Single-lead junctions in pregrouping days

[ForestPines]

I'd always thought that the single-lead junction was a modern innovation, or at least, a post-1960 innovation along with TCB and suchlike.  However, recently I was looking at some South Wales lines on old OS maps and came across an interesting layout at Bassaleg Jn.

Firstly, if you don't know the area, here's the RCH diagram of the area from 1914.  We have the Great Western (yellow), the Brecon & Merthyr (blue), and the Alexandra Docks & Railway (purple).  Note that in 1914 there is no connection shown from the GWR to the AD&R.

 

 

Now, here's that represented on the OS 25" map revised in 1916.  Note how the junction between the B&M and the AD&R is with a facing crossover and single lead; the AD&R is single track until a point just past the GWR signalbox, where it becomes double track. 

 

 

Now, nowadays this wouldn't raise an eyebrow, but this is in pregrouping days.  Here's a photo of Bassaleg B&M station platforms: the signal in the picture is the one shown on the map over on the left.   Zooming in seems to show ringed arms for both the goods loop and the AD&R line.

https://www.peoplescollection.wales/items/562399

 

Was this layout only possible because the AD&R was a goods-only line?  How was it signalled, and how was the point where the AD&R goes from single line to double controlled?  Plus, how long did it last?  The SRS diagram of the GWR box at Bassaleg Jn is clearly from a later date and shows the AD&R joining the B&M with a double junction close to the eastern end of the B&M goods loop - see https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/gwj/S1313.htm.  This change is also borne out from photos of the B&M station in latter days, such as https://www.peoplescollection.wales/items/562402 - you can see here that the signal has been replaced without the right-hand doll, the facing crossover has gone, and the former AD&R line appears to be some form of up loop or recess.

 

Does anyone have any information on how this was signalled in pre-grouping days, and particularly how traffic on the AD&R was worked?  Were single-lead junctions like this relatively common in that period, or is this an unusual oddity?

 

[Jeremy Cumberland]

It looks to me the AD&R is only single because of the bridge and embankment.

 

There is surely nothing unusual about the B&M to AD&R junction, with the single-track AD&R running parallel to the double track B&M. You'd want an S&C expert to comment, but I think a double lead to a parallel line makes for some awkward geometry, particularly since the OS map appears to show a six-foot rather than a ten-foot gap. However, in this case it is clear that there is no space for a double lead junction, not with the bridge and the facing points for the loop/siding on the north side, unless it were moved quite a distance to the east, which might not be possible with the signalbox position (wherever that may be).

 

How it was signalled is an interesting question, but from the signal post positions, it appears to be a single line between the B&M box and the AD&R box, wherever these may be, since there appears to be a home signal at each end of the single line, heading west and south, as well as the expected signals controlling entry onto the single line. I have no idea how such a single line would be worked between the boxes.

[Oldddudders]

11 hours ago, ForestPines said:

I'd always thought that the single-lead junction was a modern innovation, or at least, a post-1960 innovation along with TCB and suchlike. 

TCB is considerably older than that, with installations in the 1920s, maybe before. 

[The Stationmaster]

4 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

TCB is considerably older than that, with installations in the 1920s, maybe before. 

Slightly OT but as an Ex Southern man you should know that there was a form TCB on the L&SWR auto signalled sections before the Great War. (although your excuse will no doubt be that you had nothing to do with the South western.  

 

Going back to the OP it appears very much to have been the case that the AD&R was squeezed down to a single line by the bridge and embankment however I do - as always - wonder about the accuracy of an OS Map in situations of complex trackwork.  It would for example seem rather odd to me that the GWR would later go to a lot of expense just to double the former AD&R line between the junction at Bassaleg and the former B&M station.  Also the 25" OS map doesn't shw any connection between the AD&R and the GWR Western Valley line which sounds rather unusual although quite possible.  What is clear - from John Hodge's book - is that Bassaleg Loop signal box,  at the end of the AD&R line, was closed in 1925 implying that control of the AD&R then went onto the GWR Bassaleg 'box on the Down side (and thus as shown on the SRS diagram).  

 

The question would of course be answered by an accurate diagram of the original track layout at the Newport end of Bassaleg B&M station.  It is of course conceivable that the Board of Trade's Inspecting Officer had given permission for an unusual junction between the B&M and the AD&R because he was persuaded not to consider it 'an ordinary case'.  While the AD&R only operated freight/mineral trains over the connection the B&M and the PC&N (at various times) both operated passenger trains over what, by implication, was a facing crossover in a passenger railway - something normally very heavily frowned upon by HMRI.  It would be interesting ti search out any original AD&R/B&M documentation and plans - if they survive - to establish more reliably exactly what form the tracj  k layout took in this area.  

[Oldddudders]

49 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Slightly OT but as an Ex Southern man you should know that there was a form TCB on the L&SWR auto signalled sections before the Great War. (although your excuse will no doubt be that you had nothing to do with the South western.  

So true - although I knew one or two who had worked over there in Puff-and-Dart days. I'll stick to the Tisbury Loop as being my meagre main claim to fame on the South Western, and then only because I chaired the meeting where it was proposed!

[The Stationmaster]

23 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

So true - although I knew one or two who had worked over there in Puff-and-Dart days. I'll stick to the Tisbury Loop as being my meagre main claim to fame on the South Western, and then only because I chaired the meeting where it was proposed!

Now wildly OT.

 

Tisbury was the last place where I investigated a significant loss in booking - exactly £20.  so a good bet about what I was looking for and eventually I did indeed find the miscreant £20 note but only after I started dismantling drawers!  But the best thing about Tisbuty in the latter half of the 1970s was the record book of blank 1st Class season ticket issues which they still maintained in addition to the proper form.  And hardly a difficult task because so few were issued - a lovely L&SWR book with hard card covers which had been opened in the summer of 1913 - I don't think they even got past a dozen pages by 1977.

[Oldddudders]

4 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Tisbury was the last place where I investigated a significant loss in booking - exactly £20.  so a good bet about what I was looking for and eventually I did indeed find the miscreant £20 note but only after I started dismantling drawers!  

The Internal Check era! Duller than dull. Crossing string-bound bundles of tickets with an orange pen, so removing one out of sequence would be visible. The more orange was visible in the accounts, the more it was thought you were implementing sound supervisory principles! Implausibly I once found a missing £5 while the Regional Auditors were in the office - a cheque for £20.50 instead of £25.50. Notice board out for customer to call at the office - and they did. Little did I realise that less than 20 years later the then-Chief Auditor would be representing the internal supplier, BR Business Systems, at senior level at my IT Project Team meetings. 

 

Apologies to the OP!

[ForestPines]

19 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

 

It would for example seem rather odd to me that the GWR would later go to a lot of expense just to double the former AD&R line between the junction at Bassaleg and the former B&M station.

 

My assumption from the SRS diagram of Bassaleg Jn was that they didn't double the whole of that single-line stretch - instead they put in a double junction between the AD&R line and the B&M line at Bassaleg Jn, and the former AD&R single line became a loop or refuge (the Bassaleg Jn diagram doesn't show a loop entry, and the SRS don't seem to have a diagram at all for Bassaleg South, the first ex-B&M box).

 

19 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Also the 25" OS map doesn't shw any connection between the AD&R and the GWR Western Valley line which sounds rather unusual although quite possible.  What is clear - from John Hodge's book - is that Bassaleg Loop signal box,  at the end of the AD&R line, was closed in 1925 implying that control of the AD&R then went onto the GWR Bassaleg 'box on the Down side (and thus as shown on the SRS diagram).  

 

There's also no connection between the AD&R and the Western Valley shown on the RCH diagram for the period - it implies that pre-grouping traffic from the Western Valley to Newport Docks would have to travel via Maesglas Jn.  It makes sense that the GWR would want to maximise their own mileage, rather than letting traffic slip onto the AD&R at the earliest opportunity, obviously not an issue after 1922.

 

Have to admit I didn't spot how Bassaleg Loop and Bassaleg Jn boxes were situated almost opposite each other until after I'd posted the thread.  Did the AD&R have any other signalboxes?

 

19 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

The question would of course be answered by an accurate diagram of the original track layout at the Newport end of Bassaleg B&M station.  It is of course conceivable that the Board of Trade's Inspecting Officer had given permission for an unusual junction between the B&M and the AD&R because he was persuaded not to consider it 'an ordinary case'.  While the AD&R only operated freight/mineral trains over the connection the B&M and the PC&N (at various times) both operated passenger trains over what, by implication, was a facing crossover in a passenger railway - something normally very heavily frowned upon by HMRI.  It would be interesting ti search out any original AD&R/B&M documentation and plans - if they survive - to establish more reliably exactly what form the tracj  k layout took in this area.  

 

I've only been learning about the B&M for a few weeks, but it already seems apparent it's a very under-documented railway with little in the way of bibliography; unless I'm missing something, the best book on it still seems to be the Oakwood Press book first published in the 1950s.  It sounds like the answer to this will need a trip to the archives!

 

18 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

Apologies to the OP!

 

No need to apologise!  It is fascinating to read accounts like that in any case, even if they're off-topic for the thread.  And, speaking of which...

 

20 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Slightly OT but as an Ex Southern man you should know that there was a form TCB on the L&SWR auto signalled sections before the Great War. (although your excuse will no doubt be that you had nothing to do with the South western.  

 

I should have course have remembered that there were automatic signals on the NER and GCR which could probably be described as a form of TCB, although I haven't read the relevant regulations for them.  I suppose I was being cavalier in using "TCB" as shorthand for a modern style of track layout that doesn't avoid using facing points, rather than choosing my terms carefully: the two are not necessarily connected

[The Stationmaster]

One source I have not mentioned so far (because to my shame I forgot about it) o is whether or not the area i covered in Tony Cooke's 'Track layout Diagrams of the GWR  etc'.   Tony is a punctilious and very careful careful researcher who will almost certainly have got to the bottom of what happened at Bassaleg if he has yet dealt with the area. (it has not yet appeared in the latest revised series and there is so far no indication of when it might appear).  If/when it becomes available it will be the authoritative source without a doubt.

 

The Area has been covered to some extent in John Hodge's books about Newport and the Western Valleys (which I heartily recommend to anyone interested in that area and it includes photos of two former AD&R signalboxes at the ends of Mendalgief yard.  I would think that originally the section between West Mendalgief and Bassaleg loop signal boxes (including the Golden Mile) was probably a single Permissive Block section but from GWR days Park Jcn was also involved with the former AD&R line and it had double junction connections, in both directions, between it and the Western Valleys Relief Lines.

 

Alas - in many respects - I came to the area far too late to know much about its history or what had once been there.   Although I'd visited Pill shed (the one time AD&R depot) in 1962 I didn't work in the Newport area until 1974 and by that time Bassaleg had ceased to exist as a physical junction and the remnant of the B&M line joined the Western Valley line at Park Jcn - all very much part of my patch as I spent all my relatively short time at Newport dealing with/responsible for operation on the remaining Western Valleys lines and branches.  So Park Jcn was a signal box for which I had managerial responsibility but it was hardly even a faint shadow of its former self by then.

 

If you're interested in the B&M you have probably already found the site with photos from Derek (DSM) Barrie's collection -

 

https://www.peoplescollection.wales/discover/owner/D. S. M. Barrie

 

 

[ForestPines]

4 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

One source I have not mentioned so far (because to my shame I forgot about it) o is whether or not the area i covered in Tony Cooke's 'Track layout Diagrams of the GWR  etc'.   Tony is a punctilious and very careful careful researcher who will almost certainly have got to the bottom of what happened at Bassaleg if he has yet dealt with the area. (it has not yet appeared in the latest revised series and there is so far no indication of when it might appear).  If/when it becomes available it will be the authoritative source without a doubt.

 

The Area has been covered to some extent in John Hodge's books about Newport and the Western Valleys (which I heartily recommend to anyone interested in that area and it includes photos of two former AD&R signalboxes at the ends of Mendalgief yard.  I would think that originally the section between West Mendalgief and Bassaleg loop signal boxes (including the Golden Mile) was probably a single Permissive Block section but from GWR days Park Jcn was also involved with the former AD&R line and it had double junction connections, in both directions, between it and the Western Valleys Relief Lines.

 

Alas - in many respects - I came to the area far too late to know much about its history or what had once been there.   Although I'd visited Pill shed (the one time AD&R depot) in 1962 I didn't work in the Newport area until 1974 and by that time Bassaleg had ceased to exist as a physical junction and the remnant of the B&M line joined the Western Valley line at Park Jcn - all very much part of my patch as I spent all my relatively short time at Newport dealing with/responsible for operation on the remaining Western Valleys lines and branches.  So Park Jcn was a signal box for which I had managerial responsibility but it was hardly even a faint shadow of its former self by then.

 

If you're interested in the B&M you have probably already found the site with photos from Derek (DSM) Barrie's collection -

 

https://www.peoplescollection.wales/discover/owner/D. S. M. Barrie

 

 

 

I assumed the AD&R would have been likely to use permissive block, given they operated a heavily-trafficked freight-only route.

 

I did indeed find that photo collection, once I'd worked out that a lot of the good stuff on that site isn't geotagged very well!  Indeed, a couple of the pictures are linked to in my first post.  I'm slowly collating a list of B&M-related photos in the various online archives - Amgueddfa Cymru have some nice photos of B&M locos digitised but most of their relevant holdings seem to have an online catalogue entry but no digital version as yet.

 

[Penrhos1920]

9 hours ago, ForestPines said:

Have to admit I didn't spot how Bassaleg Loop and Bassaleg Jn boxes were situated almost opposite each other until after I'd posted the thread.  Did the AD&R have any other signalboxes?

 

 

Yes, there was one at Groeswen (half way between Penrhos and Pontypridd) and a pair at Interchange Sidings in Pontypridd.

 

2 hours ago, ForestPines said:

 

I assumed the AD&R would have been likely to use permissive block, given they operated a heavily-trafficked freight-only route.

 

There were 7 A(N&SW)D&R passenger trains a day each way between Pontypridd Tram Rd Halt and Machen, plus there was a GWR passenger service between Newport and Pontypridd.

[The Stationmaster]

1 minute ago, Penrhos1920 said:

 

Yes, there was one at Groeswen (half way between Penrhos and Pontypridd) and a pair at Interchange Sidings in Pontypridd.

 

 

There were 7 A(N&SW)D&R passenger trains a day each way between Pontypridd Tram Rd Halt and Machen, plus there was a GWR passenger service between Newport and Pontypridd.

But all of the PC&N  passenger trains (after some argument with the owner) used Newport High St as far as I can establish.  There does not seem to have ever been a passenger service using AD&R trackage south of Bassaleg.  The former AD&R lines south of Bassaleg were definitely not signalled to passenger standards after 1925

[ForestPines]

Yes; sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant specifically the AD&R from Bassaleg to the docks

[Penrhos1920]

[Michael Hodgson]

I infer from the above that the A(N&SW)DR used the standard RCH block regulations rather than their own, and that they didn't use the "No Block" regulations anywhere on their system.  This would suggest that they did use permissive block.

 

The GWR regulations (at least the 1936 version) do include the "Regulations for Working on Goods Lines where the Absolute Block System is not in Operation or where no special regulations are in force."  Their version (on lines to which it applied) added to the RCH regulations a Time Interval of 5 minutes before another train could follow, and trains arriving between 5 and 10 minutes after the previous one were to  be cautioned, but the GWR line in that area would have been Absolute Block. 

[Penrhos1920]

Where are permissive block regulations mentioned in the rule book?

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, Penrhos1920 said:

Where are permissive block regulations mentioned in the rule book?

Very little about them in the Rule Book  mainly working of signals etc.  The Block Regulations will be in the General Appendix or separately in the book of Block Regulations once that was published separately (on the GWR from August 1936).  Those parts of the Permissive Block Regulations which were applicable to Drivers, and Guards etc were published in the General Appendix (page 57 in the GWR 1936 edition, they had been on page 75 in the 1920 edition and were subsequently on page 21 in the BR/RCH 1960 edition, page 31 in the BR 1972 edition).

 

The GWR 1936 Regulations showed both the Permissive Block Regulations (applicable over Goods Running Loop Lines - e.g. the former AD&R lines, by then known as the 'Dock Lines', between Park Jcn and Bassaleg Jcn and 'other Permissive Lines').  Separately there were Regulations for working Goods Lines where Absolute Block was not in operation and no Special Regulations are in force - effectively a GWR equivalent of 'No Block' Regulations using time interval working.  The latter were dispensed with some time between 1950 and 1960 but I'm unable to date their disappearance any more accurately than that