Jump to content
 

Dartmouth Townstal - Theoretical tunnelling out of Dartmouth


cary hill
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

Right - although we are lacking info on other freight services I'll take a pop at it -

 

1.  Train runs in on the Down Line, passes through the station and reverses into the Middle Siding.

 

2. a. Assume cattle wagons front, shed traffic behind them, mileage behind them, coal on the rear of the Dartmouth section.

     b. Assume all Newton bound traffic will not run via Tavistock Jcn but will be picked up by the Up direction trip later in the day.

     c. Assume no empties will be attached, only westbound traffic.

     d. Assume this train is only dropping off and positioning but is not doing a full clearout although it will shunt to make space for inwards traffic

3. Cattle wagons detached off the front and positioned at the dock.

4. Shed traffic detached off the front and positioned for the shed. theoretically there should be no empties from the shed as the outwards and any empties were cleared late teh previous afternoon (but things will be different if this wasn't the case of course)

 

Stop for breakfast

 

5. Pull the mileage and coal and shunt to Upside platform line, run round and reattach loco at the Newton end, then propel towards Middle Sdg/Down Line

6. Reverse and draw towards Back Road then shunt off inwards wagons to the siding between the timber yard siding and the Up line (assume it's long enough, if it isn't then put other wagons towards the timber yard siding - ideally split the coal and mileage to save later shunt but not the end of the world if you can't.

7. Pull the empties from the coal/mileage siding (which will inevitably include some loaded coal wagons) and shunt out any loaded coal wagons back to the coal siding.

8. If there's no room in the yard to shunt with or stable the empties (for Hackney) now attached shunt them onto the Upside platform line, run round via the Down platform and shunt the empties onto the train in the Middle Siding, return the engine to position the coal wagons and mileage traffic. * Note

9 Depending on how the rest of the trip is formed either attach the Kingsbridge/Plymouth wagons front or hope they not rough and are in the correct order and pick up with the front of the train off the Middle Siding to get them in the right place when shunted onto the back portion of the train of the train.  Send Fireman for hot water in the tea cans while doing this shunt.

 

Havea  cuppa while waiting the road.

 

10. Off we go for Kingsbridge

Note * Theoretically the siding for Hackney traffic/empties should be empty at this time so the empties and outwards mileage stuff that's ready, would go in there at this point and not be taken on through.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that very detailed list of prototypical shunting procedures. I attach a provisional abridged goods timetable for the line in case it makes any difference to things. The timetable was formulated by using most of the 1957/58 Torbay Branch freight workings with "bolt-ons" fore and aft to extend the trip times as necessary.The timings for the Torbay Branch freight workings seem to have survived intact until 1961/62 with some slight adjustment to timings.

 

Goods Timetable.xlsx

 

I think there is time for tea.

 

A supplementary prototype question. How many loaded freight vans/wagons would a 57XX Pannier be capable of hauling up 1 in 55 gradient unassisted? I'm asking because I envisage a steep climb out of the station in the Kingsbridge direction up to Townstal Woods Tunnel to pass through/under the ring of hills surrounding Dartmouth. I think I read somewhere that a 57XX was restricted to 14 wagons when hauling Torquay Gasworks traffic up a similar gradient out of Kingswear - would that be a reasonable comparison. It would be handy if it was, as that length of freight train might roughly equate in length to a 4 coach train - which might be convenient in the fiddle yard.

Edited by cary hill
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Thanks for that very detailed list of Prototypical shunting procedures. I attach a provisional abridged goods timetable for the line in case it makes any difference to things. The timetable was formulated by using most of the 1957/58 Torbay Branch freight workings with "bolt-ons" fore and aft to extend the trip times as necessary.The timings for the Torbay Branch freight workings seem to have survived intact until 1961/62 with some slight adjustment to timings.

 

attachicon.gifGoods Timetable.xlsx

 

I think there is time for tea.

 

A supplementary prototype question. How many loaded freight vans/wagons would a 57XX Pannier be capable of hauling up 1 in 55 gradient unassisted? I'm asking because I envisage a steep climb out of the station in the Kingsbridge direction up to Townstal Woods Tunnel to pass through/under the ring of hills surrounding Dartmouth. I think I read somewhere that a 57XX was restricted to 14 wagons when hauling Torquay Gasworks traffic up a similar gradient out of Kingswear - would that be a reasonable comparison. It would be handy if it was, as that length of freight train might roughly equate in length to a 4 coach train - which might be handy in the fiddle yard.

Timetable is good for the way I shunted the place although breakfast would have been a bit of a rush!

 

Now the supplementary can be answered in two different ways and I'm choosing the easiest as I've no wish to start getting in volved with No.3 wagons and No.1 wagons and all that sort of thing (although we might have to at some stage) so I've taken the easy way and used the passenger train loads and a 57XX was allowed 220 tons from Torquay to Newton A. unassisted and 392 tons when assisted to Torre Up Advanced Starting Signal and that is 1 in 55; the load from Kingswear to Paignton was 250 tons where the steepest gradient is 1 in 66.  They are actually passenger train loads and freight would be subject to other constraints as getting up hills was one thing, getting down them was quite another.  I can probably delve out the freight loads but it might take a bit of time if you really need me to do so?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Stationmaster, on 18 Oct 2013 - 17:23, said:

I can probably delve out the freight loads but it might take a bit of time if you really need me to do so?[/i]

Thanks for the offer, but as it might be time-consuming, I assume I won't come to total grief by studying some of the Freight WTTs for other areas of the country available on Michael Clemens' excellent site. The wagon "tables" and notes towards the end of the WTTs appear to be essentially standard and some of the wagon numbers permitted for smaller locomotives look suitably low.

Edited by cary hill
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Thanks for the offer, but as it might be time-consuming, I assume I won't come to total grief by studying some of the Freight WTTs for other areas of the country available on Michael Clemens' excellent site. The wagon "tables" and notes towards the end of the WTTs appear to be essentially standard and some of the wagon numbers permitted for smaller locomotives look suitably low.

I can dig the number of wagons out if you are happy to translate them David - but not until tomorrow as th timetables are up in the 'library'

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have made planning progress with my imagined single track tunnel from Dartmouth towards the coast at Blackwood Sands, as this will partly determine traffic patterns and levels on my planned layout . Quite shocked at the gradients required up to the tunnel and also the length of the tunnel itself. The tunnel (at approx 2,728 yards) would have been about the 5th longest on the GWR and entirely explains why the South Hams Railway was never built using this route or any other. 

 

 A table and chart of the tunnel gradients and a routemap with 50m(164') and 100m (328') contour lines marked are attached. I assume the tunnel will be a bit of pig to drive a hardworking steam locomotive through.

 

 I have "surveyed" the viability of the first 400 yards or so of the Dartmouth end (the terrain rises very sharply) and last mile or so at the Blackpool end, whilst on holiday a couple of years ago, but I strongly suspect I'm not much of an armchair railway civil engineer, so any criticisms and suggestions are most welcome.

 

GRADIENT PROFILES.xlsx

 

post-9751-0-15160600-1382664115_thumb.jpg

 

I have also been giving some further consideration to what might get up and down the gradients through the tunnel, using information for loadings the Torbay Branch (as the approach to Greenway Tunnel is vaguely similar on a smaller scale) ,and also looking at the Newton to Rattery section the South Devon Banks.

 

train tonnage limits.xlsx

 

I hope the loadings are reasonable but, I suppose that depends on how daft the tunnel is.

Edited by cary hill
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the actual gradient through the tunnel David?

 

Rising at a (constant ?)1 in 66 from the Dartmouth end virtually all the way through. The crest of the climb is very close to the southern exit from the tunnel.

 

I've done the whole process back to front to a certain extent by calculating what height I could reach from the Blackpool end without the need for tunnelling. I reckon theoretically I can get up to around 200 ft before entering the tunnel, albeit with a challenging 1 in 53 climb from Blackpool and some possible hefty embankments and deepish cuttings up the narrow Blackpool valley.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great way of working the gradients involved. Can you tell me what mapping software you used to get those pictures?

 

I was struggling a bit with old OS maps etc., trying work out routes and gradients, until I came across this site http://www.mapometer.com/ , whilst looking for a site to measure how far my wife and I were walking on our Sunday "exercise" strolls.

 

I discovered that if the "Show Altitude" button is activated the blue "Altitude Graph" line was generated and by clicking on this "spot" heights and distances show up on your "red" walking route. 

 

A bit of experimentation and some lateral thinking ..... and I thought why not try it as a free "fun" surveying tool for "might have been " railway lines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Rising at a (constant ?)1 in 66 from the Dartmouth end virtually all the way through. The crest of the climb is very close to the southern exit from the tunnel.

 

I've done the whole process back to front to a certain extent by calculating what height I could reach from the Blackpool end without the need for tunnelling. I reckon theoretically I can get up to around 200 ft before entering the tunnel, albeit with a challenging 1 in 53 climb from Blackpool and some possible hefty embankments and deepish cuttings up the narrow Blackpool valley.

So definitely in the 'steep' category but nothing too nasty when compared with some other places.  I haven't checked all your load details yet as I've been playing at scanning and posting old phoyos for a lot of my computer/online time but I'll try to have a look at some stage when i get a chance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was struggling a bit with old OS maps etc., trying work out routes and gradients, until I came across this site http://www.mapometer.com/ , whilst looking for a site to measure how far my wife and I were walking on our Sunday "exercise" strolls.

 

I discovered that if the "Show Altitude" button is activated the blue "Altitude Graph" line was generated and by clicking on this "spot" heights and distances show up on your "red" walking route. 

 

A bit of experimentation and some lateral thinking ..... and I thought why not try it as a free "fun" surveying tool for "might have been " railway lines.

 Many thanks for that. I've had a look at it and it seems a useful bit of software. Just a shame there isn't many contour lines and not always very clear. But it's free. The only other program I know that does a similar thing but with more detail is Memory Map. This uses OS maps but does cost quite a bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

Sorry I'm late to the party (by six years) - but it occurred to me that because of Dartmouth Naval College, part of the hypothetical traffic might be supplies to a small Royal Navy dockyard? Nothing like Devonport, but just something in the scenery, maybe with a minesweeper or customs cutter?

 

Also, for any other Railway Surveyors, interested in creating their own "new" tracks:

https://www.gpsies.com/

Has a "Track Creator" which shows route and contours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There used to be a Dartmouth training cruiser (HMS Devonshire at one time) for the provision of sea training to BRNC students.  Later the role was undertaken by a light fleet carrier and subsequently by a frigate squadron.  Budget cuts resulted in the abolition of a separate training facility, other  than  small craft, with longer voyages  undertaken within the Fleet.  Additionally,  there has often been a "guardship" in attendance during regatta week, often a frigate.   So there would be some scope for a warship in the scenic background (more in the build-up to D day).  Additionally, the existence of a railway on the Dartmouth side of the river could have supported growth in the local boatyards.  A number of minesweepers and, I believe, a couple of corvettes were built on the Dart.

 

Did this interesting layout scheme see the light of day?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Given that the GWR intended to run trains to Dartmouth and built the road that is now South Embankment and terminal building that is currently used as the Station Restaurant.

 

The line could have followed the River Dart down stream from Totnes, shortest and simplest route.

 

The upper section of which served Totnes Quay mostly as a horse powered street tramway.

 

One wonders how all this would have played out.

 

Its lack of progress being most likely the presence of the RNC Dartmouth as the line would have needed to pass through it's grounds.

 

I have looked at various of the South Devon might have been lines.

 

Linking Ashburton to Heathfield or Christow to Chagford never got built due to the sparsity of population and lack of industry to support the cost of the major engineering works with revenue traffic. Even if the proposed extensions followed the contour line methods of light and narrow gauge railways.

 

Settle and Carlisle being an exception that proves the rule but the further extension north of the border helped to put the line into a more cost effective choice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
On 11/04/2020 at 14:28, Sturminster_Newton said:

The line could have followed the River Dart down stream from Totnes, shortest and simplest route. The upper section of which served Totnes Quay mostly as a horse powered street tramway. One wonders how all this would have played out.

 

How about this?

 

Part 1 - from Totnes station, a new curve towards the quayside.

 

image.png.d943a082ac0d4365d41bc49609389b19.png

 

Part 2 - Totnes Quay to Sharpham Barton

 

image.png.38e3ee09780b23ef4541dc82f6f8a1cd.png

 

Part 3 - Sharpham Barton to Langham Wood, with a couple of tunnels

 

image.png.17c84dc22b6ea51d3319769daa90188b.png

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Part 4 - Langham Wood to Dittisham, with a couple of small bridges.

 

image.png.b91a6fcc69e45373ba3e1806952a12f2.png

 

Part 5 - Dittisham Halt, with a small quay and siding

 

image.png.4b75fecc86acdc6183acd7c42c9a7a99.png

 

Part 6 - Dartmouth Docks - (to keep the Naval College happy)

 

image.png.60c37f8d701fa4392fdb1b52d1ec6aab.png

 

Part 7 - Dartmouth Town station and terminus.

 

image.png.9d36ebfc177de76de07684fad6b5a82f.png

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

As I recall, the original impetus for the South Hams railway was the LSWR wanting a competitive way to get from Plymouth to Newton Abbot/Exeter in the 1860s - that scheme eventually got as far as Yealmpton only in, but even that was built as a through station as the initial terminus on the modified scheme was supposed to be Modbury.  Given that the ambition was a link across the Dart to the Kingswear side - and with the Admiralty usually being sticklers for unimpeded navigation to 100ft (e.g., Menai and Royal Albert bridges), it seems to me that a crossing near Ditisham at a high level was a likely outcome using the local topography of very steep sides to the estuary to help level the approaches to the bridge.  Perhaps it could have added a spur to a terminus/docks nearer Dartmouth, although Kingswear already supplied that to a great extent.   This would also have avoided the need to breech the town itself.  Many a station was sited several miles away from its nominal place after all.

But in any case, the idea of a line from Totnes by the GWR, although easier from an engineering standpoint, would not have met the competitive case except as a pre-emptive strike - potentially leading to a dueling Dartmouth stations. 

From a modeling POV, the vista of through trains passing by a terminus but at a higher level is available.  Of course, just as at Yealmpton, the scheme could simply have run out of money at any stage desired. 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 09/10/2019 at 21:32, 2750Papyrus said:

A number of minesweepers and, I believe, a couple of corvettes were built on the Dart.

I don't know about being built on the Dart though it is certainly the case that two Algerine-class minesweepers, HMS Acute and HMS Jewel were attached to the stone frigate HMS Britannia in the 1950's. There is an (inaccurate) account of them rescuing the German coaster, Vormann Rass, off Start Point in 1959. The Imperial War Museum account of the incident has Jewel getting a line on Vormann Rass and towing it into port. I have heard an account from one of the ships' company that it was in fact Acute that towed the German freighter into port. The salvage awarded to the ratings involved amounted to almost a weeks pay.

 

The ships were used to train both RN snotties and overseas students. One one occasion a Petty Officer on board Acute resorted to using bad language when one overseas student, a minor member of a Middle Eastern Royal Family, proved to be incapable of maintaining the ship on a constant bearing. (He was chasing the line in Jack Speak). The student complained to the captain about the the way he had been spoken to by the Petty Officer. This resulted on the Petty officer being admonished by the ship's captain. The student was then sent aloft for his stupidity and spent the next half-hour clinging to the mast as the ship practised manoeuvres!

Edited by MartinRS
Add link
  • Like 2
  • Round of applause 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tynewydd said:

the original impetus for the South Hams railway was the LSWR wanting a competitive way to get from Plymouth to Newton Abbot/Exeter in the 1860s - that scheme eventually got as far as Yealmpton only

 

If anyone is wondering why, a look at an OS map of the area will help.

e.g.

https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=12.1&lat=50.36666&lon=-3.76636&layers=10&b=1

 

The GWR line (Totnes - Brent - Ivybridge - Plymouth) runs roughly east-west, but most of the valleys in the South Hams run roughly north-south. The GW line avoided the worst of that by hugging the edge of southern Dartmoor. Any extension from Yealmpton could get about halfway to Modbury, but then need cuttings, bridges and tunnels.

 

Kingsbridge got connected by using the north-south route up the Avon valley to Brent.

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...