876&product_id=70637 so unless the image date is wrong, was the box altered from 2 to 3 and then back to 2 ?? Just to confuse the issue, after the box was sold to the Yieldingtree Museum they converted that end to a door + one window (of different pattern) and when eventually it ended up in the hands of the S&DRT they converted it back to 3 windows.
  5. A BR-era job with a frame put in the former Porter's Office on the Up Platform
  6. Corfe Castle is on the site of the FIRST, not the second, box at that station. Again, it is a modified version of the original and about a 1/3rd longer in length.
  7. >>>The signal box at Swanage is a preservation copy of the original that was demolished, built on the same site as the old one - and you would be hard pressed to tell the difference. No, you won't :-) because (a) it is NOT on the same site as the original , but on the opposite side of the line with its frame back-to-track and (b) it is a modified version of the previous Type 3 style.
  8. The Scottish lines originally were traditional LH running, but AIUI changed to RH running when RETB was introduced as it was easier then (for some reason) to deal with access to the sidings. The (recently) new 'dynamic' loop at Axminster was indeed RH running originally , apparently AIUI because this fitted better with the geometry of the points at the loop ends by enabling departing trains to leave the loop at speed. Exactly why and when they changed to LH running - and whether that is still the case - is not known to me. Certainly as a 'customer' I found the RH running b***** confusing when waiting for a train at a station that was different from all the others on the line :-(
  9. >>>>...and only applies to the local geography such that other places still exist as normal (Exeter, Bristol, Bath.....) That is comforting to know :-)
  10. AIUI the terms 'Direction Lever' and 'Acceptance Lever' relate to different methods of block working over single lines - sadly I can never remember the precise difference between the two :-( Certainly from a GWR/BR(WR) perspective the term 'Interlocking Lever' was often used for levers which controlled one of a number of different functions, say (for example) GF releases or 'switching out' at single-line passing-loops or 'wrong direction' running on AB lines such as at Exeter St Davids etc, so not exclusively related to block working in any way.
  11. It might be worth asking the Exeter West Group about the arrangements for the Interlocking Levers which worked between the Middle and West boxes - it's been a very long time since I dabbled with them to remember now :-(
  12. Which would suggest that it is physically possible to pull both levers?
  13. Surely part of the set-up for the Interlocking levers at East and West must be that they lock each other, which presumably would have been done electrically. Otherwise, what is to stop both boxes pulling their levers and releasing the signals at both ends at the same time?
  14. One important thing to remember, which does not seem to have been mentioned so far, is that - regardless of whether traps are provided or not, and whatever 'the rules' may say - it depends also upon what the interlocking does - or does not - allow. In a 'typical' simple passing-loop with no traps, then the opposing Home signals would be interlocked so that it would be impossible physically to pull them both 'off' at the same time, thereby enforcing the relevant rule about 'only one train at a time'.
  15. Actually, there are two now :-) The layout at Crowcombe Heathfield (on a summit) with traps at each end replicates what was there in GWR and BR days until the line closed. The layout at Williton (much more on the level-ish) used to be similar until modified in the 1960s by BR. It has now been reinstated with traps at both ends again. The ability to admit trains simultaneously certainly helps to cut down on possible delays.
×
×
  • Create New...