Signalling help requested - not real location - suggestions and advice welcome LNER 1938

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, ColHut said:

Thankyou both.

 

one related question:  If the junction signals  1-3  were moved closer to the toe of the junction, wouldn’t this uncover the crossover 5 requiring an outer home in rear to protect them?

 

regards

Good point - you would need an additional stop signal to protect that crossover.  i'm not sure of the way the GNR did such things but on some companies such a signal could be put far enough in rear of the crossover to also act as an acceptance home signal.  Looking at a few GNR signalling diagrams might answer that question? 

[WillCav]

If you do move junction signals 1-3, be careful of trains from the branch clipping the front of one stationary at the junction signal.  Parallel to shunt signal 12 would prevent this but you will lose about a turnout's length of useable platform.

 

Will

[ColHut]

7 minutes ago, WillCav said:

If you do move junction signals 1-3, be careful of trains from the branch clipping the front of one stationary at the junction signal.  Parallel to shunt signal 12 would prevent this but you will lose about a turnout's length of useable platform.

 

Will

Thankyou WillCav; yes, part of the reason for not having the Junction close to the points is that after allowing for not fouling the points, length of engine etc there is not much platform left for coaches, about two and a half is all I get.

 

regards

[ColHut]

39 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Good point - you would need an additional stop signal to protect that crossover.  i'm not sure of the way the GNR did such things but on some companies such a signal could be put far enough in rear of the crossover to also act as an acceptance home signal.  Looking at a few GNR signalling diagrams might answer that question? 

Thankyou, and yes, perusing GNR track plans shows that where space permitted a stop signal would be placed to protect any intervening crossovers or sidings.  Interestingly junction signal are sometime pragmatically dropped back a little to protect level crossings etc.  Mablethorpe junction seems to somewhat similar to my use case.

 

https://signalbox.org/~SBdiagram.php?id= 378

 

regards

[ColHut]

Thanks for all your help on this.  After much thought I have decided to move the splitting home signal forward to near the toe of the points; there is enough space to get a bracket signal in to the RHS of the running line in accordance with LNER B.1101, and many if the passenger trains will only be a J15 with 3-4, 4 or 6 wheelers.  Train out of section will be delayed  for trains on the down main but overall this is a minor matter, and would likely have occurred anyway, and it permits trains to cross from the branch to the up main whilst a down main train is standing at the home signal, and permits limited station duties etc.  I will get my Dremal flexible nozzle into use and cut out the crossover at (5).

 

regards all.

[Railpassion]

Why not extend your platform back by a carriage length to enable a slightly longer train? 

 

[ColHut]

22 hours ago, Railpassion said:

Why not extend your platform back by a carriage length to enable a slightly longer train? 

 

I run out of table as the line curves around a corner towards a tunnel, but I did think about some re-modelling.

 

regards

[Rodentian Railways]

I think the bigger picture here is whether the wheezing asthmatic engines operating on the line would ever have gone fast enough (if they went at all) to actually be in danger of a collision such that some form of signalling arrangements were required. All historical photos of Piglington and its environs clearly show a man with a red flag moving sedately in front of each train as late as 1956. The impecuniosity of the former LNER constituents is well known and it is hard to imagine that any form of signalling would have been provided for. The surviving station records at  the NRM strongly indicate the station was entirely staffed by one old blind Kelpie call "Muffie" whose job it was to keep the rats and any paying passenger out. Gifted as "Muffie" undoubtedly was I suspect manipulating the the necessary levers in the signal cabin was beyond him. I will have to check the relevant section in the General Appendix to the WTT but I believe that all movements were regulated by "Special Instruction". Specifically "Any Train approaching or departing from Piglington, whether preceded by Flagman or not, must not under any circumstances cross onto or from any running line unless prior permission is received from the Regional Traffic Manager." There is however no evidence that any such permission was ever granted. It is interesting to note that no thought appears to have been given to the using proven LNWR method of train control - "First to the junction has right of way for punctuality is the politeness of Kings!"

[ColHut]

Having decided to move the home signal  up to much closer to the toe of the facing points, I now need to redesign the actual signals. The signals will be for the Main, Branch, and Siding.

 

Sighting precludes the existing design as there are the following constraints:

 

- canopies on both platforms which would prevent good visibility of signals mounted to the left (or right)

- platforms which by preference require the faces of any structures 6’ from the edge.

 

- a lattice footbridge in advance of the signals which will make for an awkward background.

 

Given the likely original construction (about 1890), some tighter clearances would be an option, but probably not if modernised.

 

So the options include a couple of very tall single posts , perhaps with a tie rod at the top (A).  A left or right hand unbalanced  bracket with a long cantilever and three dolls. (B1 or B2), and a small gantry  with three dolls, either pendant or normal. ( C1 or C2).  I have the option of two full size and one miniature arm, or two reduced length arms and one miniature arm.

 

If a gantry, a wooden one will be preferred such as at Wembley Hill:  https://www.steve-banks.org/prototype-and-traffic/236-signals-and-signal-boxes .

 

All are more or less justifiable having regards to examples at Seghill, (albeit 1965, on the front cover  of Essery’s Railway Signalling and track plans.), Firsby South Junction on on the back cover of Vanns’ Illustrated History …GNR signalling, and Sleaford West -  Vanns, p.80.  .

 

Sketch  to follow.

 

regards.

[ColHut]

Well after further thought, and actually getting down and dirty with some straight edges and locos, it seems that just raising the post and bracket height to about 21’ or more above platform height enables visibility of the entire bracket from any distance except to a small part of the lower part of the bracket right at the first encounter with the canopy corner.  Even then the entire bracket is easily seen by crossing to the right hand side of the cab.   It also lifts the bracket arm higher than the footbridge.

 

So I will forget about A, and concentrate on B and C.

 

Options include bracketing the arms all the way over the track (B1) with a siding and two reduced length arms, not bracketing the arms all the way over but otherwise the same as B1 (the test measurement case), and using full size arms and a siding arm (B3), but otherwise as B2.

 

B2 is my preferred option at this stage, and matches well with the LNER booklet on structures, standard spacing and sizes.

 

I would probably go for somersault arms.

 

A gantry is still an option.

 

regards