Martin Shaw

Hi adanapress The two signals are the result of the lines from Perth to Stanley Jn being bi-directional. How long this has been in operation I'm not certain, but theres no mention of it in the 1977 sectional appendix so reasonably it post dates then. Regards Martin

ColHut You should perhaps bear in mind that the "branch" is in fact the Highland Railway main line, and the main is the Caledonian Strathmore route to Kinnaber Junction and Aberdeen so whilst it was a rural junction, it's no sleepy byway. Regards Martin

Jim The cause of the change to what we nowadays accept as normal practice was sequential locking, both mechanical and electrical, and line clear releases. Whilst the Ais Gill accident put track circuits to the fore, seq locking makes it quite difficult to accidentally run one train into the rear of another. Regards Martin

This was quite a common arrangement in Scotland, and as has been suggested, is indeed to simplify the locking. With this, almost all of the interlocking is straight dead locks, rather than bothway or conditional locks. Given that Stevens held the patent for tappet interlocking I can't explain readily why this was done, but it may have been a stipulation of the BoT rather than the railway company itself. In answer to Jim's comment re levers 15 and 16, the levers required to signal trains on the up and down main lie next to each other, and remembering that in those days signals were cleared in the opposite direction to the travel of the train, 15.16,17,18,19,20 in that order is wholly logical. Regards Martin

Hi Pete Now you've finished the 165, nice job, your going to hate me for telling you this. Post 24 you mentioned a hole at the front of the bonnet which you thought was for an alternative exhaust location, it is in fact the radiator filler cap. Sorry about that. Regards Martin

I can only think of one location, Highbridge, Somerset, where the access to the GWR goods yard was via a level crossing across the S&D Burnham line. This was a proper gated level crossing controlled by a signalbox, Highbridge East B in BR days, so might not be what the OP had in mind. As others have commented, extremely rare. Regards Martin

Asking questions is the way to find things out, apologies not needed. Regards Martin

Suzie With respect, I don't think you have fully grasped how this works. Splitting distants are only provided where there is minimal speed differentiation between the two (or more) routes. You cannot directly infer a speed from splitting distants. At the time, and possibly still today, there was a speed restriction through Petteril Bridge Junction of 20mph, so any train, goods or otherwise had to slow for that. The splitting distants for the passenger lines are purely to provide advance directional information and also to forewarn the driver that he doesn't have to stop at Petteril Bridge. The passenger lines had a maximum speed restriction of 50mph from Carlisle to Durranhill and onto the NER at Corby Gates. The goods lines had a speed restriction of 20mph, but since Petteril Bridge to London Road was only 500yds even allowing a clear run through the fixed distant recognised this and provided adequate braking distance at that speed. Regards Martin

Funnily enough I was discussing London Road Junction with another member recently. At that time I was working on the WCML mod based in Carlisle and No7 was a favoured evening time waster, a most welcoming signalman and plenty of tea. I can't pretend I know the type of distant arm on the goods lines, it was I realise 45 years ago, however I'm almost certain it would have been fixed. If a working distant had been required then it would have to have the same appearance as the passenger lines i.e a splitting distant. I think if it were otherwise the signal sighting committee would have rejected the proposal. Just a thought but relevant I think. Regards Martin

Hi Robert Nice drawing, are you certain that it was a No7 tablet to Arisaig? I'm pretty certain that the whole of the WHextension was No 6 before RETB. Regards Martin

I thought in light of this thread you may care to see these. 7mm in crimson and cream, which I think may well make these some of the rarer Exleys around. I acquired them from now sadly departed good friend as a rake of 4, it included an LMS liveried restaurant car which I didn't really want to keep so I exchanged it with a local O gauge group for the Wayoh bogies and fine scale wheels. They originally had some pretty grim cast bogies, possibly original, possibly Leeds, and coarse scale wheels. As models they are obviously generic LMS, and of them the middle one, a TK numbered M2321 is actually pretty good. The real thing being built at Derby in 46-47. The top one is obviously the exact same model with the addition of first class designation on the doors and a number M3377, which is really two fudges too many. The pre war FKs' were 5 full and one coupe compartment, the post war 6 compartment with added doors on the corridor side which makes the model completely wrong. Nor can I find any evidence that the LMS ever had a coach, of any description, numbered 3377. The BTK whilst lacking the guards lookouts is a reasonable interpretation of a dia 1968 vehicle, built primarily at Derby with one lot at Wolverton between 1937 and 1946. I feel however that the guards door should be nearer the end. The LMS built over 500 of these so they would have been common. The number is a complete fiction, it having been carried by a 60' BCK of period 2 design. The first lot of 1968 vehicles were numbered 5957 - 6020, the remainder 26100 - 26545, with the the very odd quirk that 26190 wasn't used. Dimensionally they are accurate and the finish is typical Exley high quality. One has to acknowledge their shortcomings but also recognise that even today achieving a similar quality is not for the faint hearted, or me. It's likely more than 50 years ago I first saw Exley coaches and of course wanted some, way beyond my fathers disposable model railway budget, and these three are probably the only ones I will own but a boyhood dream has been fulfilled and they serve as a timely reminder of a very good friend. Can't ask for more really. I hope my Sunday afternoon ramblings may be of some interest. Regards Martin