HIGHLAND RAILWAY TRACK

[keidal]

Thanks again for all these comments.

I have seen photographs what I believe were lengths of 24' track having 11 sleepers and 30' track having 13 sleepers.

The reason I'm so interested is that I would like to produce a realistic interpretation in model form, of the trackwork in 3mm scale [Scalle3] at Achanalt station - I'm aware of radii restraints !

I'm wondering if anyone or Templot could suggest, or preferably define the sleeper spacing which was specified by the Highland Railway  for 24' and 30' track lengths please ?

[eastglosmog]

The accident report for the Mosstowie derailment http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/BoT_Mosstowie1900.pdf gives 30ft rails and 11 sleepers per rail in 1900 on the Inverness to Keith branch of the Highland Railway.

[dunwurken]

If in Dunkeld call in at the cycle shop (through the pend next to the Dunkeld Arms hotel) accross the ceiling in what appears to be an old blacksmiths shop is a length of bulkhead rail stamped HR 1910

[Wickham Green]

18 hours ago, dunwurken said:

If in Dunkeld call in at the cycle shop (through the pend next to the Dunkeld Arms hotel) accross the ceiling in what appears to be an old blacksmiths shop is a length of bulkhead rail stamped HR 1910

 But HOW LONG is it ?

 

( I remember the Dunkeld Arms very well from having stayed a couple of times back in the eighties ..... I DO hope it's not been modernised ! )

[dunwurken]

1 hour ago, Wickham Green said:

 But HOW LONG is it ?

 

( I remember the Dunkeld Arms very well from having stayed a couple of times back in the eighties ..... I DO hope it's not been modernised ! )

This is just going to confuse matters, I would say 20 foot max but I presume it has been cut to fit the width of the room, a fairly easy task for a blacksmith.

I have no knowledge of the DA hotel in the 1980's but it currently probably offers the best value for food in Dunkeld in relaxed surroundings.  Nothing pretentious.

Malcolm

[LochMaree]

I have, over recent months, been taking an interest in this topic and have been counting sleepers on a large number of photographs in the Highland Railway Society collection (I lead an exciting and enriching life). Forbye the rail lengths mentioned by Graham R in his posting, which gives the lengths of rails in some early constituents of the Highland, I believe that by around the 1890s, the HR standard track was using 30 foot long rails with 11 sleepers to the rail. Most photographs on HR metals show this well into the grouping. This ties in with the drawing at:

http://www.oldpway.info/drawings/1895pw_pl16_HR.pdf

This is a drawing from an 1895 publication and shows rail of varying cross-sections of 76½, 77 and 80lbs/yd. The 76½ lbs/yd section looks awfully like a double headed rail to me; the other two are definitely bullhead.

However, there are a few photos which show 10 sleepers per rail length. There is also one which shows 8 sleepers per rail length in LMS days (at an unidentified location but it shows Mackenzie and Holland signals, so almost certainly ex-HR). I doubt that this would be 30 foot rails. I have also recently found one photo which shows 12 chairs on each rail, but only 11 sleepers per rail length. How was this  remarkable feat achieved? By use of joint chairs at each end, that's how. "Jings, crivvens!" I hear you say. You can have a look for yourself at:

https://www.ambaile.org.uk/?service=asset&action=show_zoom_window_popup&language=en&asset=28586&location=grid&asset_list=28586&basket_item_id=undefined

The bottom right hand corner shows a joint chair. Count back from there, if you have nothing better to do.

The use of joint chairs is confirmed by:

http://www.oldpway.info/drawings/1905jt_d42_HR_supported.pdf

This drawing is signed by Mr Roberts in 1905 and shows the use of 90lbs/yd rail. This is quite an increase from 10 years earlier, but it would tie in with the introduction of heavier rolling stock and locomotives at that time and ties in with the general development of British permanent way.

My thoughts are that, once the use of 30 foot long rails was introduced, the Highland used 10 sleepers per rail length for a while, but later used 11 sleepers per rail length. I have not seen any evidence for the use of longer rails on the HR. (This has to be treated with some care, as longer rails would tend to not show their full length in a photo, so the number of sleepers couldn't be counted; I hope that makes sense.) My view is that the use of 30 foot rails continued to the end of the HR. Given the low volumes of traffic on the HR generally, they would remain in use for a long period after the grouping.

On my own layout in 2mm, I have opted for 11 sleepers per rail length on the main running rails, with 10 sleepers per rail length in the yard.

Incidentally, there are a good number of photos of HR trains on the CR between Stanley Junction and Perth. A few of them show 14 sleepers to the rail length. But that was CR track, I presume using the CR standard of 32 foot rails (later 48 feet).

Fascinating stuff! It's remarkable how little attention most modellers give to the permanent way. Without it, there would have been no railway. Locomotives were only replacements for horses, so we could still do without them.

Back to my sad and lonely existence. One sleeper, two sleepers, three sleepers, four sleeper - ooh! look at that lovely bit of ballast...

[keidal]

Thanks once again.

I have seen a photograph of a length of track, preumably 30' 0" long at Achanalt station [platform] and it has 11 chairs between the fishplates.

I'm presuming that when this track was originally laid, the sleepers would have been 9' 0" long and I'm assuming that the sleeper spacing was 1' 0", 2' 8", 8 x 2' 10", 2' 8" and 1'0" - unless you can suggest a different more appropriate spacing.

I appreciate that this is nit-picking but I'm hoping to produce some realistic looking track in 3 mm scale. The station is on a curve and I've settled for a three metre radius, with the tracks [a loop arrangement] 30 mm apart.

I've literally spent hours fiddling about with Templot2 for this simple station layout [with one siding] but being a computer nerd, it's way above my head !

So I've used some school geometry [from c. 70 years ago] and with an 80 cm long platform the offset in the centre is 5.43 cm.

Edited May 25, 2019 by keidal

[LochMaree]

You are right about the sleeper length being 9 feet. However, the spacing of the sleepers for 11 sleepers per rail length was 2' 9½" generally with 12½" at the joint ends. This is shown on the drawing at the first link in my last post.

If you are interested (and even if you are not), the spacing of sleepers for 10 sleepers per rail length was 3' 0" based upon measurement against known wheelbases. This would give 1' 6" at each joint end which is a bit excessive. However, looking at photos, I don't think that the overhang could have been much shorter, if at all. Perhaps it was 3' 0½" or 3' 1" with a commensurate reduction at the joint end? 

Apart from cranking up the old time machine again, I don't think we'll ever get fully defined information for the 10 sleeper option.

No wonder the world is in the state it's in, when such basic knowledge has not been carefully preserved. 

[keidal]

Thanks for this information - and my maths was incorrect for a 5.43 cm offset, as I had worked on a diameter of 3 metres, not a radius.

I'll try again sometime !

The platform height appears to be approximately level with the bottom of a coach buffer - and I'll probably work that out as well, at the same time.

[keidal]

I have taken two photographs of an enlarged photograph at Achanalt station, which shows the 30' length of track which I refer to.

Despite what the official drawing might show, it seems to me that those on site probably chose to "do their own thing " within limits.

The track clearly shows that the sleeper spacing of 2' 9 1/2" beyond the first sleeper is not adhered to and at a guess might be closer

to 2' 3". The remainder of the sleepers appear to be at random centres !

The second photograph vaguely shows the short S signal which I have mentioned previously.

It's all good fun really ?

[inversnecky]

On 20/05/2019 at 10:33, Portchullin Tatty said:

 

Forres - https://www.ambaile.org.uk/?service=asset&action=show_zoom_window_popup&language=en&asset=26561&location=grid&asset_list=20138,11625,26552,26554,26557,26558,26559,26560,26561,26562,26564,26961,26962,27613,30947,31010,31041,31365,31540,11930,11427,20135,11652,11656,5934,5936,5938,5940,5943,8139,14431,20004,26868,27024,27045,27284,27494,27495,27496,27524,27615,27874&basket_item_id=undefined

 

 

 

Wonder what date that was.

[Wheatley]

It's unlikely that there was an advanced starter beyond your Shunt Ahead signal, the driver would know that he had authority to proceed only as far as was necessary to clear the points to set back.