Pushing wagons on non-passenger branch lines

[The Stationmaster]

I think we need to define 'propelling movement on a non-passenger branch line', or anyway define 'non passenger branch line'.  Obviously propelling is a locomotive pushing a train, but this is not the same as setting one back in a shunting movement, some of which were relatively long distance affairs over several hundred yards, but within station limits.  I would understand the term 'non passenger branch line' to be one under the control of signal boxes, with block sections between them, or between signals if MAS was involved.  I suspect many of the examples quoted took place on branches which were not signalled in any way and were worked as 'long sidings', with the train locked in, restricted to 15mph, and controlled by hand signals from whoever was in charge of the movement, i.e. not a running line, passenger or not.

 

A 'non passenger branch line' may be signalled as if it was a passenger line, with full block regulations in place and able to take a diverted or special passenger working as a matter of course, even if it never does, or it may possibly have been built as a freight only route with permissive block regulations (or reduced to that status after the withdrawal of passenger services).  Permissive block is rarely modelled, though quite common,  Speed is restricted to 15mph, and a signal may be cleared while a train is already occupying the section it protects; drivers are instructed to be aware of this and able to stop in the distance that they can clearly see ahead.  Any number of trains may occupy a section, and a queue of them waiting their turns to enter some steelworks or yard was a common occurrence.  No distant signals are needed and the guard does not need to protect his train if it is stopped in the section; the driver of the next one already knows he is likely to be there, nor is there need to carry out Rule 55.  There is also no requirement on such routes for facing point locks, and if they are used for diverted passenger traffic facing points must be spiked and clipped in position and padlocked.  

 

Another feature of permissive block is the use fo signals controlling diverging routes mounted on a single post one above each other, rather than the splitting bracket signals used elsewhere.  They are read 'top to bottom, left to right, so, if you were approaching a junction at which you could be routed to the left or the right of your line, there would be 3 signal boards mounted above each other on the post; the top board would indicate the left branch, the middle one straight ahead, and the bottom one to the right hand branch.  Obviously, extreme caution and 5mph running is required during fog or falling snow.

 

Some 'long sidings' were very long indeed; IIRC the Carmarthen-Felin Fach creamery was one, over 20 miles of it through the rural fastnesses of Darkest Dyfed, though AFIAK they did not propel on it.  It was the stub of the former Carmarthen-Aberystwyth main line.  Any propelling on a siding of this sort does not count, IMHO, as propelling in the sense the OP wants to know about, it is just a shunting movement that goes a long way.  A long siding must be accessed by points under the control of a signalman (a ground frame counts as he has to release it) so that the train can be locked in and cannot interfere with other traffic until it returns to the box or ground frame where there is a phone. and requests exit.

 

My advice to anyone wanting to propel freight trains on a model railway is to go ahead and do it unless it is downhill, and invent a local instruction in your imaginary Sectional Appendix to cover it, unless you are modelling an actual location at a set time period, in which case you must work it as the real railway did/does!

 

There are definitions and there are definitions.  A siding is a siding - i.e. a piece of railway which connects into another piece of railway but where the movements on it are solely under the control of the Shunter or Guard or whoever is in charge of the movement and who, in most situations, didn't need permission to enter that piece of railway but had to first ascertain if it was safe to do so (there were exceptions but that is basically the situation.

 

Some sidings could be quite long but the situation regarding who was in charge was basically as above.  However in the next tier above that there were numerous stretches of railway which although they lacked any form of fixed signal (and possibly even any STOP boards were under the control of a nominated person - and were therefore not sidings and which required proper authority for various movements such as actually entering that stretch of line or - pertinently to our debate - required a printed authority to propel trains over it.  Different Companies, and the BR Regions, adopted varying approaches to dealing with such lines with some being classified by some Regions as 'No Block' while others simply listed a set on Instructions applicable to such lines or dealt with them individually with their relevant Instructions but the common thread was that they were under the control of someone other than those in direct charge of the movements being made onto and over such lines.

 

So using some examples we've already mentioned the Common Branch Jcn - Creigiau Quarry line (after closure of the Waterhall Jc end) was worked under the Western's C2 system and no move could be made onto that section, or could return from Creigiau to Common Branch Jcn, without the permission of the person nominated as in charge (who happened to be the Mwyndy Jcn Signalman).  The same sort of working applied between Bodmin Road and Boscarne Jcn after the signalling and token working was removed with with the Bodmin Road Signalman having charge of three sections, viz - Bodmin Road - Boscarne Sidings, Boscarne Sidings - Wadebridge, and Boscarne Sidings - Wenford Bridge.  These examples show a Signalman in charge but that was not universally the case, for example on one such section in South Wales the nominated post was a Travelling Shunter (who no doubt in reality gave permission to enter the section to himself - but the section being worked in that way meant it was under far tighter control than would be the case with a siding and of course it required printed authority for propelling).  

 

Interestingly if we go back to Southern Railway days the section between Boscarne Junction and Wenford Bridge was worked under One engine In Steam Regulations which theoretically was a 'tighter' system of controlling the line than the WR's C2 Instructions but the overall operational impact was the same - certain things could not be done unless there was printed authority to do them  (we'll forget what might have actually happened in practice of course).

 

Incidentally Carmarthen - Lampeter (and Felin Fach) was not a 'siding' in the legal sense of the word and could not therefore be treated as a siding for operating purposes as it was worked in accordance with Special Instructions basically akin to the Table C2 Instructions.  I don't know about later changes but as things stood in  1969 and the 1982 amendments there were no listed authorities to propel through any of the sections in that vicinity.

[Stubby47]

Mike,

 

Does a 'siding', however long, have to be just one line - i.e. there are no points to further branching tracks ?

 

From what's been said above, I would be quite correct in propelling a few wagons into Tinners, as long as there was a guards van at the 'front'.  This would need shunting out of the way, then the wagons left/collected/exchanged as required, before re-collecting the van and heading out.

 

A nice little operational sequence.

[The Johnster]

No, it doesn't; a siding with pointwork to other siding along it's length is simply treated as a yard, with movements directed by handsignal by the person in charge or someone authorised by him.  The Ferry Road branch in Cardiff referred to earlier would come under this category; there was no danger of conflicting movements as you were the sole occupant of the siding, working 'one engine in steam'.

[br2975]

Propelling wrong road from Waterhall to Radyr Quarry definitely counts as pushing loose coupled wagons downhill, though there was a brake van leading!  Interesting stuff, Brian, as is the D95xx info.  Our mutual acquaintance Nigel R once told me he worked with one in very late '69 on a trip to recover stored parcels vans from the Riverside Branch, which was also semi-derelict by then.

I've got some  notes / memories about the Ferry Road branch, in Nigel's fair hand !

 

Give him my regards.

.

Brian R

[Nearholmer]

Johnster,

 

Is there any difference between what you term 'a long siding' and 'a one engine in steam branch'?

 

Kevin

[The Stationmaster]

Mike,

 

Does a 'siding', however long, have to be just one line - i.e. there are no points to further branching tracks ?

 

From what's been said above, I would be quite correct in propelling a few wagons into Tinners, as long as there was a guards van at the 'front'.  This would need shunting out of the way, then the wagons left/collected/exchanged as required, before re-collecting the van and heading out.

 

A nice little operational sequence.

 

A siding can have other sidings leading of it - part way along or fanning out at the end as a yard.  I'm not entirely sure just how common a long siding with an intermediate siding(s) might be - there were certainly a few examples around after various rationalisations from the  late 1960s onwards but if anything heavy was about on a regular basis it was often felt safer to use a ground frame although there were exceptions to that too  But in most, if not all, cases the longer sections but definitely those used by trains rather than just being shunted were never classed as 'long sidings' and were worked under some kind of Instructions intended to prevent more than on e train being on the line at a time.  .

 

The interesting question as far as propelling into Tinners is concerned is whether or not a brakevan would be used and that really depends on what is likely to be encountered on the way and the safety of the train/movement on the way back and it's fair to say that in the overwhelming majority of cases a brakevan was required at the leading end when propelling freight vehicles outside Station Limits.

 

I also can't think of, or find, any instance of a brakevan not being required where freight vehicles were permitted to be propelled over lines used by passenger trains (not that you seem to have passenger trains in mind of course).

 

Johnster,

 

Is there any difference between what you term 'a long siding' and 'a one engine in steam branch'?

 

Kevin

 

See post No.51 

 

A long siding is exactly that - a siding.  A line worked under any sort of 'train separation system', i.e. a block system, No Block, Special Instructions, or any method of working to ensure the separation of trains such as the Western's Table C2 Instructions, means that the line concerned is not a siding in operational terms.  'One Engine In Steam' (or 'One Train Working' to use the modernist version of the term) is a Regulation to ensure the space separation of trains, either in opposite directions, or potentially following each other, over a single line of railway and as such is a 'signalling system' by any other name.  In OES/OTW operation the normal practice is to use a train staff to enforce the system and act as the tangible authority to enter the OES/OTW section and that staff will have attached to or incorporated in it a key or keys to unlock the ground frame(s) controlling all points leading into that section other than any which might be under the direct control of a Signalbox.   

 

It is effectively one step in safety terms above the Western's C2 system in that it is governed by Regulations and not by Instructions (there being a technical difference between the two terms) although in some cases train staffs were used on C2 lines but usually they were simply worked by verbal instructions.  But the important point is that any access to an OES/otw section of line is physically controlled by means of those keys and/or by fixed signals at the end where it happens to start from a signalbox.   In a number of cases Western C2 lines were converted to OTW after they passed out of Western Region control into the hands of Trainload Freight in 1992.

[The Johnster]

What Mike said, Kevin, but, to simplify for modelling purposes, a branch worked 'one engine in steam/one train working' is under full block regulations, and may be used by passenger traffic.  It's line speed can be and usually is higher than 15mph, and it will be maintained in respect to that.  A siding, however long, is not controlled by block regulations or any other sort of train separation, and movements are directed by the person in charge by handsignals or direct verbal instruction.  

 

My remark about working 'one engine in steam' may have been confusing in this context; I simply meant that we were always on our own down there!  

[Nearholmer]

Thanks guys ...... it was J's comment about "being in there on our own" (or similar words) that threw me, because I thought it was permissible to have multiple trains and/or isolated vehicles in a siding, and to have multiple trains moving simultaneously, if the person in charge could devise a way of achieving that safely. Traditional-style carriage sidings are a good case where multiple simultaneous moves occur, as are industrial railways, which often work to verbally defined limits of movement, often from a despatcher by radio or phone.

 

And, within a complex of sidings there is no trapping (which is why sideswipes happen in them!).

 

Next question: a non-passenger OES section; why does it need GFs at sidings? It presumably doesn't need FPLs, so can't it just have point levers, if they are arranged to work a trap as well as the main switches?

 

Kevin

 

PS: eating a big meal too close to bedtime - bad idea - uncomfortable sleep, and now wide awake at a godless hour!

[Stubby47]

Kevin,

Good question about the ground frame, I'd intended to only install separate point levers on each section/layout ( although Treamble might qualify for a GF as there is a loop).

[keefer]

If trains are able to be 'shut in' then wouldn't you need a GF to do this to still be able to continue using the rest of the line?

[Nearholmer]

Keefer - I'm talking about sidings diverging from this mythical goods only OES section, not at the points controlling entry/exit to/from it.

 

K

[Stubby47]

"mythical" - it is getting built, you know, not like the PSMT...

[Nearholmer]

Sorry Stubby; I'd temporarily forgotten that this was about your layout, and begun to think of it as a sort of mutual improvement class about operational practices on non-passenger railways in general!

 

We haven't touched on military railway practices yet, have we ........

 

K

[Stubby47]

Military is interesting too, as trying to think of a plausible 'industry' for the intermediate section, a factory did not fit. Alternatives include cattle pens, a broccoli loading bank and a military siding, which of course is what Treamble already has, so could provide more 'traffic ' shunting between the two.

[Stubby47]

Quite a few posts above have mentioned a dedicated brake van which was for the sole use of the extended siding.

 

Would this be a similar concept to the GWR Toads marked 'Not for common use' / 'Return to xxx' ?

 

I'm thinking of re-marking one for the Treamble branch ( Ha, branch; it started as a short stub off Shepherds, now it's a branchline; tomorrow The World !!!)

[The Johnster]

Yes, similar in concept to branded toads.  However, I do not remember the Calvert one being branded in any way, though it was kept for that particular duty at Lawrence Hill.  This is no different from non GW restricted use vans, perhaps even unofficially restricted in that it was just a working practice not especially sanctioned in instructions, which were used all over the place before the advent of the 1969 single manning agreement which ended the practice of guards booking on at goods depots and transformed them into acting secondment for light engine movements, booking on at the loco depot.  When guards booked on duty at goods depots or yards, they would usually have arranged for their own van, and protected it vigorously.  The state of vans deteriorated rapidly when guards booked on at engine sheds and lost contact with their vans, and the old timers moaned that it was a sign of the times and that nobody had any pride in the job any more, but they'd only themselves to blame for letting the vans deteriorate.  The only difference pre-1969 in R U practice was that the GWR 'officialised' the practice and branded their vans more than the other companies did, a practice which continued under BR's regions. Post '69 the vans were pooled and in theory worked more efficiently with less being needed, but the Southern was assiduous in chasing up any Queen Marys that had escaped.  For some reason they were less keen to get the awful little SECR pillboxes back!

 

Another R U van was used on the Blaenant-Aberthaw mgr trains, which ran via Jersey Marine yard where they ran around for the run up to Blaenant on the Neath & Brecon.  An air braked van was attached to the rear at Jersey Marine and used to stop the train under the loading hoppers, three HAAs at a time, after the train ran past the colliery and set back into the loading plant by rolling down the bank under gravity.  A travelling shunter accompanied it from Jersey, and stopped the wagons on the air brake setter, with the loco out of sight around a curve in the heavily wooded valley.  At the point that he lost sight of the operation, the driver hove into view and took over.  When the loading was complete, the train drew forward until the travelling shunter stopped it clear of the points at the downhill end of the colliery, again with the air brake setter, and the loco then hooked off, ran around, and a coupled to the van for the return journey.  The van was detached and positioned ready to attach to the next working as the loco ran around when it got back to Jersey Marine.  And you thought the mgr principle was that the train never stopped...  I think this one was branded 'return to Jersey Marine' or something, there was no indication of the working it was intended for; but it certainly had the yellow stripes and markings of a fitted air braked van.

[The Stationmaster]

Thanks guys ...... it was J's comment about "being in there on our own" (or similar words) that threw me, because I thought it was permissible to have multiple trains and/or isolated vehicles in a siding, and to have multiple trains moving simultaneously, if the person in charge could devise a way of achieving that safely. Traditional-style carriage sidings are a good case where multiple simultaneous moves occur, as are industrial railways, which often work to verbally defined limits of movement, often from a despatcher by radio or phone.

 

And, within a complex of sidings there is no trapping (which is why sideswipes happen in them!).

 

Next question: a non-passenger OES section; why does it need GFs at sidings? It presumably doesn't need FPLs, so can't it just have point levers, if they are arranged to work a trap as well as the main switches?

 

Kevin

 

PS: eating a big meal too close to bedtime - bad idea - uncomfortable sleep, and now wide awake at a godless hour!

 

Ah, a very good question.  And on some OES sections there were definitely handpoints (e.g Wenford Bridge once clear of Boscarne Jcn) while on others there were ground frames.  Two reasons - the first and most likely being where the line originally came from in signalling terms - i.e. it was downgraded from a more puissant system to OES or it had previously been a passenger line.  However by the 1970s the WR (and probably other Regions) preferred to use ground frames complete with facing point locks on intermediate connections on goods only branches - whatever sort of signalling system was used - especially if heavy vehicles were involved as it reduced the risk of derailments to through movements at facing points.  If trapping is provided - at, say a private siding - then a ground frame would often be used because it was the most effective way of ensuring the trap fulfilled its correct function nbut basically it was no more than a siding off a siding so trapping was not always necessary.

 

The situation regarding all sidings is exactly as you have described it - multiple trains and multiple movements are permitted by the Rule Book - it is the only document which regulates their use although at specific locations it might well be amplified or amended by Local Instructions.

 

This is the distinction I was trying to paint between lines where movements are regulated by a system of control of access - be it anything from a verbal instruction or a piece of wood or a bunch of keys or whatever right up to fixed signals to Tom, Dick or Harry making a  movement onto and on that piece of line entirely under their own control.  In other words there is no such thing as a long siding being worked One Engine In Steam because the two terms are mutually exclusive.  This is probably why long sidings tended to be relatively unusual and why some sort of control of access to them was instituted.

 

Interestingly, and fairly unusually, the line to Ferry Road/Penarth harbour from Grangetown was effectively a long siding although there was an Appendix Instruction that it was under the control of the Shunter.  So it was in a sort of halfway state between a line worked under C2 Instructions and a simple siding with the essential difference that as a siding it could have more than one train on it at a time provided the Shunter said so.

 

Quite a few posts above have mentioned a dedicated brake van which was for the sole use of the extended siding.

 

Would this be a similar concept to the GWR Toads marked 'Not for common use' / 'Return to xxx' ?

 

I'm thinking of re-marking one for the Treamble branch ( Ha, branch; it started as a short stub off Shepherds, now it's a branchline; tomorrow The World !!!)

 

Not really - basically a system of making sure you didn't let go of what you had by hiding it if necessary and if it ever went anywhere else you told the Guard to make sure he brought it back (on pain of a nasty end if he didn't).

 

Branding of vehicles was specifically forbidden after the GWR vans went and any requests for it to be done - such as one I made in 1973 - got very short shrift, even for our special anti-stone throwing vandal protected vans at Radyr.

[Rivercider]

Thanks again for all the posts - makes some very interesting reading.

 

Following Mike's comment earlier : "Note that as a general rule propelling over a falling gradient or a section which involved a falling gradient was not permitted, particularly with freight vehicles.", I wonder how many of the given examples above included a downhill gradient - they can't all have been flat or up hill ?

A couple of examples from the the Teign Valley route while it was still open to passenger services where propelling on the branch between stations was permitted,

details are abbreviated.

 

 

The distance from Trusham station up to Whetcombe siding was 30 chains, the gradient at Whetcombe was 1 in 198 falling towards Trusham. Trains were permitted to be propelled along the branch in either direction without a brake van, max 25 wagons, man to ride on or walk beside leading vehicle, max speed 4mph.

 

The distance from Trusham station down to  Crockham siding was 25 chains, the gradient at Crockham was 1 in 84 falling from Trusham. Trains were permitted to be drawn down from Trusham without a brake van, but were not permitted to be propelled down. Wagons were permitted to be propelled up from the siding to Trusham without a brake van, max 25 wagons, man to ride on or walk beside leading vehicle, max 4mph.

 

 

Two examples of short freight only lines, albeit of the rival L&SWR on the Exmouth branch, also illustrate the different methods of working dependant on gradients.

 

The Topsham to Topsham Quay branch was 32 chains descending at a maximum of 1 in 38, all trains were propellled down, and the line crossed a road.

Trains were restricted to 8 wagons and 2 men preceded the move on foot, but after a runaway incident in 1925 a specially built light brake van had to be marshalled at the quay end of all movements. 

 

The Exmouth to Exmouth Docks branch was 21 chains, again all trains were propelled towards the docks and the line crossed 2 roads, but as the route was level there was no requirement for a brake van to be provided, max speed 4mph and a man preceded the train at each crossing.

 

cheers

[enz]

Military is interesting too, as trying to think of a plausible 'industry' for the intermediate section, a factory did not fit. Alternatives include cattle pens, a broccoli loading bank and a military siding, which of course is what Treamble already has, so could provide more 'traffic ' shunting between the two.

Greetings

 

Fascinating topic.

 

I'm not knowledgeable about the geology of Cornwall, and it's your railway, so I'm happy to be shot down - but if I may be permitted to offer a suggestion, how about a colour mill (ochre works) as an industry?

 

Regards - E

[Stubby47]

Thanks E.

After a quick bit of research, it seems ochre is not a mineral found in Cornwall.

 

Many others were: tin, copper, zinc, lead, silver, manganese, feldspar, arsenic and of couse china clay in many forms.

 

Apart from the clays, most minerals came from the same mines, although some production sites were single minerals only.

 

Which means most of the surface infrastructure looked similar and if it needed a rail connection, it would have been quite large.

 

Stu

[Nearholmer]

What about something to do with transatlantic telegraphy/telephony? Or servicing a lighthouse? Or a temporary branch to recover scrap from a wrecked vessel?

 

There all things that justified short narrow gauge railways, so might justify a standard gauge siding.

 

K

[MarcD]

Greetings

 

Fascinating topic.

 

I'm not knowledgeable about the geology of Cornwall, and it's your railway, so I'm happy to be shot down - but if I may be permitted to offer a suggestion, how about a colour mill (ochre works) as an industry?

 

Regards - E

There was an ochre mine off the Rutherford Bridge branch on the Bodmin and weybridge. Ochre is technically hydrated iron oxide and geologically called Lemonite. It's why mine water run off is stained orange/yellow.

It's formed by acidic ground water leaching iron from rocks. It's very common where the iron content of the underlying geology has a higher than normal iron content. As some copper ore contains high iron content it occurred in some copper mines.

Marc

[Guy Rixon]

After a quick bit of research, it seems ochre is not a mineral found in Cornwall.

 

Many others were: tin, copper, zinc, lead, silver, manganese, feldspar, arsenic and of couse china clay in many forms.

 

Apart from the clays, most minerals came from the same mines, although some production sites were single minerals only.

 

 

Multiple minerals came from the same mines, but from different levels. The valuable metals came up into the granite in gas phase, seeping up the cracks, and condensed out at different levels according to their properties; usually the heavier atoms were deeper.

 

Therefore, a mine was usually producing one metal at a time, driving the shafts deeper as the shallow metals were worked out. Devon Great Consols, was (IIRC) the biggest copper mine in the UK but switched to arsenic when the copper ran out. There's remains of a mine near Mary Tavy (West Devon) that was sunk to win silver but later produced lead.

[Pacific231G]

The goods only line that's long intrigued me, though I've no idea how it was worked, was the old Liskeard and Caradon line from Moorswater to the Cheesewring and Kilmar on Caradon Moor in Cornwall. At its greatest extent this line was twelve miles long with a series of short branches off to various tin and copper mines and granite quarries and on the open moors its route can still be clearly followed, (though its sometimes difficult to distinguish the railway from various tramways)  even though the GWR, who were its final operator, closed it in 1917.

 

I've explored most of the line and studied detailed OS maps of it from its later period and can find no evidence of a passing or run round loop anywhere. Trains could not simply have been propelled up the entire line as there was a reversal at West Caradon before the line skirted around Caradon Hill to reach the upper quarries and mines. I've always assumed that horse and gravity shunting must have been used to get locomotives to the right end of trains and to work the shorter branches but it would be good to know how. The line never carried passengers- at least not officially!*- though Passengers were and still are of course carried on the associated Liskeard and Looe Railway. That was fully signalled but I don't think there there were any signals and certainly no signalboxes beyond Moorswater on the Caradon line.    

 

I have come across a very curious example of propelling goods wagons by trains carrying passengers. This was a practice on a series of short quasi-indepedent railways in S.W. France. These were standard gauge public railways but in an areas of massive forestry and their normal service was two mixed trains each way each day. When timber was being worked at a location some distance from the nearest station the train would set out with two or three empty wagons at the back which would be uncoupled and left on the main line. Forestry workers (who may have been among the train's passengers) would then load the wagons with logs or cut timber from mobile sawmills. When the train returned a few hours later and in the opposite direction it would simply propel the loaded wagons to the next station or to the end of the line where they could be remarshalled to get to the main line junction's exchange sidings.

 

*The railway, originally horse and gravity operated, was never licensed to carry passengers but apparently got round this for excursions etc. by not selling passenger tickets but instead selling tickets to carry their hats, coats, umbrellas etc. the "passengers" still had to travel in goods wagons.

[Nearholmer]

231G

 

After exploring the upper reaches of the L&C in 2006, I invested in the big book about the railway and canal, by Michael Messenger. Looking in that, I think there was a short run round loop at Railway Terrace, where the main branches split, but, even with that, there must have been a great deal of pushing, over long distances.

 

You are right about the overlaid remains being confusing in some places; I got utterly befuddled, which is part of what caused me to buy the book.

 

I was really "wowed" by the fact that there was still track in-situ in Chesewrings quarry, and track could be clearly discerned, just below the surface, in a couple of places way out on the moor.

 

Kevin