WW2 Era Railway crossings.

[G-man69]

Hi PMP,

 

That's brilliant feedback, thank you, :-)!  The photograph really does help.

 

A couple of questions for you, or anyone else reading this post:

 

1) was there a standard height for level crossing gates, or a default one you'd suggest?

 

2) over a single track would there be a minimum width to the gate, or between supporting posts, or a default one you'd suggest?

 

3) were all level crossing gates painted white as a general rule?

 

Thanks again,

 

G

[G-man69]

Hi SignalEngineer,

 

That's interesting information regarding Monty, so my basic idea of some sort of exercise being held in and around Devon, isn't so far fetched, though I think the Start Bay/Slapton Sands was Exercise Tiger and mainly American...but great information none-the-less.

 

Thanks again,

 

G

[TheSignalEngineer]

Monty was C-in-C, Allied Ground Forces for the invasion.

[Nearholmer]

As far as a train driver is concerned, in traditional railway operation the gates of a highway level-crossing are treated as signals, so have to be good and visible. Board of Trade Requirements specified a red disc (although they were sometimes a diamond), and a red light at night, facing along the track when the gates were closed to trains, and gates were almost universally painted white to make them more visible in during "darkness, fog, and falling snow", to adopt language beloved of railway rule-book authors (mind you, white isn't so good in the snow!).

 

In many places, separate signals were also provided, to give a longer "sighting time" and a less ambiguous message to train drivers, but not in all places.

 

If you can squeeze even one signal onto your diorama, it would certainly add atmosphere, and it would add height, which might help the composition. Ditto a telegraph pole, either for a route running along the road, or one running along the railway - luxury would be to have one of each!

Edited September 26, 2019 by Nearholmer

[Harlequin]

The gates were 4ft 7in from bottom of bottom rail to top of top rail, as far as I can tell. The verticals at the ends project above and below the gates's rails and have rounded tops in the plane of the gate.

Notice that the hinge support column is cast iron, not timber, and painted black, as were all the major iron fittings.

The "shutting post", opposite the hinge column, is a 9in or 10in square-section timber post, painted white with a protective cap on top (pyramidical or domed).

Not sure about standard width for a single track.

 

Edited September 26, 2019 by Harlequin

[Kris]

At least one of the crossing gate posts was still in place at Topsham bridge 7 or so years ago when I live just up the road. Looking at google maps it is still there. 

[Kris]

31 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

Not sure about standard width for a single track.

 

 

It would be dependant upon the road width and angle. 

[PMP]

2 hours ago, G-man69 said:

Hi PMP,

 

That's brilliant feedback, thank you, :-)!  The photograph really does help.

 

A couple of questions for you, or anyone else reading this post:

 

1) was there a standard height for level crossing gates, or a default one you'd suggest?

 

2) over a single track would there be a minimum width to the gate, or between supporting posts, or a default one you'd suggest?

 

3) were all level crossing gates painted white as a general rule?

 

Thanks again,

 

G

Different companies had different design gates so dimensions would vary. I did a bit of digging and found these in the HMRS drawings.

https://hmrs.org.uk/drawings/level-crossing-gates-small-hand.html

https://hmrs.org.uk/drawings/level-crossing-gates-medium-hand.html

These are Western Region hand gate drawings from 1951. As nationalisation occurred in 1948 and these are from the Reading works, they are almost certainly GWR in origin and a good bet for what you’re looking for. HMRS might have others more suitable if you drop them a line. These also show picket gates too, and are a type that would have been used on minor roads on GWR branch lines.

Colors would be white woodwork, black metalwork, and red warning targets. Any lamp fixed to the gate would (I believe) normally be painted red, but occasionally I’ve seen images of them in black.

Edited September 26, 2019 by PMP

[IWCR]

There  were  some  wartime  built crossings.

These  were  generally  alongside  an  existing  road  bridge  which  was  deemed  too  weak  for  heavy  loads.  A  loop  road  off  the  original  being  provided  leading  to  a  level  crossing  to  allow  heavy  vehicles  such  as  tanks  to  cross.

 

Pete

[TheSignalEngineer]

The 15' gate would be the one on many minor country roads in the 1940s, the clearance available on the road would be 14'.

The Reading drawing was probably just an updated redraw of old GWR ones to reflect some changes in materials and manufacturing over the years.

The picture about half way down this page http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/kingsbridge-branch.html

shows that the gates at Topsham Bridge in 1961 were of a similar pattern to the drawing of the small gates.

 

The drawings show planted timber posts for the small gates and iron post on concrete foundation for the medium size, although I have seen both sizes on iron posts. At Cradley Heath and Cradley East which was double track we had a crossing worked from the signal box which because of the shape of the crossing had two small gated on one side of the railway and a small and medium on the other side.

 

In your case for a narrow country road crossing a single line branch I would use one small gate on each side.

 

Coming back to the wicket gates or not, in the early days the gates were normally kept closed across the road. In what became the BR Rule Book in 1950 this was covered by Rule 99 (IIRC), the person wishing to cross the railway where the crossing was manned had to get the crossing keeper to open the gates. As road traffic increased many places had the gates normally closed across the railway, in which case the crossing was termed 'Rule 99 Exempt'. For crossings where Rule 99 was in force it would be customary for wicket gates to be provided so that pedestrians could cross without needing the crossing keeper to open the main gates. In the case of Topsham Bridge I would expect that there wasn't a signal box but the crossing keeper may have  lived in the small building behind the first coach in the 1961 photo.

 

[TheSignalEngineer]

25 minutes ago, IWCR said:

There  were  some  wartime  built crossings.

These  were  generally  alongside  an  existing  road  bridge  which  was  deemed  too  weak  for  heavy  loads.  A  loop  road  off  the  original  being  provided  leading  to  a  level  crossing  to  allow  heavy  vehicles  such  as  tanks  to  cross.

 

Pete

Good suggestion, a small hump backed bridge with the old diamond weight restriction sign would make a nice scenic break at one side.

https://images.app.goo.gl/JfkJzG2CQAbm8YpR9

[G-man69]

Hi SignalEngineer,

 

Thanks for all your posts to-date, the width of the gate is especially useful, I can now start to map out full size on some card.  Thank you for the links, I'll take the time to look at them in detail later on.

 

Thanks again,

 

G

[G-man69]

Hi Nearholmer,

 

Thank you for the information regarding gate colours, I also picked up on the 'snow' comment, lol!  Likewise, I'm not so certain it would help much in the fog, :-).

 

Your comment on signals and telegraph poles is very useful, I can scratch build telegraph poles fairly easily, not sure my skills will stretch to signals though, but I'll see if anything is available commercially in 1/35th scale as it would add interest and colour.

 

Regards,

 

G

[G-man69]

Hi Harlequin,

 

Thanks for the information regarding heights and timber thicknesses, this is much appreciated as it will help me get the scale right, and allow me to judge dimensions of hinges and other fittings.

 

Thanks again, and cheers,

 

G

[G-man69]

Hi Kris,

 

Thanks for taking the time to read my post and provide feedback, all information helps me build a bigger picture.

 

Much appreciated,

 

G

[G-man69]

Hi PMP,

 

Those drawings are brilliant, I need to study them closer, but thank you for providing such useful links.

 

Cheers,

 

G

[G-man69]

Hi IWCR,

 

I have just been reading something about a style wartime signal boxes built, but hadn't picked up on the level crossings comment, thanks for highlighting it.

 

Cheers,

 

G

[Fat Controller]

14 hours ago, IWCR said:

There  were  some  wartime  built crossings.

These  were  generally  alongside  an  existing  road  bridge  which  was  deemed  too  weak  for  heavy  loads.  A  loop  road  off  the  original  being  provided  leading  to  a  level  crossing  to  allow  heavy  vehicles  such  as  tanks  to  cross.

 

Pete

An example of this still exists at Lydd station:- https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Lydd,+Romney+Marsh/@50.9572878,0.916235,148m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x47dee60de541cabf:0xe29ffc46bebaaad8!8m2!3d50.950945!4d0.9065892?hl=en-GB

[G-man69]

Hi all,

 

Firstly a general comment, if I may?  The friendliness and helpfulness of the people on this site has been brilliant, thank you for providing time, assistance and patience to someone who hasn't really got a clue regarding railways.

 

Secondly, I'd like our opinion(s) please on the following:

 

The most economic track in 1/35th is that shown in the two photographs of the box lids below.  It says it's european gauge, would this be acceptable, as built, for track used in the UK, or would i have to modify it?

 

Thirdly, the 'woodgrain' effect on the sleepers is very subtle, also it is limited to the top surface only as I imagine, in an ideal world, that the vertical surfaces would be buried in the ballast.  However, looking at images, it is apparent that the vertical surfaces would show to some extent in reality, therefore I have had a go at adding texture (see images below).  In your opinion(s) have I overdone this for a working line, or could even greater wear-and-tear occur?

 

Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thank you, 

 

G

[G-man69]

Hi Fat Controller,

 

Thank you for the link, much appreciated.

 

G

[cypherman]

Hi,

If you want to see a WW2 era style level crossing on a B road still in action type in Google blue anchor level crossing. Click on pictures and you will find dozens of colour photo's of the level crossing. Also here are a couple of other pictures I thought you might like to see.

[G-man69]

Hi cypherman,

 

Thanks for images and google search information, I'll give it a look.

 

Cheers, 

 

G

[Nearholmer]

The gauge of your track should be fine, but, if you want to get mega-picky, the rail-fastenings and rail are almost certainly inappropriate. Which will bug railway spotters, but probably not tank spotters. Your sort of track was rare in the UK in the 1940s.

 

Here is a GWR rail chair, although there is a danger that this will spark a debate about two-hole and three-hole fixing to the sleepers! The other picture below is typical, but the keys were probably wooden on branch-lines in the 1940s.

 

I’m not sure whether British-style track components are available in 1:35, it being a pretty rare scale for railway models.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Nearholmer

[G-man69]

Hi Nearholmer,

 

Thanks for the feedback, I'm not sure there is much I can do about the rail but I will see if I can do something about the 'chairs'.  However, if my skills, or lack thereof, limit me, I might have to resort to artistic license, though I would hate to offend you guys as you've all been amazingly helpful.

 

Love the colour photograph of the track, it shows i can be a tad more heavy-handed on a few of the sleepers, and it gives me a good idea of colour and weathering of rail and sleepers.

 

Thank you again,

 

G

[Nearholmer]

The rail is probably the easier bit, ironically, because rail is easily available, and is often over-scale, or represents quite heavy rail, so that what is used for 0 scale (1:43.5) might well credibly be useable at 1:35.

 

The shape of rail most-widely used in Britain was traditionally “bullhead”, whereas “flat bottomed” is what you’ve got.

 

As I said, though, how picky is needlessly mega-picky?