Justification for the ‘three plus one rule’ in Inglenook Sidings layouts.

[Will Crompton]

I am planning to construct a small n-gauge layout as a way of getting back into actual railway modelling after a break of more decades than I care to mention. As is often the case a small layout will enable me to develop basic modelling, wiring etc skills. I built a baseboard a while ago with the dimensions 75cm x 25cm (and yes, so that it can sit on a Billy bookcase shelf). Given the small footprint and an interest in freight workings, a shunting layout appeals. I would incorporate a small offscene fiddle stick or yard to be attached when the layout was taken off the bookshelf for operation (subject to the usual SWMBO permissions). I have a small number of ideas which I am considering, one obvious one being an Inglenook sidings layout.

 

If an Inglenook (see diagram) is built and operated in its most familiar form there are the three sidings with room for 5, 3 and 3 wagons. One is allowed room in the ‘headshunt’ for one locomotive and three wagons and as I am sure most regulars here know, 8 wagons are used in total. I would extend the head shunt to run offscene to the fiddlestick or yard, i.e. so once a 5 wagon consist had been made up it could then run offscene beyond the limit of shunt. If I went with an Inglenook I would like to have a reasonably prototypical justification for the limit of shunt. I would probably set the layout in the 70s railblue era but am also potentially interested in the 50s and 60s. I have thought of some possible justifications I will list below. Are any of these prototypical? If not can anyone suggest prototypical justifications?

 

1) The limit of shunt is necessary because the line then runs under through a short tunnel in an urban area with poor visibility from the tunnel to the yard (a bit like Gasworks tunnel at Kings Cross).

 

2) The limit of shunt is necessary because a staff foot crossing is located there.

 

3) The yard consists of private industrial sidings in a small congested urban area, maybe a factory dating back the late 19th/early 20th century. The sidings are located at the end of a small freight only branch or spur serving a few rail connected industries. Offscene there is a runround loop. A BR locomotive pulls into the loop, runs around and propels wagons into the factory sidings. However in doing so it has to propel the wagons across a public road which runs along the boundary of the factory (a la Fry’s Factory in Keynsham) – cue chaps with flags. Once the train and loco are within the factory yard limits shunting is only allowed up to the factory yard boundary, not out onto the road, and this just happens to be 3 wagons and a loco long.

 

4) As above but with a road internal to an industrial site such as a factory or dockside.

 

5) An industrial site such as a factory or even part of a railway works with congested buildings. The limit of shunt coincides with a convenient view blocking building to the front of the layout. The exiting line runs between this and a building to the rear with very little clearance and poor visibility back to the yard once the engine has drawn back between the buildings.

 

Thanks in advance for any answers, advice etc.

Edited March 31, 2022 by Will Crompton
Diagram reupload

[Chimer]

6)  The turnout linking your yard to the rest of the world is just beyond your limit of shunt.  You might even see the "Main" line track(s) running across the bottom right hand corner exiting under a bridge (bus optional) .....

[Wheatley]

The problem with a Limit of Shunt is that it is an absolute stop command for all movements in that direction, not just shunts. They are usually (always/only ?) found where a shunting move has to make a wrong direction move on another running line, so you will not  usually find one on a single line nor in a yard. Yours would stop any movement out of the yard. 

 

Chimer's idea is a good one but rather than a LoS, make it the signal protecting the exit from the yard (disc, GPL, miniature arm, whichever you like). Or make it a "Stop and await instructions" board which would be more likely in a yard. 

[Gordon A]

Level crossing as there used to be on Avon St, Bristol.

Edited March 6, 2022 by Gordon A

[Flying Pig]

Yes it's not technically a LOS in signal-speak, but it is the farthest point the shunter can set back, so...

 

Signal and trap points leading to main line works as does a stop board and a gateway leading to a road crossing is a good reason to have one.  It also makes a good scenic break - see the linked thread, which admittedly is rather more spacious.

 

Don't worry too much about running round as the trip from the nearest yard could be propelled in one direction, which means the train could even appear with a brake van to complicate shunting.

 

 

[Will Crompton]

Thanks everyone for the answers and info so far. Clearly 'limit of shunt' is a poorly chosen term in this context. I like Wheatley's suggestion of a 'stop and await instructions' point with an appropriate signal and notice board. Would this be appropriate for scenarios 1, 2 and 5 above? Chimers suggestion of a teeny bit of the mainline would be an excise for some additional scenic work as 'practice'. Although regarding the bus on the bridge I have been working my way through Graham T's Chuffnell Regis thread this afternoon and one of his respondees points out that the bus on the bridge is compulsory and is in fact Rule 2. I also like Flying Pig's idea about propelling the brake van as well for added shunting complications.

 

Thanks to Gordon A for mentioning Avon Street. I just found a track plan here.

 

http://bristol-rail.co.uk/wiki/File:Avon_Wharf_Track_Plan_1902.jpg

 

This looks like a fascinating rabbit hole. Must resist, must resist..............

Edited March 31, 2022 by Will Crompton
Typo correction

[Ian Smeeton]

If it is an industrial yard, you 'Limit of Shunt' could be the gate.

 

eg here (from the main line side)

 

https://flic.kr/p/j32XDH

 

 

Regards

 

Ian

[Will Crompton]

Thanks for that photo Ian. BTW the gradient of that branch looks a bit fearsome! A gated exit before the road crossing was my thinking for scenario 3 but I can see that using your idea one could have the gate before the 'main line' with maybe a catch point for added versimil......versimlll.....realism. This would give one a bit more space to play with as one would not have to model a road (although I like the scenic possibilities of that). The gated exit could be combined with Chimers idea of modelling a teensy weensy bit of the main line.

 

Hmmm, this and the stop and await instructions idea are giving me plenty of food for thought. I forgot to mention that i was interested in this question in the context of shunting puzzle layouts in general but chose the Inglenook for illustrative purposes and because it's on my shortlist as a potential track plan.

Edited March 6, 2022 by Will Crompton
typo

[ejstubbs]

58 minutes ago, Gordon A said:

Level crossing as there used to be on Avon St, Bristol.

 

And as Alan Wright used for the shunting puzzle built in to the second, 1966, version of his "The Wright Lines" layout, which was the early genesis of his Inglenook Sidings idea.  In his article about the layout in the September 1967 edition of RM he even writes about his use of the "tiddlywink computer" to determine the consist of the train to be assembled.

 

Note however:

1) According to that article, there was a limit of shunt sign beside the level crossing.  That seems like an unusual error for someone who, in the article about his earlier 1956 layout using the same track plan, wrote about "a small line upon which suitable locos and rolling stock can be operated in a true-to-type manner".

2) "The Wright Lines" Mk2 had two sidings, one 4 wagons long (or 3 if one was a long wheelbase wagon), and one 2 wagons long.  He doesn't mention any particular limit on the number of wagons that can be on the main line at any one time, although the target for the puzzle is assemble a four-wagon train from the eight on the layout.  This makes it rather different from the rules for his 1979 layout "Inglenook Sidings", and which are generally regarded as the 'standard' rules for Inglenook-type layouts.

[Will Crompton]

I have changed the thread title as 'limit of shunt' is clearly what scientist's call 'wrong'. Here's an updated diagram.

 

 

Edited March 31, 2022 by Will Crompton
Diagram reupload

[Rivercider]

Avon Street in Bristol has been mentioned up thread. The former Midland Railway line to Avonside Wharf

remained in use until the 1980s, though by that time connected into the former GWR yard at Lawrence Hill.

By the late 1970s there was no run-round at Avonside Wharf, so all trains were propelled down the 'branch' which was effectively a long siding worked under 'C2' instructions, which I understand was a WR thing. The line being under control of a nominated person (in this case possibly the chargeman shunter at Lawrence Hill).

 

I have posted these photos before, but here is 08949 working a train of molasses tanks down the branch in 1983.

 

Propelling across Barton Road Crossing is 08949 with molasses tanks for Distillers Ltd at Avonside Wharf. 28/9/83.

In Avon Street sidings, the leading brake van from the propelling move has been stood aside and the TTAs of molasses split into two shorter rakes. 28/9/83

 

Another view of the urban decay at Avon Street. 28/9/83

 

 

The shunter holds a red flag as 08949 propels tanks across Avon Street into Avonside Wharf. 28/9/83

 

Note that class 03s had worked this duty until 1979, and the only other traffic by that time was cement for Blue Circle. There had also been scrap loaded in 16t mins until the early 1970s.

 

Whether you need a brake van at the head of the propelling move is entirely up to you, on the former LSWR Exmouth branch the siding to Topsham Quay was required to use a special brake van due to the downhill gradient, while the nearby Exmouth Docks branch did not require a brake van - both lines involved propelling moves over public roads.

 

cheers 

 

 

Edited March 8, 2022 by Rivercider
Correction name - Barton Road Crossing

[Will Crompton]

Many thanks, Rivercider, for the Avonside Wharf photos. They are fascinating on a number of levels. Also your comments on propelling moves.

[The Stationmaster]

On 07/03/2022 at 07:32, Rivercider said:

Avon Street in Bristol has been mentioned up thread. The former Midland Railway line to Avonside Wharf

remained in use until the 1980s, though by that time connected into the former GWR yard at Lawrence Hill.

By the late 1970s there was no run-round at Avonside Wharf, so all trains were propelled down the 'branch' which was effectively a long siding worked under 'C2' instructions, which I understand was a WR thing. The line being under control of a nominated person (in this case possibly the chargeman shunter at Lawrence Hill.

 

(snipped)

cheers 

 

 

Just to explain C2 working a bit further it was not anything to do with a long siding but was using the authority of a single person to authorise the entry of a train into a section worked in accordance with Table C2.  So it was in effect more akin to a block section but without any block instruments although a telephone was normally provided at the remote end and in some cases even a wooden train staff was used if it was needed to unlock points.  All points in a C2 section were locked by means of either a  locked hand lever or a padlocked point clip and the key(s) were handed to the crew working any train which might need to use those points.   The principle of operation was normally that only one train could be allowed in a C2 section at any one time but - except where prohibited - successive trains in the same direction were sometimes allowed

 

A normal Western pattern STOP board was normally provided at the entrance to both ends of the section although in some cases a 'STOP telephone for Instructions' sign was provided instead.  The system could be used on either double or single lines and propelling was not permitted except where specially authorised (as was the case on the Avonside branch - see below).  In some cases there could be quite an extensive network of C2 lines controlled from a single point and a number of them included junctions where two C2 lines came together at their mutual end-on junction with a third C2 section.  In places some of these lines were used by freight trains conveying trailing loads of 1,000 tons or so.  de4spite basically relying on evrybody doing what they were told by the person in charge of the section the system was remarkably safe - speeds were in any case usually low - and in all my years on the WR I never heard of a collision between trains  on a C2 line.

 

On the Avonside line up to = 22 SLUs (Standard Length Unit, = 21 ft) of brake fitted wagons were permitted to be propelled without a brakevan at the leading.  A maximum of 10SLUs of unfitted wagons were permitted to be propelled but had to have a brakevan at the leading end

[Will Crompton]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Just to explain C2 working a bit further it was not anything to do with a long siding but was using the authority of a single person to authorise the entry of a train into a section worked in accordance with Table C2.  So it was in effect more akin to a block section but without any block instruments although a telephone was normally provided at the remote end and in some cases even a wooden train staff was used if it was needed to unlock points.  All points in a C2 section were locked by means of either a  locked hand lever or a padlocked point clip and the key(s) were handed to the crew working any train which might need to use those points.   The principle of operation was normally that only one train could be allowed in a C2 section at any one time but - except where prohibited - successive trains in the same direction were sometimes allowed

 

A normal Western pattern STOP board was normally provided at the entrance to both ends of the section although in some cases a 'STOP telephone for Instructions' sign was provided instead.  The system could be used on either double or single lines and propelling was not permitted except where specially authorised (as was the case on the Avonside branch - see below).  In some cases there could be quite an extensive network of C2 lines controlled from a single point and a number of them included junctions where two C2 lines came together at their mutual end-on junction with a third C2 section.  In places some of these lines were used by freight trains conveying trailing loads of 1,000 tons or so.  de4spite basically relying on evrybody doing what they were told by the person in charge of the section the system was remarkably safe - speeds were in any case usually low - and in all my years on the WR I never heard of a collision between trains  on a C2 line.

 

On the Avonside line up to = 22 SLUs (Standard Length Unit, = 21 ft) of brake fitted wagons were permitted to be propelled without a brakevan at the leading.  A maximum of 10SLUs of unfitted wagons were permitted to be propelled but had to have a brakevan at the leading end

Many thanks for this info Mike, it's really helpful. I have a couple of follow up questions if that's OK. 1) Can I assume there were similar arrangements on other BR regions? 2) If there was a 'STOP telephone for instructions' board would the train crew phone for instructions on both entering and exiting the C2 section?

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

On the Avonside line up to = 22 SLUs (Standard Length Unit, = 21 ft) of brake fitted wagons were permitted to be propelled without a brakevan at the leading.  A maximum of 10SLUs of unfitted wagons were permitted to be propelled but had to have a brakevan at the leading end

 

What are the mechanics of propelling that many vehicles without a brakevan leading?  Would there be a very severe speed restriction?   Would any additional lookouts be required, particularly at level crossings? 

[Rivercider]

1 hour ago, Flying Pig said:

 

What are the mechanics of propelling that many vehicles without a brakevan leading?  Would there be a very severe speed restriction?   Would any additional lookouts be required, particularly at level crossings? 

On the day I took those photos on the Avonside branch I travelled with the shunters on the veranda of the leading brake van in front of 18 TTAs. The shunters were in contact with the driver by back-to-back radio.

Later when the Avon binliner started running it called at Barrow Road, part way along the Avonside Branch, to start with there was still a class 08 pilot at Lawrence Hill, the binliner (7 PFAs and loco) would back in on top of the pilot which would haul down the branch. When the 08 pilot duty was withdrawn the back-to-back radios were used for the propelling move, though where the shunter positioned himself I do not know.

 

cheers 

[Flying Pig]

52 minutes ago, Rivercider said:

On the day I took those photos on the Avonside branch I travelled with the shunters on the veranda of the leading brake van in front of 18 TTAs. The shunters were in contact with the driver by back-to-back radio.

Later when the Avon binliner started running it called at Barrow Road, part way along the Avonside Branch, to start with there was still a class 08 pilot at Lawrence Hill, the binliner (7 PFAs and loco) would back in on top of the pilot which would haul down the branch. When the 08 pilot duty was withdrawn the back-to-back radios were used for the propelling move, though where the shunter positioned himself I do not know.

 

cheers 

 

Thanks.  I should obviously have taken note of the shunter on your previous post!  Though of course in that case there was a brake van.  I'd be interested to know when radios came into use and how they changed working mthods.

 

I find this subject interesting as it ties the Inglenook and similar simple shunting puzzles, which have the benefit of being small but can sometimes seem very artificial, into prototype operations.

[Rivercider]

12 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

 

Thanks.  I should obviously have taken note of the shunter on your previous post!  Though of course in that case there was a brake van.  I'd be interested to know when radios came into use and how they changed working mthods.

 

I find this subject interesting as it ties the Inglenook and similar simple shunting puzzles, which have the benefit of being small but can sometimes seem very artificial, into prototype operations.

I think the use of back-to-backs at Lawrence Hill was not new when I visited in 1983. Barton Street Crossing was gates worked by the traincrew/shunters. I think Avon Street Crossing did have gates at one time, but there were multiple tracks across the road into Avonside Wharf, so it was flagged in later years.

 

I agree that an Inglenook layout or other similar set up did seem a bit odd and un-prototypical to me at one time. Now having increased my railway book collection I realise there were actually quite a few locations where trains were propelled in to a yard like that. There were one or two Cornish china clay branches where traffic was propelled into the terminus, including Carbis Wharf,

 

cheers

[Nearholmer]

On the pre-radio communication question: I’ve often wondered about this, particularly thinking about the fairly long Rye Harbour Branch, which crossed the public road at least once, and I think twice, but along which propelling, with a van at the front, was the normal method of working, and the train length permitted was significant (my copy of the appendix isn’t to hand to check, but I think up to 24 wagons).

 

The guard had to be accompanied by a “competent man” to deal with the crossing gates, and I can only assume that the guard signalled to the loco crew by a combination of flags/lamp and using the hand-brake, but the appendix isn’t very clear on the point from what I recall.

 

That branch did at least have good sight-lines, it running across a somewhat desolate district, the ‘tramway’ to Deptford meat depot was operated similarly, sans break van I think, also with quite long trains, right down the middle of a sinuous street with shops and houses on both sides!

 

 

Edited March 8, 2022 by Nearholmer

[5BarVT]

10 hours ago, Will Crompton said:

Can I assume there were similar arrangements on other BR regions?

As I understand it, C2 working was a WR speciality.  Whether that meant that other regions did the same thing but called it something else, or whether they achieved the functionality in a different way, I know not.

Paul.

[Will Crompton]

It's just struck me that Avon Street Sidings above were almost certainly inspired by Rob Owst's wonderful 7mm Peasevern Yard layout!

[The Stationmaster]

22 hours ago, Will Crompton said:

Many thanks for this info Mike, it's really helpful. I have a couple of follow up questions if that's OK. 1) Can I assume there were similar arrangements on other BR regions? 2) If there was a 'STOP telephone for instructions' board would the train crew phone for instructions on both entering and exiting the C2 section?

Table C2 (if the sectional Appendix) was a peculiarly WR way of doing things which emerged during the 1960s and then gradually became quite extensive as various lines were rationalised and reduced to freight only working.  When, after sectorisation in 1992, Trainload Freight took over responsibility for most of the formerly WR C2 lines they converted many of them to Train Staff & Ticket working as the whole idea of C2 horrified their ex ER Rules & Regs people!  the otehrs they simply covered by special instructions - which weren't really much different from C2.

 

The WR was - as far as I know - unique in devisinga standardised system for working this sort of line - others simply covered them by speciall instructions in teh Sectional appendix which in reality weren't much different in many respects.

 

The traincrew were either vernbally instructed (or, in a few places, a semaphore top signal was cleared) at the end where the person in charge of teh section was located.  They would use the 'phne at teh remote end of the line.   They both obtained permission to enter the C2 section and reported their arrival at the remote end - this was obviously important where there was a junction and a train from the othhr branch  (also a C2 line) might be waiting to enter.  

 

21 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

What are the mechanics of propelling that many vehicles without a brakevan leading?  Would there be a very severe speed restriction?   Would any additional lookouts be required, particularly at level crossings? 

Yes - this is quite interesting and i do wonder if the Instruction was altered?  Table F in the 1980 Sectional Appendix clearly states that a brake van is required to be leading when propelling non-fitted wagons by none is required when propelling fitted wagons.  So the only way of dealing with fitted wagons would have been a Shunter/somebody proceeding to the front of the train. to deal with the level crossing or indeed walking by the front of the train all the way with somebody intermediately to relay handsignals to the Driver until such time as radios became available..

 

I don't doubt that for conveience the ground staff would have marshalled a brake van at the front to save the walking.   Equally I wouldn't be surprised to find that the SA Instruction was amended (alas I have no supplements to the 1980 edition) as in my direct experience the Bristol Rules section sometimes seemed to live in a different world from the railway out on the ground.  The early 1970s Bristol loco Route Availability booklet was as bad as it only specifically barred or restricted a class of loco if it had been tested;  if a loco had not been tested it wouldn't be shown as not permitted etc so by inference it was obviously permitted.  Hence we regularly used a Class 46 on the Cranmore tanks when we had one and only after a few wagons were derailed one day (but not the  loco) did somebody in Bristol wake up to the idea that one had never officially been tested on the branch and according to them wasn't permitted - although, as i pointed out in defence of my staff, the RA book didn't say they were not permitted.  That was a good illustration of the way Instructions can easily become ambiguous.

Edited March 9, 2022 by The Stationmaster

[Flying Pig]

47 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

I don't doubt that for conveience the ground staff would have marshalled a brake van at the front to save the walking.

 

Thanks, Mike.  @Rivercider's pictures above suggest this was the case in practice.  

[Will Crompton]

On 09/03/2022 at 10:14, The Stationmaster said:

Table C2 (if the sectional Appendix) was a peculiarly WR way of doing things which emerged during the 1960s and then gradually became quite extensive as various lines were rationalised and reduced to freight only working.  When, after sectorisation in 1992, Trainload Freight took over responsibility for most of the formerly WR C2 lines they converted many of them to Train Staff & Ticket working as the whole idea of C2 horrified their ex ER Rules & Regs people!  the otehrs they simply covered by special instructions - which weren't really much different from C2.

 

The WR was - as far as I know - unique in devisinga standardised system for working this sort of line - others simply covered them by speciall instructions in teh Sectional appendix which in reality weren't much different in many respects.

 

The traincrew were either vernbally instructed (or, in a few places, a semaphore top signal was cleared) at the end where the person in charge of teh section was located.  They would use the 'phne at teh remote end of the line.   They both obtained permission to enter the C2 section and reported their arrival at the remote end - this was obviously important where there was a junction and a train from the othhr branch  (also a C2 line) might be waiting to enter.  

 

Yes - this is quite interesting and i do wonder if the Instruction was altered?  Table F in the 1980 Sectional Appendix clearly states that a brake van is required to be leading when propelling non-fitted wagons by none is required when propelling fitted wagons.  So the only way of dealing with fitted wagons would have been a Shunter/somebody proceeding to the front of the train. to deal with the level crossing or indeed walking by the front of the train all the way with somebody intermediately to relay handsignals to the Driver until such time as radios became available..

 

I don't doubt that for conveience the ground staff would have marshalled a brake van at the front to save the walking.   Equally I wouldn't be surprised to find that the SA Instruction was amended (alas I have no supplements to the 1980 edition) as in my direct experience the Bristol Rules section sometimes seemed to live in a different world from the railway out on the ground.  The early 1970s Bristol loco Route Availability booklet was as bad as it only specifically barred or restricted a class of loco if it had been tested;  if a loco had not been tested it wouldn't be shown as not permitted etc so by inference it was obviously permitted.  Hence we regularly used a Class 46 on the Cranmore tanks when we had one and only after a few wagons were derailed one day (but not the  loco) did somebody in Bristol wake up to the idea that one had never officially been tested on the branch and according to them wasn't permitted - although, as i pointed out in defence of my staff, the RA book didn't say they were not permitted.  That was a good illustration of the way Instructions can easily become ambiguous.

Many thanks once again Mike, really fascinating and helpful info. I was dead set on setting my proposed layout 'oop north' but the WR practices outlined make an imaginary WR setting a possibility as well. It would be appropriate as I spent many happy spotting hours here in the early 70s at the platform ends at Paddington and at Old Oak Common depot.

Edited March 10, 2022 by Will Crompton
typo

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, Will Crompton said:

Many thanks once again Mike, really fascinating and helpful info. I was dead set on setting my proposed layout 'oop north' but the WR practices outlined make an imaginary WR setting a possibility as well. It would be appropriate as I spent many happy spotting hours were in the early 70s at the platform ends at Paddington and at Old Oak Common depot.

Plenty of scenic/traffic choices - in 1975 there 19 C2 lines on the WR in England and 83 on the WR in South Wales.