RailWest

Well, the minimum that you would need is a basic trap-point, but nothing more - no spur. Looking at the photo there appears to be a switch blade on the RH side, so as there would needed to have been one on the LH side at least then it would appear to have been a 2-blade trap.

A quick sketch would help a lot to have a better understanding :-) Why do you think it would be on a GF rather than worked from the SB?

Trap, not catch, as it was facing for exit traffic :-) The signal-diagram merely shows it as a simple trap-point, tho' such things are not always truely representative of what was actually 'on the ground'. However the attached image - a rather crudely-enlarged snip from what IIRC was a photo from the SWC's Eyres collection - does suggest to me nothing more than a plain trap. You may wish to form your own opinion :-)

IMHO this one looks like just a pair of rails sunk into the wall, as opposed to the usual alternative of a sleeper or similar. As regards the Up SIding, do not forget that this appears to have been lengthened at the south end when the signal-box by the junction was abolished, so it could have been either the original one relocated or a new one provided at the time.

† - well, you learn something every day here - thanks!

RCH code P was in fact Passengers and Parcels. P* was Passengers but no parcels. P with a 'dagger' suffix (sorry, don't have that symbol!) was Parcels, but no passengers.

AIUI you are now looking at Blaenavon (Low Level) GWR again then? The locking table tells us that the backing signal 22 required points 9 reverse. Similarly No 23 also required 9 reverse. I don't know what the gradient is there, but if it's downhill going to the left then I would suggest that the 'balanced points' were to protect the single-line from any runaways for the 'mineral line' platform road, as there would be no wrong-road signalled movement - unless, of course, a train coming in on the mineral line platform from the RH end over-ran and SPADed signal 22. I doubt that they would have provided a double-slip unless the traffic really demanded it - complicated to install and maintain and it would need a FPL for LH-bound trains. Maybe a single-slip at best, to allow LEs to run back between the shed and the passenger platform, but the other part of a double-slip - go between the lower line and the upper line - would have no use at all.

AIUI 'balanced points' is simply another term for points which are not worked from a signal-box or ground, but essentially are sprung-loaded or otherwise biased to normally lie in one direction, but could be pushed over when trailed. In the location indicated, almost certainly a set of spring-loaded trailing catch points that can be trailed shut by a train running from L to R, but otherwise lie 'open' to prevent wrong-direction movements from the upper platfrom line back onto the LH single line.

I wonder if the OP has been influenced by the GWR Blaenavon, where the upper platform line appears to have been goods-only and passenger traffic used the lower platform only?

Approaching from the right, you signal for routes into either platform. There is then a signal at the LH end of the upper platform, but nothing equivalent at the LH end of the lower platform.

Oh dear....I would really like to come and see this, but it clashes with the WSR 'Spring Event' and other things too :-( Mind you, knowing my 'luck', I won't get to any of the events after all !

A quick skim of the web produces a few pix of Blaenavon HL with some signals in view. If you couple those with an old 25" OS map, you might get some clues. I'm sure there is a L&NWR Society, so you could ask them and/or ask the Signalling Record Society to pass your query to their relevant Corresponding Member.

Have you asked the SRS Archivist ?

I would agree that traffic would have gone on a Down goods, which probably continued on towards Glastonbury etc afterwards - I doubt it warranted a special trip from Evercreech Jcn and back, but who knows, where was the loaded traffic destined for? Knowing the tendency of railwaymen to do the jib by simplest/easiest safe method possible, I would guess that they left the main train in the Up loop at Pylle, went to the Lime Siding, propelled back to Pylle, came to a stand at 2, then the signalman reversed 8 and hand-signalled them back into the Up loop. Simples all round :-)

I think you've got your Up and Down confused!

AFAIK the passing-loop and Down platform were concurrent additions in the 1891 alterations, but sadly I don't have a copy of MT6/566/3 for reference. As regards the part which I have emboldened, I don't understand that :-(

Sadly no clues from the Minutes, other than to refer to the decision to remove it in 1912 as it had had little use.

Pylle was the first station up the Branch from Evercreech Junction to Highbridge. In 1891 it was upgraded to have two platforms and a passing-loop for passenger trains. At that time the existing old S&DJR Type 1 signal-box was re-locked (or perhaps had a new frame?) to work the layout shown in the attached diagram. Now, what puzzles me about that layout is the crossover (points 9) between the Up and Down loop lines. This is not a feature seen at other S&DJR passing-loops and it's hard to see what purpose it might have served. Any thoughts on this please? About 1/2-mile to the west of Pylle station lay the Pylle Line Works siding, which was opened in 1869 and closed in 1912. This siding was shunted by trains which ran from Pylle and then back again (see http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/railco/sdjr/sh-staff.html#pylle-staff ). I wonder therefore if it is just a coincidence (or not) that the crossover was taken out-of-use in December 1912?

>>>The dock road turnout is actually separately controlled.... As was the prototype of course, but interlocking requires the crossover road to be normal before the dock road points could be set for the yard exit.

Looks very nice. However I see that the signalman appears to be struggling to open the signal-box doors, so the driver of the Up train just SPADed the Up Starting anyway - time for a Form 1 maybe? Better send for the locking technician too, as the dock road points were set for a conflicting move with the crossover road ....:-)

Oops - my 'typo' - J&P said 1856 - sorry ! Hopefully there will be time for some more research idc, but for the moment I was hoping that 'someone might know'.....:-)

ASHCOTT (and Meare) station. Atthill implies in his book that this was one of the original SCR stations and opened in 1854. Oakley ('Somerset Arilway Stations) says that it was a later addition in 1856 (similar to Bason Bridge and Edington Road). Judge&Potts also say 1856. Cooke gives no date. Does anyone have any more information please?

Yes

That was a different thing from the purpose of an Annett's Shield, which is what the photo shows. In the C/L example, I think the semaphore green aspect was blanked off completely ?

It was known as an Annett's Shield after the signal engineer who designed it. Very common on the L&SWR. It's purpose was to prevent 'stray' light from behind the arm giving a false 'green' when the arm was at danger. When the SR changed from LQ to UQ arms the position of the green aspect changed to being in front of the post rather than to the side - not a problem on nice thick wooden posts, but with lattice posts or those built of 2 rails with a large gap between them the same risk of a false green existed. That was solved by fixing a rectangular plate to the post immediately behind the spectacle plate - often not noticeable in photographs unless the arm was 'off'.