Signalling Queries on a Real Location

[Grovenor]

I would expect the heights of arms on a splitting distant to be arranged as for the stop signal it is the distant for. Anything else would be confusing.

[The Stationmaster]

19 hours ago, 5BarVT said:

Thanks Mike.

I had taken the 4A from my 1960 WR Regs and assumed that such things had transferred into box instructions in 72.  I can quite see the logic of having the ‘how to’ in regulations but ‘at this box’ specifically in the box instructions.
 

Am I being too influenced by modern thinking over height meaning speed for stop signals? East 5 is Starting to Honeybourne, 7 Starting to St James (lower) and 9 a short arm into the Sidings (lowest).

Paul.

In the latter I think you might be    But I think it's probably fair to say that the situation generally is that the principal  route usually has the higher speed but that need not necessarily be so and there were definitely situations where the same speed applied over several routes in advance of a splitting stop signal but the elevation of the arms varied.  

 

But on the other hand the opposite applied for the splitting signals (including the splitting distants) for the junctions to the Westbury and Frome avoiding lines where the highest elevated arm applied to the faster route (the Avoiding Line) in all four cases - but refer Note below-  notwithstanding two of the junctions (Fairwood and Blatchbridge) standing normal towards the Main Line; the other two junctions stood normal towards the Avoiding Line.  Prior to various  alterations in the 1970s all of these junction 'boxes switched out with the junction set towards the Main Line route, not towards the Avoiding Lines.

 

Note - there is a suggestion from one source that the Inner Home splitting signal for the junction at Clink Road had arms of equal elevation but I've never seen a photo of the original signal so don't know if that is reliable information.

 

As g far as splitting distants replicating the form of the splitting stop signal they applied to that definitely wasn't always the case with Didcot East Junction providing an example.  On its Down Main splitting distant the arms for the routes to the Down Relief and Down Avoiding Line were of equal elevation - so three distants on the same bracket structure with the one for the route to the Down Main higher than the other two. On the Down Relief splitting distant the arms were also of equal elevation.  However the Down Main splltting Inner Home Signal only read to two routes (DM or DR) and the Down Relief Starting Signal read to either the Down Relief (highest elevated arm) or the Down Avoider.  There was clearly a logic in the way it was all arranged but - as photos clearly prove - the relative elevation of of the arms on the Down Relief splitting distants definitely didn't match the elevation of the arms on the splitting sop signal to which they referred (and the speeds permitted over the two routes differed by 20 mph).

[Michael Hodgson]

21 hours ago, Grovenor said:

I would expect the heights of arms on a splitting distant to be arranged as for the stop signal it is the distant for. Anything else would be confusing.

 

It's signalling.  There's bound to be an exception somewhere that proves the rule.

 

According to the Stationmaster, the GWR was an exception .... nothing new there then.

Edited April 16, 2021 by Michael Hodgson

[WillCav]

Thanks for everyone's input on this.

 

Going back to something Mike the Stationmaster said, and looking at the plans for the Down direction.

 

The acceptance point 440yds beyond Malvern Rd West's home (2) is beyond the section signal (3) - somewhere in the absolute block to Landsdown Jn I assume. For a down train to be accepted from M Rd East to M. Rd west, would M Rd West have to get prior line clear from Lansdown Jn?

 

Will

 

[5BarVT]

2 hours ago, WillCav said:

Going back to something Mike the Stationmaster said, and looking at the plans for the Down direction.

 

The acceptance point 440yds beyond Malvern Rd West's home (2) is beyond the section signal (3) - somewhere in the absolute block to Landsdown Jn I assume. For a down train to be accepted from M Rd East to M. Rd west, would M Rd West have to get prior line clear from Lansdown Jn?

Don't think so.  The line would need to clear for 1/4 mile, it's just in this case that is beyond the starting signal.

Mike mentioned outermost home less than 1/4 mile from next box outermost home, which to Lansdown Jn is 936 yards.  Even if it were less the 1/4 mile it's just Train Out of Section required, not Line Clear. (Plus other limitations relating to blocking back outside at the next box.) (AB Reg 4b)

Paul.

[The Stationmaster]

12 hours ago, 5BarVT said:

Don't think so.  The line would need to clear for 1/4 mile, it's just in this case that is beyond the starting signal.

Mike mentioned outermost home less than 1/4 mile from next box outermost home, which to Lansdown Jn is 936 yards.  Even if it were less the 1/4 mile it's just Train Out of Section required, not Line Clear. (Plus other limitations relating to blocking back outside at the next box.) (AB Reg 4b)

Paul.

Exactly so.  The important point for the Malvern Road West Signalman is that he has to have the line clear to his Clearing Point before accepting a train so the block for the advance section would need to be at 'Normal'.  

 

There might possibly have been a Modified Clearing Point. (which almost invariably meant a reduced Clearing Point distance) depending on line speed and gradient.  The only place that would be found would be in the Special Instructions for Malvern Road West 'box but i would think it highly unlikely in view of the steep, generally falling, gradient from Cheltenham Racecourse.   The West 'box might have been authorised to accept trains (or some trains) under the Warning Arrangement (Regulation 5)  which would at least help keep things moving - especially if the section towards Lansdown Jcn was occupied meaning a full Clearing Point was not available.  That would be much safer than a Modified Clearing Point but again the only ways of confirming that would be from the Signal Box Special instructions or  possibly from detail information in respect of a subsidiary signal below East 'box's Section Signal.  The latter isn't always the answer as far as the (G)WR was concerned because it made relatively limited use of subsidiary signals for advising Drivers that they had been accepted under the Warning.

[bécasse]

I would add to Mike's analysis concerning the possible use of the warning arrangement by saying that it is sometimes possible to judge whether the arrangement was authorised by analysis of working timetables. If there were a number of scheduled what-might-be-called "near misses" then it is likely that the warning arrangement was authorised (as a reasonably safe way of keeping the traffic moving).

[The Stationmaster]

21 hours ago, bécasse said:

I would add to Mike's analysis concerning the possible use of the warning arrangement by saying that it is sometimes possible to judge whether the arrangement was authorised by analysis of working timetables. If there were a number of scheduled what-might-be-called "near misses" then it is likely that the warning arrangement was authorised (as a reasonably safe way of keeping the traffic moving).

Technically there shouldn't be as trains should be timed on the basis of a clear road but if a train is stopping at a station then it might become apparent that things were worked that way.  However many train timers - particularly in the days before timetable planning rules were developed - didn't necessarily understand how block signalling worked on double lines (fortunately they did understand single lines in their most important respect) and some strange anomalies definitely appeared in WTTs.  The Western was not immune from that in the late 1950s.  I was always amazed that many timers from the post-war generation never used a timetable graph for short term planning although they were used for permanent, i.e, WTT, timing.

 

The GWR developed a very strong aversion to use of the Warning Arrangement from roughly the time immediately after the Great War.  The reason for this was that three collisions involving passenger trains (with some consequent passenger fatalities) took place in the early 1900s and the following decade and the Company was very heavily criticised by Inspecting Officers for making such liberal use of the arrangement.  The Company's 1920 and 1936 issues of the Block Regulations implored Signalmen - in capital letters in the Regulation - to try to get a full Line Clear before a train which had been accepted under the Warning arrived at their Distant Signal 

[WillCav]

2 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

...

I was always amazed that many timers from the post-war generation never used a timetable graph for short term planning although they were used for permanent, i.e, WTT, timing.

...

I started out on the railway in timetabling - firstly WTT for Bristol-Penzance. I was taught to use train graphs and found them very intuitive.

I then moved to do the Paddington area. I was told by my new boss that I wouldn't be able to use graphs there as it is 4 track. It was not a problem. I found it easier to spot issues on a graph than on timetables.

 

In other news, I went for a socially distant walk with a colleague in Cheltenham yesterday (someone you know, 5barvt).  We knew there wasn't much left - but the retaining walls and bridges are still there. We spotted a white painted area on the West end bridge.

 

In the 1960 signalling plan, there is no signal there. I did some digging, a signal post is shown there on 1925 OS 25" map. Looking at Britain from the air 1947 - it looks like the section signal (3) with 3 x Landsdown distants was before the bridge.

My guess is that the signal was moved to allow longer DMUs to shunt from the 'new' diesel facilities in Malvern Road towards St James.

I'll have to update my signal diagram (and another complicated signal needs building).

 

Thanks for all your comment and help everyone.

 

Will

[5BarVT]

53 minutes ago, WillCav said:

I went for a socially distant walk with a colleague in Cheltenham yesterday (someone you know, 5barvt).

Need a better clue than that!

The Brompton has been there, getting to Waitrose for provisions going to/from Swindon in my former life, and also as far as is practicable towards Honeybourne.

Paul.

[WillCav]

9 minutes ago, 5BarVT said:

Need a better clue than that!

He's a bit of an LNER fan - does that help?

Will

[5BarVT]

27 minutes ago, WillCav said:

He's a bit of an LNER fan - does that help?

Will

‘fraid not.

The only person I’m sure comes from that area was/is a special constable and (I think) sang in the choir at Gloucester cathedral.  Reading D.O. and latterly GW RAM prior to retirement.  Might have been before your time though.  He was definitely GWR orientated, Dean Forest I think.

Paul.

[WillCav]

I've got another query on absolute block - specifically Malvern Road again.

I've been reading David J Smith's GWR signalling practice and hadn't picked up before about night indications of subsidiary signals.

 

I therefore assume that (going along DM & siding) 27 would be white/green, 8 red/green. What about 10? A long train reversing at Malvern road east signal A could be past 10 so would it be r/g?

 

Also, would it be possible to send a train from 10 towards A? Reading about blocking back outside home signal, we haven't got the space to have a clear half mile from the shunt move. Is there any way it could be done - or did a move from the Down Siding HAVE to continue along DM towards Lansdown?

 

Thanks for looking

 

Will

[5BarVT]

Agreed, I would expect 27 to be white and 8 to be red.

10? Hmm. . . 
At Wolves Low Level which had North and South boxes, there was an interlocking lever in South to release North’s ‘Up the Down Main’ shunt and slotting from North on South’s shunts reading Down the Up.  So gut feel is that 10 does not read to A.  However, attaching/detaching from the front of something on the DM wouldn’t need blocking back as the block would already be at Train On, so 10 could read to a ‘blind’ LoS.

I’m not going near shunting the siding with the section clear as I’m not near my block regs!

Paul.

 

[The Stationmaster]

20 hours ago, WillCav said:

I've got another query on absolute block - specifically Malvern Road again.

I've been reading David J Smith's GWR signalling practice and hadn't picked up before about night indications of subsidiary signals.

 

I therefore assume that (going along DM & siding) 27 would be white/green, 8 red/green. What about 10? A long train reversing at Malvern road east signal A could be past 10 so would it be r/g?

 

Also, would it be possible to send a train from 10 towards A? Reading about blocking back outside home signal, we haven't got the space to have a clear half mile from the shunt move. Is there any way it could be done - or did a move from the Down Siding HAVE to continue along DM towards Lansdown?

 

Thanks for looking

 

Will

Safest way to look at it is that 10 would be red/green because it does not read towards a stop signal (i.e. a red light) controlled from the same signal box.   8 could well be white/green as it does read to a stop signal (No.2) and there were plenty examples of signals reading from sidings having a white light.

 

Yes, you could probably make a setting back movement (but not a train movement) under a 3-3 Block Back from 10 into the section although it would depend on the gradient and other factors as to whether or not a Block Back was prohibited.  I would also think, in view of the presence of Signal A, that Regulation 11, 'Engine Running Round its Train', was probably used on the Down Main Line .

 

I now have some Sectional Appendix information in respect of Malvern Road so can add the following which might be useful -

 

Propelling was authorised in the right direction over the Down Main Line, and the Up & Down Goods Line, between Malvern Road East & West 'boxes, and in the right direction over the Up Main Line, and Up & Down Goods Line between Malvern Road West and Malvern Road East subject in all cases to a limit of15 8 wheeled coaching stock, or equivalent, vehicles at a maximum speed of 5 mph .

Additionally between Malvern Road West and Malvern Road East propelling in the right direction was permitted over the Up Main Line, or the Up & Down Goods Line, for a maximum of 25 freight wagons - without a brakevan leading,  in clear weather only .

 

Propelling - again subject to various limits was also authorised in the right direction between Malvern Road East and St James.  

 

Working in the wrong direction was not permitted between Malvern Road West and Malvern Road East.

 

Working in the wrong direction was permitted between Malvern Road East and St James on both the Up & Down Main Lines subject to the following restrictions (which applied in both directions)

1. Setting back - coaching stock not to exceed 15 eight wheeled vehicle or equivalent; 5 freight vehicles without a brakevan.  Sped in both instances not to exceed 5mph.

2. Hauled movements - coaching stock vehicles permitted.  (And no notes regarding length or restriction of speed - a supplement might have told a different story possibly.) 

[WillCav]

On 22/05/2021 at 16:13, The Stationmaster said:

Safest way to look at it is that 10 would be red/green because it does not read towards a stop signal (i.e. a red light) controlled from the same signal box.   8 could well be white/green as it does read to a stop signal (No.2) and there were plenty examples of signals reading from sidings having a white light.

 

Yes, you could probably make a setting back movement (but not a train movement) under a 3-3 Block Back from 10 into the section although it would depend on the gradient and other factors as to whether or not a Block Back was prohibited.  I would also think, in view of the presence of Signal A, that Regulation 11, 'Engine Running Round its Train', was probably used on the Down Main Line .

 

I now have some Sectional Appendix information in respect of Malvern Road so can add the following which might be useful -

 

Propelling was authorised in the right direction over the Down Main Line, and the Up & Down Goods Line, between Malvern Road East & West 'boxes, and in the right direction over the Up Main Line, and Up & Down Goods Line between Malvern Road West and Malvern Road East subject in all cases to a limit of15 8 wheeled coaching stock, or equivalent, vehicles at a maximum speed of 5 mph .

Additionally between Malvern Road West and Malvern Road East propelling in the right direction was permitted over the Up Main Line, or the Up & Down Goods Line, for a maximum of 25 freight wagons - without a brakevan leading,  in clear weather only .

 

Propelling - again subject to various limits was also authorised in the right direction between Malvern Road East and St James.  

 

Working in the wrong direction was not permitted between Malvern Road West and Malvern Road East.

 

Working in the wrong direction was permitted between Malvern Road East and St James on both the Up & Down Main Lines subject to the following restrictions (which applied in both directions)

1. Setting back - coaching stock not to exceed 15 eight wheeled vehicle or equivalent; 5 freight vehicles without a brakevan.  Sped in both instances not to exceed 5mph.

2. Hauled movements - coaching stock vehicles permitted.  (And no notes regarding length or restriction of speed - a supplement might have told a different story possibly.) 

Many thanks Stationmaster,

 

That's all going to be very useful. I haven't got info on empty stock moves but plan to use the two short sidings for local services overnight, with locos going on shed. I can use your info to ensure I follow the rules.

 

I'm thinking of adding more operational interest by adding / removing tail traffic at the station - the down siding has an end dock so I'm thinking some Damos and Loriots might get some use.  Adding it to the back of an down express would be tricky as it will involve a run round and shunt via Malvern Road West.

 

Thanks again for your assistance. 

 

Will

[WillCav]

I'm bumping this thread as I have a few other queries that I hope people can help me with.

 

1. What are the 3 x lever numbers for the distants at Malvern Road West that are 'owned' by Lansdown Jn (post 1943 remodelling)?

 

2. What is the mileage for Malvern Road Station?

 

Thanks in advance 

 

Will

[5BarVT]

Hi Will,

 

Good to have you back on here.

1. Will have to wait until tomorrow when I can get at my laptop.

2.Hmmm!  1959 Gloucester WTT list mileage as 20m63c but annotates that as Malvern Rd East.  Using miles from Bham Snow Hill for Malvern Rd and comparing against Honeybourne W Jn MP and Bham gives 21 miles exactly (assuming I can add and subtract).

 

FYI I got my WTT from the Michael Clemens Railways site.  Plenty of GWR and WR PTT/STT/WTT on there to download.

 

Paul.

 

[5BarVT]

And back to Q1, from the left:

87 to Up Branch, 95 to Down Relief, 102 to Down Main.  Inner distants under MRW3 are wire worked, outer distants under MRW2 are motor worked.

Paul.

[WillCav]

Paul,

 

Thanks for the information. Looks like I'll need 21m and 21m20ch mile posts in the area I'm modelling.

 

What you've said about the working of the distants matches the photographic evidence.

 

Thanks 

 

Will