Titanius Anglesmith

It’s not unlike Bakewell, albeit with the shed in a different spot https://signalbox.org/~SBdiagram.php?id= 900

My local line made fair use of selectors where industrial expansion led to new sidings being added to existing layouts, though I haven’t come across it at a double slip yet. In some cases the selected signals were controlled from a push/pull lever, so three or more arms were controlled by one lever.

Great, thanks

Greetings All, I know signal placement has been done to death so apologies in advance. When a single shunt disc controls the exit from more than one siding, where is the signal placed? For example, 6 signal at Harlesden: https://signalbox.org/~SBdiagram.php?id= 134 Is it placed in the 6 foot between the two sidings as close to the fouling point as possible? Or on the outside where it can be closer to the tips of the trap, angled to give the best sighting from either siding? Thanks

Depends where the light switch is Doors should be hinged on the side furthest from the light switch, as not to obstruct it when opened. All three of the bedrooms in my house have the switch near the corner, so the doors all open away from the corner.

Being pedantic, that's a trainstop not a tripcock. The tripcock is the arm on the train that interacts with the trainstop.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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).

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.

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.

Beautiful scenic work

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

Interesting, thanks for the info

Mike, would you mind explaining what this means please? I’ve never come across the term before. Thanks

Ah yes, I see now that it’s a slotted post. I also see that you said it was NER above Thanks

That’s a beautifully built signal. Interesting arrangement too with the arm behind the doll but the spectacle plate in front (or are my eyes deceiving me?) Was that a common arrangement on the H&B?

That’s an interesting observation to my modern eyes... on my patch the old point machines are steadily being replaced by modern variants with integral FPLs, regardless of where or how they’re used. At some locations we think the drivers have made it a sport to smash the points up...

The bits in bold answer my questions perfectly, thanks Mike. We’ve still got plenty of lever frames left on LU but no FPL levers, so I’ve always wondered how they interacted with the rest of the frame.

Afternoon All, I'm sure this has been covered before but "FPL" comes up so often in the search it's hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. The Hayling Island thread has aroused my curiosity regarding the locking of FPL levers, but Hayling Island looks a bit unusual to me. In the example below lets assume the FPL lever 3 stands out when locked (this is just an example, it's not meant to represent a full track plan or proper numbering): 1. Naturally lever 4 (the home) would be released by 3 reversed. Would there typically be any locking between levers 1 and 3? I.e. would the FPL be used as it's there anyway, even though the move is trailing? 2. How likely would it be that the FPL would bolt 2 both ways (in which case 5 would also be released by 3)? It seems like an unnecessary complication for a shunt move. Thanks in advance

Yes we do have our fair share of relay failures but it’s rare for them do be really elusive (assuming the failure hasn’t self-cleared by the time the technician gets there, which our relay failures have a knack of doing). Our electronic failures on the other hand can keep us guessing, and that situation is steadily getting worse as the system ages.

I have now. Very interesting, thank you for the link