Signal Position advice

[Izzy]

I'm after some views on where, and whether, a signal should be placed on yet another small layout I am intending to make. I have produced the whole track layout although only part of it will feature, in order to confirm that I have the signalling basically correct. There is a level crossing to the left, protected both ways, and a few g/s for shunting, but I am a bit unsure where a starter should be when proceeding left to right. At the platform end 'A' or at 'B', or whether neither is correct.

 

 

 

 

 

As a short single line branch with junctions at both ends I am thinking it might have been worked as a single section so really only the signals protecting the crossing would be needed and not even the g/s. But looking at such as the Buntingford branch locations such as Widford had similar arrangements. 

 

Many thanks.

 

Izzy

 

added later - this will be exGE in the 60's/70's .

Edited June 21, 2020 by Izzy

[RailWest]

In the absence of any information about which railway company and what era, I would suggest that both A and B might be provided.

[Izzy]

Ah, yes, sorry it's exGE in North Essex in the 60's/70's and still with mechanical semaphore and ground signals.  I was rather hoping B would cover it, and then the only signal I would have to provide, beside the g/s, was that protecting the LC at the platform ( which I have already built previously), as all else would be off-scene.

 

Izzy

[bécasse]

I rather doubt whether anywhere would have had a goods yard in the 1970s. Mistley, on the Harwich branch, still had full facilities intact in 1974 but it was most unusual by then. Household coal, grain, sugar beet and fruit, all to some extent seasonal, tended to be the mainstay of East Anglian rural goods yards post the mid-1950s but they mostly disappeared or were lost to road by the mid- to late-1960s. As, indeed, were most rural passenger lines, even those converted to basic Pay Train operation.

Assuming that there is some good reason for the retention of this yard (for wagon load traffic), I would plump for the signal box having been downgraded to a gate box (pending closure or conversion to half-barriers - which was awkward with a adjacent station) with just protecting stop and distant signals in each direction and manned as required by a railman. The connections to the yard would then be worked by local ground frames adjacent to the points concerned, unlocked by the SL token.

Late 1950s or c1960-62 would give you more scope with the diesels having arrived but some of that traffic still about. Autumns, in particular, could still be busy.

[Izzy]

The placement of this line would be from Mistley to Thorpe-le-soken, a line half-built before abandonment. As Robert Free built the maltings and granaries at Mistley, and maltings at Thorpe-le-soken I have decided that small structures of both a grain store and maltings could occupy the rear sidings/headshunt as they might well have resulted if the line had survived. The behind platform one will become a loading point for a local sand/gravel extraction co. As you will know the area has many such enterprises, being littered with gravel pits. This should I hope cover goods traffic. Very tenuous, but then so will be the whole little layout! 
 

Izzy

[Gwiwer]

A is the correct location for the starter although it should be on the other side of the line to be in driver’s line of sight.   
 

You also need a signal, more or less where A is, to control exit from the siding to the main line. 

[Izzy]

Thanks. I should have realised that. Often I miss the quite obvious. It does make the previous suggestion of a gate box and ground frames a tempting and easy answer as there isn’t room to site the signal on the other side so I’d have to make a bracket one. So now I have plenty to muse on.

 

Thanks again to all.

 

Izzy

[bécasse]

11 hours ago, Izzy said:

The placement of this line would be from Mistley to Thorpe-le-soken, a line half-built before abandonment. As Robert Free built the maltings and granaries at Mistley, and maltings at Thorpe-le-soken I have decided that small structures of both a grain store and maltings could occupy the rear sidings/headshunt as they might well have resulted if the line had survived. The behind platform one will become a loading point for a local sand/gravel extraction co. As you will know the area has many such enterprises, being littered with gravel pits. This should I hope cover goods traffic. Very tenuous, but then so will be the whole little layout! 

I have often thought that that line offered serious modelling potential, and I have a vague recollection that you already possess a suitable station building (since it is known which style would have been used). In addition to the local train service, I have always assumed that it would have seen (at least in the 1950s and early 1960s) excursion and holiday-maker traffic from the Peterborough direction to Clacton (and Butlins!), perhaps even a summer period Clacton portion off the "North Country Continental".

[Izzy]

Yes, the station building is partly/mostly the reason for this little endeavour. As my in-laws lived at Mistley for many years I have travelled over the road bridge  built there for the line countless times. Strange to think that the only locos ever to go under were contractors ones building the track. Only recently have I spotted a station building at Bradfield - in among farm buildings down a farm track that I can’t access - which I never knew still existed. 
 

I have often thought that had the line ever been finished and used, with direct access to Ipswich from Clacton/Walton - via the Manningtree triangular jcn  - that the whole rail network further afield may well have been quite different. No trains from the North/Cambridge area having to use the Stour valley lines to gain access at Colchester to the branches. The small village of Tendring itself could well be much bigger now. Interesting to speculate....what might have been. Trying to use that to work out/justify what I can get away with!

 

Izzy

[The Stationmaster]

I agree regarding the reduction to a gatebox so really all you need is the signals protecting the level crossing as all the connections are operated by ground frames (released by the token) so need no protecting signals.   if on the other hand you decide that the 'box is still a signal box and it releases the ground frames I can't see any real need for Signal A and any train shunting would simply be working within Station Limits protected by the two Home Signals.

 

Signal A also seems a bit of an oddity in that it would protect one GF worked connection but not the other so why bother with it at all if it isn't doing the full job?  In block working terms it does nothing - Signal B fulfils that need so really A doesn't appear to serve any useful function at all (although it would no doubt be there on the Western (in the correct place to protect both connection, along with at least one mot re stop signal - BUT we are not talking about the Western  or the North Eastern)

[Izzy]

Thanks Mike, that's interesting, and along with previous suggestions does cause me to ask more questions.

 

Remarks so far suggest that even if the signal box is in full use or not, ground frames would be present, and I gather from this that they would thus exist in all situations and from the lines inception. Am I understanding this correctly? Could I thus ask where they would be and what each might control? Are g/s still present and FPL's still fitted?

 

I also add below a revised layout with where I think any signal box would be located to allow control of all points without excessive rodding distance. I had assumed it would control all but the siding on the loop which would have been hand lever but somehow missed it off the first plan.

 

 

 

 

Thanks all,

 

Izzy

Edited June 22, 2020 by Izzy
updated plan

[bécasse]

With the layout shown, this would never have been a passing station. However, given that it lies on a single cross-country line, it could have been a block-post allowing two (or more) trains to follow each other without waiting for the complete Mistley-Thorpe or vv section to be cleared. Single line instruments would have been required for this (although by the late 1950s tokenless working would have been possible as installed east of Acle* in Norfolk). No signals other than the homes and distants required anyway for the level crossing would have been needed, and the three local GFs would all have been released by the token for section to the right (or released by the frame in the box if tokenless block was in force).

 

* My recollection (which I haven't checked) is that an IBS was used at Acle to allow trains to follow each other, but given the need to man the crossing box anyway, that wouldn't have been appropriate here.

 

I mentionned previously that I had once had an idea based on this line. One concept I developed which might be of use to you was to have a connection to a canning factory (cf Tiptree Jams), which in your case could have come off the hidden section of the goods "loop" east of the road bridge. Even in the late 1950s/early 1960s it would have provided a legitimate excuse for freight traffic, particularly vans for taking away product but also coal and perhaps even steel rolls.

[Izzy]

I like the idea of off-scene demands for goods traffic which can be thus adjusted to suit whatever you feel appropriate. Thanks for the suggestion. Now I have a good idea where the layout is heading I can plan accordingly.

 

Once again thanks all.

 

Izzy

[DavidLong]

On 21/06/2020 at 17:08, Izzy said:

I'm after some views on where, and whether, a signal should be placed on yet another small layout I am intending to make. I have produced the whole track layout although only part of it will feature, in order to confirm that I have the signalling basically correct. There is a level crossing to the left, protected both ways, and a few g/s for shunting, but I am a bit unsure where a starter should be when proceeding left to right. At the platform end 'A' or at 'B', or whether neither is correct.

 

 

 

 

 

As a short single line branch with junctions at both ends I am thinking it might have been worked as a single section so really only the signals protecting the crossing would be needed and not even the g/s. But looking at such as the Buntingford branch locations such as Widford had similar arrangements. 

 

Many thanks.

 

Izzy

 

added later - this will be exGE in the 60's/70's .

 

And which scale will this one be, Bob? 2FS? P4? S? Whichever you choose I'm sure that the end result will be delightful, as ever.

 

David

[Izzy]

8 hours ago, DavidLong said:

 

And which scale will this one be, Bob? 2FS? P4? S? Whichever you choose I'm sure that the end result will be delightful, as ever.

 

David

Thanks David, very nice of you to say so. Another 2FS. It’s going to be another ‘experiment’, as always! A ‘convertible’ one that can be used either as a terminus station - with one of those sector plate run-round fiddle yards on the right hand side, or also with another small one on the left to make a through one. It’s what the crossing gate mech has been made for. And so I can use the station building already made.

 

Bob