Signalling at Marchwood

[Beacon]

Please forgive my ignorance of anything to do with signalling but for the planning and building of my Marchwood layout I'd love to know some more about the signalling around the station. For anyone unfamiliar with the location, a qick look on Google or Bing will show you a single line coming into Marchwood which turns into a double just after signal 1, followed by a level crossing and signal 2 before the station. Beyond the station the track remains double, then comes signal 3 a little way before the branch to the military port veers off to the left and the main line continues on to Fawley...

 

The signals are still of the semaphore type rather than colour lights which makes this an interesting location too. The closed down Marchwood station is still manned by Network Rail as the crossing gates are not automatic and there also seems to still be some form of 'signalbox' within the old station building.

 

I'd like to know anything about the current signalling on the line, why each signal is where it is etc. but also any suggestions on how it might be altered if the line were to be reopened to passenger trains, possible involving the whole line becoming double track?

 

This is "Signal 1" taken from the crossing/station looking back towards Totton/Southampton:

 

This is "Signal 2" taken from the crossing with the start of the platform just in view on the left:

 

 

This is "Signal 2" from the station platform with "Signal 1" visible beyond the crossing gates:

 

 

Finally, this is "Signal 3" taken from the station platform looking towards the military branch and the line on to Fawley:

 

 

Thanks for any help anyone is able to offer!

[Beacon]

And one more to add some interest - this one taken through the back window of the inside of the station building!

(I did ask permission before taking my photos, which included all sorts of detail shots to start work on modelling the station building!)

[PaulRhB]

These are No3 & 13 the Down Home signals for the main and Loop respectively.

 

Rear of No22 the Up Loop starter and 21 the Up Starter.

 

 

No22 the Up Loop starter and 21 the Up Starter.

 

 

This is Number 5 controlling entrance to the MOD Port and Number 4 that takes you up to the Down Starter at the far end of the loop. This was a lattice post until approx 2001-2 but was condemned due to the metal looking like flaky pastry. Used to be entertaining climbing up there with 2 oil lamps! Oil lamps replaced by electric ones about 2004ish

[PaulRhB]

Here's the signalling at Marchwood, the box also monitors the six AHB's on the line and controls the Up Fawley Starter remotely. The Marchwood to Fawley section is controlled by Tokens held in the box and auxillary machines.

The Starter into the Port shouldn't be pulled until the train is at or nearly at a stand due to the tight curvature and the Port must get permission before a train leaves the Port to approach the Ground signal protecting the loop. The second ground signal allows for trains to move up the loop and run round clear of the platform but a barrier operator is required for the AHB's South of the loop as the treadles are put out of sequence if a loco runs out of the south end without carrying on over the crossing, so not a common move.

DBS doesn't allow token exchanges to be made on the move any more so anything post about 2004 would require all trains to and from Fawley to stop at the platform.

The Marchwood to Totton section is track circuited with flow arrows so no tokens there.

The box is in the old station and the yellow walkway on the main track is to allow the Signalman to exchange tokens with the Drivers using the loop.

The abundance of sand drags and full rather than trap points is due to the nature of the goods carried so Marchwood is still capable of allowing two trains to enter opposite sides of the loop at the same time though the Down train would have to stop while the Up trains token is cycled through the machines.

Passenger use would be covered by the current signalling as it is more flexible than many loops that don't have traps either end. The track would need upgrading though as it is currently considered a goods only line and restricted to 40mph.

 

Oakwood Press do a nice book with the history and a few of my pics of the inside are in their as well and it hasn't changed since I was there 10 years ago. Couple of the guys on here drive down the branch and might have some more pics.

 

[John B]

Fascinating insight, thanks Paul.

 

I lived in Marchwood for 4 years in the 90s, coincidental with a reawakening in railway interest. The Oakwood Press book is very good..

[Beacon]

Hi Paul,

 

Thanks for the response. I believe you shared some of the info on my thread on the old forum too so apologies for making you repeat some of it! I do have the book you mention and various photos and info that people have been kind enough to pass on to me - although you can never get too much of any of that from anyone willing to offer it!

 

Please forgive my stupidity but am I right in thinking that each signal literally controls access to the corresponding line ahead? Would this mean any major changes if for example a second platform were added at Marchwood and directional running introduced?

[Beacon]

If anyone else out there is interested in general, there is more on my thread on the old forum:

• Fawley Branch Thread

[beast66606]

Please forgive my stupidity but am I right in thinking that each signal literally controls access to the corresponding line ahead? Would this mean any major changes if for example a second platform were added at Marchwood and directional running introduced?

 

In simplistic terms each arm controls the route to the next signal or buffer stop (simplistic view before we start getting variations!)

Looking at plan you would need a few changes if you were to add a second platform

[Beacon]

Thanks!

 

I think I'll assume that if any changes were to be made then the signalling would all be upgraded and modernised so perhaps I'll leave that one for another day!

[Beacon]

Here's the signalling at Marchwood, the box also monitors the six AHB's on the line and controls the Up Fawley Starter remotely.

 

Sorry - what does AHB stand for?

 

 

 

[beast66606]

Here's an option

 

 

 

AHB = Automatic Half Barrier (at a level crossing)

[Beacon]

Thanks for clarifying - that makes sense now!

 

Also thank you for the diagram. I think I understand what you have done there.

 

If the line was reopened to passenger traffic (with or without a second platform) and, as Paul has mentioned, this required a track upgrade, am I right in assuming that the semaphores would be replaced by colour light signals or would they actually upgrade/change the existing semaphore system?

 

Would passenger trains also be subject to the token system?

 

Sorry if this is becoming too hypothetical

[PaulRhB]

You could leave the signalling as it is and introduce a platform on the Up side if you wanted to retain bi-directional running on both lines, personally I think this would be the likely case as the signalling is designed around the freight operation and I doubt they would compromise this just to add a passenger service. I also doubt a second platform would actually be used as the current one would hold a two car unit which is all that would be likely to run on the branch. The current token and track circuit systems work fine with Passenger trains as well.

Modifying the signalling to single direction for each line and putting in a platform would be prohibitively expensive as it requires a total redesign of the interlocking. Upgrading to colour lights would also be unlikely just to add a passenger service as with Yeovil Pen Mill they would just update the semaphores as required by wear. Upgrading the track is all that's required to meet the standard for higher line speed, it wouldn't actually look any different just have tighter tolerances on it.

If your plan is to include the proposed Dibden bay terminal then a more radical scheme is required. For this I would expect the Signalbox to close the gates be replaced by four raising booms and CCTV cameras and the signalling to be colour light as the port would be paying for the enhancements.

 

(Beasts diagram of the UP staters is correct mind you as I just used a generic double bracket)

[beast66606]

Depends on volume of traffic really, if it was light then as Paul says, its probable they would keep the existing arrangement, but if the traffic, especially the passenger service, was heavier then they might not want bi-directional facilities as this presents extra risk - horses/courses.

 

Colour lights could be introduced if there was a PTE paying for the work

[PaulRhB]

Colour lights could be introduced if there was a PTE paying for the work

or Freightliner

 

Assuming there was an upgrade then the cost of installing colour lights and full cctv barriers would also see the platforms modified or rebuilt to modern standards (grandfather rights don't apply to closed stations). Marchwood box would close and be added onto Eastleigh Panel so you might see the current building replaced with a bus shelter or one of the new modular stations.

I also believe that due to the current track layout the retention of bi directional signalling on both sides of the loop would be seen as essential for operational flexibility if you had the Port and Fliner terminal joining the branch at Marchwood. ( the FLT connection was planned to be down the south beyond the end of the loop so the two down starters might even have feathers on both)

Depends on how far you want to take it.

[brian daniels]

Got a few pics at Marchwood on my website 40 pictures in total. Marcwood pics including the rare distant ground signal when you exit the MoD!

[Beacon]

Thanks for the thoughts. I am currently thinking back along the lines of modelling the location more-or-less as is. I will bring back some passenger services but probably stick to a class 153 or perhaps some 2-car units. There is certainly enough variety in traffic with the Fawley refinery trains and the mixed back of MOD traffic or things for storage at the military port!

 

I am still considering adding in a second platform - the idea behind this would be perhaps an extension of the docks for the cruise side of things on the Marchwood side of the water, meaning that I could occasionally bring in a slightly longer 'charter' train bringing passengers from Southampton Central or further afield to Marchwood for onward transfer to the terminal by bus perhaps. Either way I shouldn't have to make major changes to the track layout, signalling or crossing meaning that I can base many things on what exists on location at the moment!

 

Thanks Brian for the link to your photos. I think I have come across them before whilst searching around. How did you manage such good access to the military side of things!?

[Beacon]

Next Question:

 

Is anyone aware of models, kits or anything readily available that I could use to model the signals around Marchwood station? The ability to get them actually functioning would be a bonus but not essential! Do they match a particular regional or period style or are they a fairly standard design?

[brian daniels]

 

Thanks Brian for the link to your photos. I think I have come across them before whilst searching around. How did you manage such good access to the military side of things!?

 

I thought you might have seen them.

 

My access to Marchwood is because I drive the MoD train in to the place

[Beacon]

Wow! I guess that would entitle you to good access! Do you get to do that regularly? It might sound silly but do you have to be vetted or chosen for it like the Royal Train or anything or is it just a standard roster job?

[brian daniels]

We are not vetted for it at all, at least I don't think so, who knows what MI5 have delving into It's just another job for us that comes round one week in 16 or earlier if we have to cover for a driver on holiday. It's a cr*p job for us now as we start at 05:00 and finish at 15:30.

[Beacon]

So it has been rather a long time since I did anything about the layout but as the boards are now built I've been playing around with the track trying to decide what will work best and popped back yesterday to take a few more pictures.

 

I have a follow-up signalling question relating to PaulRhB's signalling diagram about what would happen if an additional crossover were placed just before the branch to the port: (added in red to the signalling diagram below)

 

 

I think this will be necessary to make the layout interesting to operate in the space I have available but need to know if and how it will affect the signalling? If it makes any difference, I am planning to use a double slip to achieve this in the limited space.

 

Thanks!

[beast66606]

I can't see the prototype doing that I'm afraid, no real reason for it.

[The Stationmaster]

Seems an odd way of doing things to be honest and using a double slip like that is very 19th century. But what is the reason for adding it - apart from allowing something coming out of the port to head off to the left - in which case a trailing crossover would be much more realistic?

[PaulRhB]

Peter I think rather than making it more interesting it would simplify it and actually be too easy to operate and lose something in the process. As Dave and Mike say there isn't any reason to add a crossover there as the loop is too short to run round anything apart from a 2 car passenger train and that wouldn't justify an extra crossover as they cost about a million pounds to put in.

If you are worried about trapping a train in the MOD then I would suggest something like this which is how it would be worked if services terminated at Marchwood.

 

Unit arrives from Southampton, empties train and moves as empty stock behind the dummy beyond the MOD entrance on the Down line.

MOD train arrives or departs.

Unit draws back into platform off the ground signal and loads passengers ready to depart.

 

That should add operational interest and keep a realistic plan too.