Light Railway operations / signalling ? help required

[AndiMax]

There are many helpful posts on signalling and operations on this forum. However I would appreciate very much if some specialists could answer my questions and give some recommendations on signaling and operations of the 1946 light railway I am currently building.

 

The fictitious 7mm Wanford Light Railway (track layout see picture, the photo shows a scene at “Whitehall Halt”, the figure is painted by Chris Clark, http://clarksmodels.wix.com)is a mixture of Col. Stephens railways and the Wantage Tramway. In fact the layout of Wanford is based on Wantage with locally thrown switches. Traffic is light but not following “One Engine in Steam” as the gas works in Wanford and the Jackfield tileworks sometimes require goods service and switching in addition to the usual passenger and mixed train service. Also I’d like to have trains meeting at “Jackfield”.

 

Pictured is a signaling and operations scheme that I developed based on my incompetent interpretation of GWR principles as described in Great Western Branchline Modelling – Part One by Stephen Williams. The railway is divided into two blocks that are protected by starter signals. The “bigger” yards are protected by home signals as a whole. Shunting within yard limits is allowed as long as all relevant home signals are set on ‘danger’.

Now my questions:

• Is it really adequate to have a token (or staff) controlled operation on this kind of light railway in the 1940s?
• Have other operating systems been in existence on light railways allowing several engines in steam but avoiding signals like i. e. in Germany where Nebenbahnen used a combination of fixed signs, communication between trains by whistle and a central operator allowing train movements on request?
• Assuming that the proposed signalling solution at Wanford is correct: How was shunting by one locomotive while another one is waiting at the station platform enabled? In which way was the shunter informed that he has to leave the mainline and set all switches so that the passenger train could leave (or a train waiting at the home signal could enter) the station?

 

Any advice, corrections, suggestions etc. gratefully received...

Wanford Light Railway.pdf

[The Stationmaster]

Perfectly ok to enforce the security of the single line by means of a Train Staff or Staff & Ticket working or possibly even a divisible Train Staff - in fact anything more sophisticated would be unusual on a light railway and even telephone block was acceptable in the late 1940s.  For example the Weston, Clevedon & Portished used Train Staff & Ticket with printed tickets  But the principle of shutting trains in(side sidings etc) would still require to be enforced so ground frames released by the Train Staff would be needed if more than two trains (engines) are going to operate - in fact the real complication is operating more than one train.

 

Effectively you can make it up to suit yourself provided you have some sort of logical space separation system  to allow more than one train or a shunting engine can be kept clear of the 'main' line.

[AndiMax]

Thank You Mike,

So if I understand this correct: I could lock the train waiting at the platform, shunt the yard (with a 2nd engine), then lock the shunter in a siding and let the passenger train go of.

Locking the shunter is easy. It can wait at the goods siding which is the uppermost at Wanford, close to the plattform. Locking the waiting passenger train isn't that easy because I haven't built in a catch point at the entrance of the platform siding to the main respectively loop at Wanford for space reasons. Now is there any means other than a catch point existing that I could use to lock the train at the station platform?

[Nearholmer]

I'm not even sure you need to worry about that.

 

When the trains are "inside" the home signal, they aren't "in section", but within "station limits" under the control of whoever is nominated in charge of the place - classically a signalman, but on a light railway, more likely the "station agent and general factotum".

 

In theory (which light railways didn't all, always follow) you should secure the points over which the passenger train moves with facing-point locks, but you don't need to do that except when it moves. I have a strong feeling that some light railways "got away with" weighted point levers being accepted as a sufficient lock, just as many continental railways did.

 

Any amount of general arm, flag or lamp waving ought to suffice to keep things reasonably safe.

 

Stationmaster knows a lot more about this stuff than I (that's only a guard's cap that my avatar wearing, so he is Senior Man here), so I will bow out if he suggests different things.

 

Kevin

[BG John]

If it's a tramway, does it need any rules at all? According to the book on the Glyn Valley Tramway I read recently, it was perfectly acceptable to run more than one train on the line at the same time, as long as the drivers knew there was another train about, and they watched out for it!

[AndiMax]

Thank you Kevin,

I asume you are right: it is necessary to rely on the station agent. Locking the passenger train would only protect the shunter. But still the shunter could endanger the waiting train at the platform but for a two sided derail / catch point ...

[Nearholmer]

And, in the case of Wantage, I think BGJ is right - after I posted, it struck me that it was built under tramway, not railway, legislation, so probably operated on "line of sight". My Wantage books are right at the back of the book cave, so I can't easily check.

 

Having studied light and other peculiar railways for years, before going "mainstream" three years ago, my suggestion is that you read-up on the particulars of a few, because practices ranged widely, even between those built under the 1896 Act. The Act is really an "enabler", and the individual Light Railway Orders could/did/do permit or require different things in different places. Study brake vans on the K&ESR, as an instance.

 

The biggest, most common, modelling mistake is to signal a light railway just like a typical branch-line built to full compliance with the 1889 "lock, block and brake" act ....... Which was exactly what the 1896 Act was designed not to achieve.

 

Kevin

[BG John]

Study brake vans on the K&ESR, as an instance.

Very easy to do, as they seem to have spent their lives in sidings, and not attached to trains! It helps with small layouts though, as you can add an extra wagon to trains instead. For the early days you also need the guard hopping from one coach to the next while the train is in motion, probably desperately trying to avoid losing his grip and slipping off the footboards, while checking tickets!

Edited September 28, 2015 by BG John

[RailWest]

Some random observations:-

 

1. Light Railways are almost a case of "make it up to suit yourself as long it is roughly OK" :-) I wouldn't try to adhere to the practices of any particular mainline railway company other than just to get the general principle, tho' frankly there is so little in your layout that requires much more than 'home' and 'starter' signals anyway.

2. Col Stephens did use electric train tablet on some of his lines (eg the ND&CJLR) - not sure if he had any electric key token sections - but I would agree with Stationmaster in that train staff & ticket + telephone would be more likely.

3. Facing Point Locks would probably be 'economic' types (same lever as the point).

4. I would suggest the 'signal box' at Wanford is in the wrong place - far more likely to be somewhere nearer the station alongside the loop, so that (a) the porter/signalman did not have too far to walk and (b) reduce the length of point rodding required.

[Nearholmer]

Here is the signalling diagram to a "respectable" light railway terminus, not one of the more "wild and wooly" places:

 

http://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/sre/R1852.htm

 

No signal-box, the instruments being in the station, a simple ground-frame, and the luxury of two signals, each with its own post.

 

A typical economy would be to put the two signals on a single post, with the train drivers knowing where the stopping points in the rear of each signal actually are. Tenterden Town had (still has?) an example with, I think, three arms on one post, two Reading in one direction, the third in the opposite direction. http://colonelstephenssociety.co.uk/colonel%20stephens%20society%20drawings%20service-35/index.html

 

Kevin

 

PS: I just noticed, when looking at your diagram, that your signals are on the right, with arms facing right. Unusual, even by LR standards, methinks.

Edited September 28, 2015 by Nearholmer

[The Stationmaster]

Light railways were normally only required - at most - to provide Home and Starting signals, and the wording then effectively says 'in conjunction with a token etc system'.  But one has somewwhere to draw a line between One Engine I Steam operation and having more than one engine in steam at any one time.  But to a very large extent you can do what you want - the only other stipulation being that points on passenger lines must have facing point locks (and in effect economic locks were indicated as a suitable option).

 

As far as the passenger train is concerned the answer is simple - the passenger engine can remain 'shut in' when the other one is allowed out - so the passenger engine stays in a siding or on the run round  (or in reality nobody bothers)

[Donw]

I would certainly concur with the use of a Train Staff and tickets much cheaper than a token system. Train staffs are still in use today. As regards the shunting I think the only concern is when a train is approaching when any shunting would stop and the main line kept clear. Once the train is in the platform the moves are all slow speed. Remember light railways were not that busy so stopping movements when a train is due would not be a big issue.

Don 

[AndiMax]

Thank you for all these comments. I tried to incorporate them in my updated layout below.

 

No electric token but a stuff & ticket + telephone system for the blocks and at Wanford a station master being responsible for all operations. To reduce walking he now has a ground frame in a more centralized position but still has to walk a little bit because two switches have local levers. In Jackfield there likely will be a signal box.

 

Position of signals on light railways is still a miracle to me as you can find almost everything in books on light railways. Nevertheless I shoved the signals based on Nearholmers comment (hopefully correct). But I am still not sure about the signals at Wanford. I included a picture of a train waiting at the platform which gives an impression of the yard size and what the engineer would see. The second picture shows a bird’s eye view with the possible position of the starter signal and the ground frame. The starter signal is on the outer (left) side of the curve besides the run through loco shed and the water tower (foam board block). I felt this adequate due to visibility reasons.

The home signal is also on the outer side of the curve (right when approaching the yard) and in front of the overpass that’s also visible as a mock up in the bird’s eye view.

 

One more comment on the facing point locks. I have one in Whitehall but none in Wanford because all sidings are lower than the main line (and the real Wantage has none as well).

 

Now I am looking forward for your valued comments …

Andreas

[The Stationmaster]

Having just checked the 1920s situation Facing Point Locks were required on passenger lines on light railways.

 

On the above sketch you need a second ground frame at Wanford to operate the points adjacent to the end of the station platform otherwise they would not be compliant.  I would be more inclined to put the starting signal just there as well.

 

I see that Jackfield has a proper signalbox which is probably unavoidable although a couple of ground frames could be used instead.  In both directions the starting signals should ideally be at the end of the station platform and the home signals more or less at the toes of the points leading to the loop - there is no reason at all to put the latter further out from the points so they would be there to save a bit of money.

[AndiMax]

Thanks Mike

Is a signal at the end of the platform also valid for a train (i. e. a freight train) starting from anywhere but the platform track?

My positioning of the home signals is according to german practice. In Germany a train had to stop 1 braking distance before the first switch. Seemingly that's not the case on British light railways despite the fact that 1 train length of the mainline is required for switching?!

[Nearholmer]

Andi

 

In true light railway mode, I will differ slightly from some of the other suggestions.

 

1) put both the Home and Starter at Wansford on one, tall, post adjecent to the road-over bridge. (Whatever you do, make sure both arms read left of the post from the oncoming train);

 

2) a single ground-frame at Wansford, controlling the three points that are on the passenger line, plus their FPLs, and the two signals, making eight levers in total;

 

3) starter interlocked with points and FPLs;

 

3) passenger or mixed trains not to leave the platform at Wansford until the starter signal is clear;

 

4) non-passenger trains in possession of staff/ticket can be flagged into section, past the starter, from any location;

 

5) at Jackfield, two ground-frames, one at each end of the loop, each with two levers, one point, one FPL;

 

6) signs outside the loops, requiring incoming trains to stop, whistle, and wait until called forward from the platform;

 

7) guard of train then to go to station, set the required route (loop-siding or platform) if necessary, and call the train forward;

 

8) if the guard finds the required route already occupied, he waits until it is clear,before setting the route and calling his train forward;

 

9) guards to confer (or resort to fisticuffs) to agree order of shunting etc.

 

All very procedural, but keeps the capital cost down!

 

I'm assuming, BTW, that "officially" you can only pass a passenger and a goods train at Jackfield, since there is only one platform, but if you put FPLs on all the point-ends, you could pass two passenger trains.

 

I'm fairly certain that, for instance, the Welshpool & Llanfair used this "passing without signals" process at loops,mand may even have had the stop-boards (or stopping locations) within the loop,rather than before it.

 

The overall thrust of my thinking is that all fixed signals do is tell the driver that the route is set, and FPLs correct - so, if he can see that for himself, or be told that by the guard, there is no need for fixed signals. It is the staff/ticket that gives authority to be in section, not the signal.

 

Kevin

[The Stationmaster]

Or you can - certain things such as the FPLs apart - do what you like.  In reality I bet many minor railways ignored starting signals even if they had them although the home signals were probably obeyed.  Equally in some situations I expect the starting signals were only ever used for passenger trains hence my suggestion about putting them at the platform ends - in that case they would have been no different from quite a few places which were not on light railway lines.

 

Depending on the system for working the single line there might not be any fixed signals (i.e the home and starting signals) at all as they were only talked about being used in conjunction with something such as a token system.  THE WC&PR used Train Staff and Ticket and definitely had home signals at some places but I can't find any photos of starting signals on that railway.

[Echo]

This is a subject I too am interested in. There seem to be some real oddities around - like the semaphore signal almost at the buffer stops at Lydham Heath, once modelled by Barry Norman. One or two railways had what seem to be "stop" indicators at stations to indicate there were passengers waiting to get on the train, which would otherwise carry on without a pause.

 

Maybe there is the potential to use non-standard signals instead of semaphores, particularly on early lines. The Festiniog had several rotating signals at one time, I believe. I wonder if there was any regulation that insisted on semaphores, or if any kind of clear signal would be permissible. Once semaphores became the norm, I suppose it would be easiest to get hold of that type of signal anyway, for replacements or any new work.

[Nearholmer]

Echo

 

Beware ye the Festiniog. It had two lives, one as a "full" railway, but with lots of kit and procedures pre-dating "1889 lock, block, and brake", and another as a "light" railway ........ Oops, three lives, because it is a different light railway post-preservation. Oops, no ....... Four lives, counting the pre-locomotive, pre-passenger (mostly) phase.

 

We could throw "crossing gate indicators" into the mix too. See for instance, Canterbury Road on the EKLR.

 

Truly fascinating topic!

 

Kevin

 

PS: I think that the two-armed stop indicators at KESR stations have been misunderstood by enthusiasts, in that I believe that they were used not only if passengers were present, but if new "orders" needed to be issued to the train crew, as per US "train dispatcher" protocol.

Edited September 29, 2015 by Nearholmer

[AndiMax]

Obviously I started my layout a little bit too naive I thought I could use the layout of Wantage on the prototype Wantage Tramway Co. and upgrade it to light railway standards by adding some signals. Now I learned that the signals are not the problem, it's the fooling point locks - ähh: Facing Point Locks of course. Wantage had none!

 

I added two variants of the layout. Both use the one post signal option Kevin suggested because I like the odd look of this kind of signal on the K&ESR but the platform version Mike suggested would work as well.

 

More important is the definition of the main line which I marked in blue.

• Option 1 has less curvature at the yard entrance and requires two FPLs because switch 4 can be locked to secure the main
• In Option 2 the passenger train could leave the platform at the terminal straight on but then has to go through a sharper radius at S1. This option requires -as far as I understood - 3 FPLs

So either I downgrade my railway to tramway standards or I call the track gang! Any other ideas?

[Echo]

Personally, I don't see the move to a tramway as downgrade - it gives the potential for far more fun. It could be a very liberating experience. Just think of all the amazing locos, railcars, rolling stock and operating practices you could dream up, never mind the possibility of having several locos in steam and all moving around at the same time.

 

Trying to operate that layout to "proper" railway standards - even a light railway - would probably be very boring and restrictive in comparison.

[Happy Hippo]

Andi,

 

I think you are mistaking facing point locks with trap points.

 

The fpl is fitted to any point which allows a passenger train to go through it and take either route (hence the term 'facing').

 

Trailing points do not require them, although if a passenger train has to reverse through a trailing point, the point blades must be locked in place to prevent the possibility of the blades splitting.  The lock was/is similar to a G cramp in operation.

 

Trap points are fitted at the exits of freight only lines, such as loops or sidings, and are operated in the same was as a crossover is.  One lever operated the point into the yard, and the trap protecting the main line.

 

Depending on the rout of your passenger trains and we'll assume you route S1-S3-S5, then each of those points will require fpls.

 

This would then leave you with traps in the locations you have marked as fpls!

 

I suspect that the trap at fpl2 on the diagram could instead be a siding with the point linked to S5.

 

Mike or Kevin will probably come up with chapter and verse on this, so take my words as guidance rather than gospel.

[Nearholmer]

Actually, I was going to suggest "downgrading" to tramway myself, for much the reasons that Echo puts forward.

 

The Wantage Tramway alone had a wonderful array of contraptions over the years, and if you spread the net wider across Britain you could draw in compressed air power, internal combustion locos and tramcars starting in 1883, battery-locomotives, convicts pedalling, traction-engine locomotives, the list goes on and on ........ And, if you electrify a part of it, you could have any of a dozen power supply systems!

 

I detect that you are in Germany, which also has a rich history of eccentric motive power on tramways. If you PM me your email address, I will send you a couple of articles that I have written, which touch on the topic.

 

Go to the US, and you also get "soda motors", which I don't think made it to Europe, too.

 

BTW, what you have drawn look more like "traps" than FPLs to me, but maybe that is a difference in drawing convention. As SM knows, I had to seek clarification on these things myself recently.

[AndiMax]

Richard and Kevin are right. What I've drawn are traps like the one in the attached quick shot (roding is missing, coal piles are mock ups only). Sorry for miswording.

 

Nevertheless where I've drawn traps named FPLs there are traps required, are they?

[Nearholmer]

Yes, what you have drawn in both options looks about right for full trapping, to me.

 

But, here comes light railway cheap-skating again, you could use scotch-blocks (gleissperren) instead of all that extra pointwork.

 

Or, you could invent a rule that says that no vehicle can be left in the runaround loop without a locomotive attached to it, and trap the coal/gasworks/locomotive shed siding using s2-s4, leaving only one scotch-block st s3, and that could be an old sleeper, chained and padlocked to the rails.

 

Or, declare yourself a tramway, and not bother with any trapping.

 

Very nice modelling in that photo ....... I look forward to seeing how the rest of this layout emerges.

 

Kevin