Barnstaple Junction station working

[JohnR]

32 minutes ago, Rivercider said:

Searching on Flickr there is this view of Barnstaple Junction dated 1961.

There is a train from Ilfracombe arriving in the up platform, but what is that under the bridge

on the Torrington line? Is it the Torrington portion ready to be pushed onto the rear?

 

Flickr by Brian Borrows

 

cheers

 

 

 

I've seen that photo (or at least similar ones) and always assumed (dangerous, I know!) that yes, that is the Torrington portion having already arrived, the loco run round and drawn back, ready to attach to the rear of the Ilfracombe, which will continue forward with the LP

[drduncan]

Very interesting photo. Thanks for posting. The trap point in front of the 16t minerals is fascinating- perhaps it means that there is a use for settrack geometry points after all! I’m intrigued by the need for a check rail at the end of the curved stock rail of the trap, also by the fact that anything rolling through it seems destined to write off the point rodding.

 

Duncan

Edited May 29, 2023 by drduncan

[The Stationmaster]

7 hours ago, Rivercider said:

Searching on Flickr there is this view of Barnstaple Junction dated 1961.

There is a train from Ilfracombe arriving in the up platform, but what is that under the bridge

on the Torrington line? Is it the Torrington portion ready to be pushed onto the rear?

 

Flickr by Brian Borrows

 

cheers

 

 

I reckon that is pron bab;y the case/. In SR days attaching at Barnstaple Jcn on the Up was supposed only to be done at the rear of the train so that phptp makes sense.  but then we come to a question mark - as already noted if the train arrived in the Up platform once the engine had run round it would have to  head towards the branch over 21 points and neither of which had an FPL.

 

Bécasse is quite correct in what he says because stock containing passengers could be shunted over points which became facing for the movemnt without clipping them provided that there was a dummey wiiichic detected the ppints (and also locked them although that was a given.  All well and good so far.  But if it was regular movement the normal procedure was for the Ops Dept to ask for the points to be fitted with an FPL - which it appears (according to George Pryer's diagrams) to have never happened at Barnstaple.

 

Now it might well have the case that the points were clipped - I was taught that it was always better to do that that rather than rely solely on the detection.

[Jeremy Cumberland]

10 hours ago, drduncan said:

Very interesting photo. Thanks for posting. The trap point in front of the 16t minerals is fascinating- perhaps it means that there is a use for settrack geometry points after all! I’m intrigued by the need for a check rail at the end of the curved stock rail of the trap, also by the fact that anything rolling through it seems destined to write off the point rodding.

 

Duncan

It's hard to tell from the angle, but the check rail appears to be a cover check for the crossing rather than being provided for the curvature (which appears to be sharpest before the check rail begins). The purpose of a trap is, of course, to divert vehicles away from the running line, so you don't then want a flange climbing the outside rail or the crossing nose and derailing a wagon the other way. The point rodding would just be collateral damage; both runs are for trailing points after all.