Caledonian Railway Terminus - Signalling Design Help Please

[Mike152]

I wonder if the experience on this forum can help me please with a signalling plan for this terminus station, which is a fictitious design. It is based on a Caledonian Railway branch, about 1920 era (before Grouping), and is a single line working using a token system.

 

The placing of the Goods/Fish Shed sidings is perhaps not the best position, but it has been taken that there isn't enough room to expand width ways at the left hand end (both in the fictitious place and on the baseboard).

 

Starters on both platforms for departure (or bracket signal), but would there be a bracket signal before the level crossing (heading towards the station) to guard the crossing and also indicate which platform to go into? When an engine runs around the coaches (or goes to the turntable area), it will need to go onto the level crossing.

 

The engine shed point is about a scale 300ft from the signal box and the right hand end sidings point is about a scale 900ft from the signal box. Would a ground frame be used for the sidings on the right hand end, unlocked by the token, or would it be worked direct by the signal box?

 

I seem to remember reading somewhere about token worked ground frame sidings being able to be locked with a train inside, to allow another train to pass by? This would help with the amount of activity that can happen on the layout at the same time, if so.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

[The Stationmaster]

You might find this site of interest -

 

http://www.oban-line.info

[Mike152]

Thanks, that is an iteresting site to know.

 

[Mike152]

Having looked at the Oban line signalling site, I have had a go at signalling the plan, as per below. The ground signals would actually be miniature semaphores in this time period.

 

Would the ground frames be correct for the distances from the signal box or would one or both be controlled by the signal box?

 

Any comments gratefully accepted.

 

[Grovenor]

I would suggest, given the distances you quoted that the Engine Shed connection could happily be worked from the box and the other sidings by groundframe, the groundframe ones don't need shunt signals.

All non-passenger lines connecting to passenger lines need trap points so you need two, one by SB the other by GS. The engine shed connection is already trapped but the exit signal needs moving back behind the trap. The goods shed and fish shed sidings don't need signals, they would just be hand points off the loop, probably the same for the coal siding depending on how you do the trap.

[Mike152]

Thanks Keith.

 

I've updated the plan, hopefully capturing everything.

 

Would there be a telephone or something by the ground signal to arrange for an engine to come back from the turntable?

 

Would it be possible for a train to run past the ground frame sidings, if there is a loco in them already or is that option blocked by the fact they would be in possession of the token to unlock the frame?

 

[bécasse]

Two things missing now, firstly an outer home to protect the exit from the engine shed and secondly dollies alongside each of the platform starting signals to permit access from those roads to the engine shed.

 

If you want to run trains past another train locked in the siding, it would be better to move the outer home (and distant) further back past the siding point and then have the ground frame locked by an Annett's Key released by a lever in the signal box (and physically carried from the box) rather than by the tablet.

Quote

 

 

[The Stationmaster]

26 minutes ago, bécasse said:

Two things missing now, firstly an outer home to protect the exit from the engine shed and secondly dollies alongside each of the platform starting signals to permit access from those roads to the engine shed.

 

If you want to run trains past another train locked in the siding, it would be better to move the outer home (and distant) further back past the siding point and then have the ground frame locked by an Annett's Key released by a lever in the signal box (and physically carried from the box) rather than by the tablet.

 

I'm not sure of the distances involved but as the shed entrance is a facing point in the running line I think it would need its own protecting running signal (for a facing movement because otherwise there would be nothing to stop a Signalman altering the road in front of a departing trains once it has started away from the platform.   So a running signal at the facing point with a shunting arm bracketed off it to read to the engine shed sidings.

 

And in the opposite direction a stop signal in order to protect the trailing connection leading from the engine shed sidings or use the signal protecting the ground frame operated sidings.   However in normal circumstances if the ground frame is released by the tolen (tablet in the case of the Caley) it is protected by the block system although locking in would require an additional instrument.

 

[bécasse]

2 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

I'm not sure of the distances involved but as the shed entrance is a facing point in the running line I think it would need its own protecting running signal (for a facing movement because otherwise there would be nothing to stop a Signalman altering the road in front of a departing trains once it has started away from the platform.   So a running signal at the facing point with a shunting arm bracketed off it to read to the engine shed sidings.

 

I must admit that I assumed that the connection to the loco shed commenced almost immediately after the level crossing but even if there is some distance in between, I am not certain that Mike is right in respect of Caley practice. I don't have the books to check, but I don't think that the Caley did "running shunts" (which would have required a second dolly for "main line") and certainly the diagram for Oban on the link Mike kindly gave shows a lot of pointwork facing arriving trains without any protection beyond the home and the standard fpls (whereas the SR would have surely had at least one, and perhaps more, running shunts as protection).

If there is a fair distance between the level crossing and the engine shed point, then the simple answer is to provide a ground frame for that too, again released by the tablet, which would obviate the need for any dollies or for an outer home signal because both connections would be within the single line and protected by the tablet. It would, of course, require returnable tablets, the earlier Tyer's ones weren't returnable, but that certainly wouldn't have been a problem by the twentieth century.

[The Stationmaster]

59 minutes ago, bécasse said:

 

I must admit that I assumed that the connection to the loco shed commenced almost immediately after the level crossing but even if there is some distance in between, I am not certain that Mike is right in respect of Caley practice. I don't have the books to check, but I don't think that the Caley did "running shunts" (which would have required a second dolly for "main line") and certainly the diagram for Oban on the link Mike kindly gave shows a lot of pointwork facing arriving trains without any protection beyond the home and the standard fpls (whereas the SR would have surely had at least one, and perhaps more, running shunts as protection).

If there is a fair distance between the level crossing and the engine shed point, then the simple answer is to provide a ground frame for that too, again released by the tablet, which would obviate the need for any dollies or for an outer home signal because both connections would be within the single line and protected by the tablet. It would, of course, require returnable tablets, the earlier Tyer's ones weren't returnable, but that certainly wouldn't have been a problem by the twentieth century.

For the edification of both of us - and anyone so inclined - there is of course a book about Caley signalling available.  Alas my bookshelves are already overcrowded (admittedly with some bias further much south than Carlisle) to make room for it and it might not even provide the answer.

 

http://lightmoor.co.uk/books/signalling-the-caledonian-railway/L9914

[bécasse]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

For the edification of both of us - and anyone so inclined - there is of course a book about Caley signalling available.  Alas my bookshelves are already overcrowded (admittedly with some bias further much south than Carlisle) to make room for it and it might not even provide the answer.

 

http://lightmoor.co.uk/books/signalling-the-caledonian-railway/L9914

I totally agree, and, since it is in print as far as I know, and you are modelling a Caledonian Terminus in the pre-grouping period, it really should be part of your library. Even if it doesn't answer a particular question, you should soon get a feel for how the Caley went about things (especially since most Scottish companies had significant idiosyncrasies). Like Mike, my own shelves groan, and I have the added problem of hefty postal charges (living outside the UK), so, sadly, it doesn't form part of my personal library and I have to extrapolate from what I can see from other published information.

[Flying Pig]

Several of the signalling plans on the linked site show facing connections to sidings controlled by a running signal with a bracketed disc reading to the siding, which if I've understood @The Stationmaster correctly is what he was suggesting for the shed. 

 

Also, judging by the 1904 Oban plan, wouldn't the loco release crossovers be worked by ground frames and unsignalled?

[Dave John]

In addition to the excellent book by Jim Summers the CRA publishes a CD of 278 period signalling diagrams. Looking at the CRA site it may be sold out at the moment, but if you were to join the CRA someone might be able to generate a copy.  Similarly copies of "the true line" are available on CD and there is much interesting reading over on the CR forums. 

 

1920 would be interesting, the CR ( like most other railways) struggling to recover from wartime shortages. As Becasse says, not only would the signalling be distinctly Caley the track would be as well. 

 

 

 

 

[Mike152]

Thank you for all your replies. I'll definitely join the CRA and investigate the various resource literature on offer.

 

For information:-

The engine shed point is about a scale 300ft from the signal box and the right hand end sidings point is about a scale 900ft from the signal box.

[bécasse]

3 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

Also, judging by the 1904 Oban plan, wouldn't the loco release crossovers be worked by ground frames and unsignalled?

 

It does, but the contemporary plan for Ballachulish shows the loco release crossover and the pair of attendant dollies worked by the box. The proposed model is a bit larger than Ballachulish but much smaller than Oban, so I suspect that the latter is a better guide than the former. A ground frame would have been substituted eventually (as it was at Ballachulish), either in late LMS or early BR days, depending on when renewal became necessary (or the points had to be moved because of increasing loco sizes).