Jump to content

Titanius Anglesmith

Members
  • Content Count

    248
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

178 Good

Profile Information

  • Location
    Cornwood

Recent Profile Visitors

507 profile views
  1. Being pedantic, that's a trainstop not a tripcock. The tripcock is the arm on the train that interacts with the trainstop.
  2. Southend on the LT&SR, though not quite a terminus* as two of the six platform roads were on through lines. The goods headshunt was parallel to the dead-end Platform 1. * Originally it was a terminus. When the line was extended to Shoeburyness the lines through platforms 2 and 3 were simply carried on with very little change to the rest of the station. I think the kickback goods arrangement post-dates the extension to Shoeburyness. edit: having checked the OS rather than relying on memory, now I’m not so sure. The sidings were mostly kickbacks, but what may be the headshunt is set away from the bay platform.
  3. Shunting between the loco yard, carriage sidings and platforms would have to be done via the arrival line instead of departure. Not ideal, but not a show-stopper either.
  4. The original branch platform at Upminster had facing connections to the main lines in steam days (and a run-round loop), so in theory it could have been used to terminate trains from Fenchurch St, although I don't know if it ever was. The connection at the Romford end was rarely used and was actually removed in the 1930s, but was reinstated during the Second World War as an alternate route in case of disruption elsewhere.
  5. At Grays there were frequent complaints about how long the crossing gates were closed for, so a calling-on arm was added to the home to allow trains into the platform with the gates still open. I expect a similar solution was used in other locations too. That’s probably not necessary in the OP’s situation though, Grays being on a relatively busy line (and nowhere near the GW either).
  6. Agreed. Why so many spare levers, and all at one end? I don’t think 10 or 14 ground signals are needed. For a “sleepy backwater” I’d argue that 2 and 17 are an extravagance (though not impossible), same with the Calling-On arm (swap for a ground signal, perhaps) and splitting home. Normal practice at most stations like this would be for all trains to arrive on the platform road, run round, then shunt as required.
  7. I’m happy to be corrected, but I don’t think that was the reason. In most cases it simply isn’t practical to run a goods or ECS train head-first into a yard because it traps the loco at the stops. It’s far easier to reverse the train in, then the loco doesn’t get trapped and no running round is required. Then of course there’s the FPL issue. Any facing point on the passenger line needs an FPL, which in turn means more cost. In most cases the cost isn’t justified just to allow a goods train into a yard when a trailing point will do. As as always there are exceptions, eg Southend Goods mentioned earlier. On the same line there was also Dagenham Dock, Purfleet and Grays, all of which had facing points into the sidings. This was because of the large amount of traffic going to and from the industries connected to the sidings. The facing access meant that the main line wasn’t blocked by constant reversing moves. At all three stations the sidings were arranged as Arrival and Departure, and the loco was able to run round in the sidings (before someone questions it, these were not marshalling yards).
  8. On the other hand, for a model I prefer your suggestion (access via headshunt), or a trailing access from the departure road via a crossing or single slip.
  9. Why not? Southend Goods had a similar arrangement (facing access direct off the Main) from circa 1906 if not earlier. The yard was used for general goods at first, with carriage sidings added later. Edit: having said that, Southend Goods also had its own release crossover so locos could run round inside the yard.
  10. Sorry for the bump... Does anyone know the answer to this?
  11. Beautiful scenic work
  12. I don't know how likely it is that the double-slip would be used to access the upper terminating platform. Could it be made a double junction using another R/H point and two single-slips, like this? Apart from getting rid of a double-slip in the running line, it also avoids those reverse curves as the train enters the platform. Just a suggestion Looking forward to seeing this develop
  13. LU was using a form of ARS (the “Programme Machine”) as far back as the late 1950s on the Northern Line, interfacing with power lever frames. The timetable information was held on rolls of plastic film with holes punched in it (or not) to represent ones and zeros. The Programme Machines have now all been superseded by more modern technology
  14. Mike, would you mind explaining what this means please? I’ve never come across the term before. Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.