Jump to content
 

Can you tell me please what this LNER signal was for?


Recommended Posts

I am making a model of Ripon station, and am not sure of the purpose of a particular signal - and hence where I should put it on my inevitably compacted layout plan.

The first pic shows the signal (from the rear) which appears to have a full size normal arm, with a smaller arm on a bracket to the left.

The second pic is a map of Ripon station - the signal highlighted. You will see it appears to operate on what is the southbound track, as it approaches the station - end of the platform is just visible. The signal is sited between the mainline, and a track which serviced the goods yard - the latter was not then (though was later) a goods loop.

 

But - have I got even that right... the possibilities to me are (based you will understand on a profound ignorance of signalling!):

1) The main signal is indeed for the main line, and the subsidiary some sort of calling-on signal?

2) The main signal is for the main line, and the subsidiary for the adjacent goods line?

3) In fact both signals are for the adjacent goods line, giving two routes - joining the main line, to the right and the main signal, or entering the yard, to the left, small signal.

The main line does not have an alternative route at this position.

4) I've got it so wrong I haven't even got a clue what it is ...

 

Help and guidance much appreciated!

 

 

sig1.png

sig3.JPG

Edited by Nutford
added info
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go for option 3, but,  I can't shake off the nagging feeling I'm missing something obvious.

 

I'm sure someone else will be along soon to confirm or deny.

 

Actually looking at the disused stations website, by 1967, it appears to have been replaced by two miniatuere arms  vertically mounted on the same post, which would seem to indicate option 3 as being most likely

 

Andy

Edited by SM42
Add further info since found
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SM42 said:

I'd go for option 3, but,  I can't shake off the nagging feeling I'm missing something obvious.

 

I'm sure someone else will be along soon to confirm or deny

 

Andy

My only doubt with this is that (I think) the norm here was for the signal to be on the left of the line it affected - all the others seem to be. But then norms are there to be broken anyway...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the map, sighting it to the left could be awkward with the other lines and this could be a cheaper solution to cantilevering out over the sidings to get to the left of the goods line, and then where do you place the arm for the lesser route?

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SM42 said:

Looking at the map, sighting it to the left could be awkward with the other lines and this could be a cheaper solution to cantilevering out over the sidings to get to the left of the goods line, and then where do you place the arm for the lesser route?

 

Andy

Yep, good point Andy. The other reason in favour of this argument is if that ISN'T for the goods line, then where IS there a main signal (ie. not a ground signal) to control access to the main-line. ..   But have now read Beast's post, which answers that....

Edited by Nutford
added info
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, beast66606 said:

 

Well that pcture and the box diagram has helped no end.

 

 I did think it odd to have a signal like that into the goods yard, but you never know with these railway companies. they do odd things sometimes

 

 

Andy

Edited by SM42
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 minutes ago, Nutford said:

 

Many thanks Beast - if I can call you that when you've just helped me out lol!

 

Beast or Dave is fine.

 

I suspected option 2, but wanted to find a photo to show it. The diagram also shows it, the siding signal is 32 and the points are 33. On such a layout 99.9999% of the time this would mean points 33 pulled first then the signal 32.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, beast66606 said:

 

 On such a layout 99.9999% of the time this would mean points 33 pulled first then the signal 32.

Ah. So obvious when you put it like that! And have the added advantage of knowing what you're talking about!

 

Though that raises another question; did one lever work both signals? Fine as an  'either/or', but how did you set both to 'stop' if there was a train in the platform?

Edited by Nutford
added info
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Nutford said:

Ah. So obvious when you put it like that! And have the added advantage of knowing what you're talking about!

 

Though that raises another question; did one lever work both signals? Fine as an  'either/or', but how did you set both to 'stop' if there was a train in the platform?

 

Put the levers back in the frame.

 

The map in the OP demonstrates why OS maps should be taken with a pinch of salt. The crossover the railcar is traversing is not shown!

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, SM42 said:

I did think it odd to have a signal like that into the goods yard, but you never know with these railway companies. they do odd things sometimes.

This was formerly NER territory, and the NER signalled their system on an heroic scale. I read 'somewhere' that the LNER officer responsible for signalling claimed that he had removed an NER signal arm for every day he held that position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 hours ago, Nutford said:

Ah. So obvious when you put it like that! And have the added advantage of knowing what you're talking about!

 

Though that raises another question; did one lever work both signals? Fine as an  'either/or', but how did you set both to 'stop' if there was a train in the platform?

 

Unlikely, different functions and while technically possible it's highly unlikely however it's possible that 32 applied both to the exit out onto the main via 33 points and straight into the turntable area

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes - I was thinking the signal plan showed just the single lever number for that signal so how could that work; but it isn't the proper signal plan, just some notes made some time later by an ex-signalman, so there may well have been a second lever to work the other arm

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nutford said:

Ah yes - I was thinking the signal plan showed just the single lever number for that signal so how could that work; but it isn't the proper signal plan, just some notes made some time later by an ex-signalman, so there may well have been a second lever to work the other arm

Surely the 4 on the plan applies to the main arm and the 32 applies to the small arm?  

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

I read 'somewhere' that the LNER officer responsible for signalling claimed that he had removed an NER signal arm for every day he held that position

Possibly in 'LNER' by Geoffrey Hughes (Ian Allan, 1986)  p121.  Hughes attributes the remark to A F Tattersall, but clearly it is A E Tattersall that is meant.  Tattersall was Signal and Telegraph Engineer, North Eastern Area, LNER from 1928 to 1936, so quite a lot of signals then.

 

D

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...