Regularity of track sleepers and their spacing circa 1950-1960

[n9]

Hello!

 

How uniform and regularly spaced were track sleepers?

 

In other words, were they all the same shape, and were they always spaced the same distance apart?

 

I'm modelling UK 1950s (give or take) rural branches and maybe a pair of mainlines, and wondering how often, if at all, I can take a pair of snips to sleepers or space them a little irregularly without it looking too out of place.

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

[Wickham Green too]

Generally they'd be evenly spaced except at rail ends where they'd have been a tad closer to support the joint. By this date rails were becoming standardised at 60' long but lots of 45' sections would have remained and shorter lengths in yards and sidings.

[Cwmtwrch]

Sleeper spacing was always different at the ends of a track panel, as the fishplated joints were a point of weakness. Spacing would be dependent on the owning company and the length of track panel [60ft on BR main lines, but might be shorter on secondary lines or sidings]. Reuse of worn materials where possible was fairly standard practice, so rail and other items in sidings could have originally been used on a main line and later reused on a secondary line, before being laid in sidings. Even so, sleeper spacing in most sidings was still to the normal standard for that length of track panel, although maintenance might well be infrequent and ballast poor. The track still had to cope with the weight of a loco, and even a small 0-6-0T would weigh over 40 tons in working order, while some sidings saw the GWR 72xx 2-8-2T at over 90 tons.

 

Standard wooden sleepers were identical 8ft 6ins long, wherever they were used, although occasional 9ft pre-group sleepers might possibly be found in obscure sidings; concrete sleepers varied in design dependent on the type of rail in use. Main lines were being relayed with concrete sleepers and flat-bottomed rail by the 1950s, but secondary lines and sidings still had timber sleepers and bull-head rail normally, although concrete 'pot' sleepers were used in some sidings built in WW2. Point sleepering was more variable and normally of larger timbers in both length and cross-section.

[bécasse]

Concrete sleepered stretches could be found on secondary and branch lines by the 1950s but these stretches retained chairs and jointed bullhead rail giving a distinctly different appearance that I don't remember ever having seen modelled. The stretches concerned would have been relayed by hand so they were typically quite short, representing a few Sundays' worth of work by pw gangs. The sleepers I remember were manufactured by Dowmac but other manufacturers may well have produced suitable sleepers too.

[Jeremy Cumberland]

I think sleeper spacing have always been very consistent on "real" railways. This does not mean uniform - as others have said, the gap between sleepers was shorter at the fishplates, and different rail/chair/sleeper combinations might have different standard spacings.

 

Spot resleepering might produce some oddities on lightly used lines, but 8' 6" x 10" sleepers had been standard since the grouping, and I can't imagine that many lines had anything else by the 1950s.

 

Where you might get an oddity is at one end of a relayed section, where a pair of rails needed to be cut to fit the gap. This panel might require a non-standard sleeper spacing to suit the rail length.

 

[n9]

Should have popped back earlier to thank everyone who replied. My only excuse is that track laying got in the way... But those replies have been extremely informative and very very helpful. Thank you very much!

 

I confess I'd hoped for poorer maintenance and consistency just to make parts of my track a little more interesting, but it seems clear that at least in that era, standards were very high and track very well maintained.

 

Ah well, looks like my modelling ideas will have had to take second place to rail users' safety on this occasion. Thanks again!

[Southernman46]

24 per 60' length and you won't go far wrong - and British rail joints are suspended not supported like on the Continent 

[The Evil Bus Driver]

On 19/09/2023 at 12:45, bécasse said:

Concrete sleepered stretches could be found on secondary and branch lines by the 1950s but these stretches retained chairs and jointed bullhead rail giving a distinctly different appearance that I don't remember ever having seen modelled. The stretches concerned would have been relayed by hand so they were typically quite short, representing a few Sundays' worth of work by pw gangs. The sleepers I remember were manufactured by Dowmac but other manufacturers may well have produced suitable sleepers too.

The Bluebell was Bullhead on concrete. Its only actually been replaced relatively recently with flat bottom rail on concrete. There's even long welded rail through the tunnel. They kept the bullhead around the stations though. 

 

https://www.bluebell-railway.com/brps/infrastructure-news/

Edited May 3 by The Evil Bus Driver

[davefrk]

On 19/09/2023 at 12:45, bécasse said:

Concrete sleepered stretches could be found on secondary and branch lines by the 1950s but these stretches retained chairs and jointed bullhead rail giving a distinctly different appearance that I don't remember ever having seen modelled. The stretches concerned would have been relayed by hand so they were typically quite short, representing a few Sundays' worth of work by pw gangs. The sleepers I remember were manufactured by Dowmac but other manufacturers may well have produced suitable sleepers too.

Yes modelled on Wharfeside in EM and based on the wartime track that is still on the Wharfedale line though the bullhead rail is welded complete with the fishplate holes still visible. C& L dowmac sleepers with the name scrapped off, C&L 2 bolt chairs and EMGS bullhead rail.

 

Dave.

Edited May 3 by davefrk
Spelling

[roythebus1]

A lot of heritage railways are using flat bottom CWR and concrete sleepers away from station areas. It's a lot cheaper on maintenance of track and rolling stock. But it loses the diddly dum diddly dum of wheels on rail joints.

[Wickham Green too]

Don't they know the old trick of notching the rail with the corner of a triangular file above your dummy fishplates. 🙄

[Rivercider]

Yesterday I travelled up from Exeter to Salisbury. In one of the stations I noticed the down line was laid with flat bottom cwr on concrete sleepers, but for some distance there was a pair of wooden sleepers about every 60'. I assume this must have been laid in 60' sections (with a wooden sleeper at each end) and subsequently the rails replaced by cwr. Might the sleepers date from SR days before the transfer to WR in 1963?

 

cheers   

[Wickham Green too]

1 hour ago, Rivercider said:

... In one of the stations I noticed the down line was laid with flat bottom cwr on concrete sleepers, but for some distance there was a pair of wooden sleepers about every 60'. ...

Possibly Honiton : - 

6/4/24