Holcombe - an SDJR branch line terminus

[RailWest]

Do I spy stacked SR ground discs in the background? Really ? Tscch...:-)

[RobAllen]

34 minutes ago, 57xx said:

Looking at your plan, I feel like the entrance to the goods yard, may need some consideration. If I have interpreted the "Slope down" part correctly, this would have a slope in two directions to get level with the far shed road and the front of the shed. That would be a nasty off camber turn for any vehicle. Maybe you could do a loading dock at the end of the shed road (brown lines)so everything at the right hand end is at the higher level with the slop in one direction towards the front of the shed.

 

 

You have interpreted the general idea correctly. I had realised that I needed the ground to be “platform height” on the station entrance side, so the idea is that this higher ground would allow driving straight onto the carriage loading dock from the road which seems to be a neater use of the landscape by the railway company.

However we do need to be at ground level for by the time we get into the goods yard itself, so I was thinking of a curved slope, but your point about the camber is well made. I like your idea of keeping it higher lever all the way along to simplify the slopes. Thanks.

 

39 minutes ago, 57xx said:

The carriage loading dock won't need a traditional buffer stop and probably doesn't need to be as long as you have it (maybe half the length?), adding a bit more track on that spur. The end of the run around spur closest to the front may not need a full size buffer stop either when you consider the road in front of it (green line) is at the same height as the carriage dock.  It's very reminiscent of Barnstaple Victoria Road. 

 

Not sure how that buffer stop on the carriage loading dock line got there! It’s gone on the master plan now! Interesting point about whether a buffer stop is needed on the platform line. I’ll have to see what I can do there when I get that far.

 

42 minutes ago, 57xx said:

Hope this is constructive for your thoughts.

 

This is incredibly helpful. Thank you.

[RobAllen]

30 minutes ago, KeithMacdonald said:

Here's a couple of pics of Wellow Station on Flickr, with the canopy sloping down

Thanks. The downward slope looks more interesting than the upward one, though Radstock’s seems quite steep compared to most stations.
Downwards feels a bit different and I’m hoping will help give the station a sense of place on the SDJR.

 

[RobAllen]

31 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Rob, don't know if you're aware of this book, but a publication (spiral bound in A4 format) by HMRS and written by John Childs called 'All about Midsomer Norton' contains 4mm scale plans of all buildings at Midsomer Norton and many useful photos as well.

33 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Midsomer Norton was extremely similar to Wellow (downward-sloping canopy), if not a carbon copy.

I was not aware - thanks for pointing it out. I have snagged that copy.

I had noted that there were a number of stations with the same basic design, so Midsomer Norton will work just as well for me as Wellow. No matter how much research I think I’m doing, there’s always more that can be done.

[RobAllen]

17 minutes ago, RailWest said:

Do I spy stacked SR ground discs in the background? Really ? Tscch...:-)

 

Which reminds me that I need to work out signalling for Holcombe. Hoping that it’ll be simple!

[RailWest]

4 minutes ago, RobAllen said:

 

Which reminds me that I need to work out signalling for Holcombe. Hoping that it’ll be simple!

Don't bet on it..... :-)

[RailWest]

7 minutes ago, RobAllen said:

I had noted that there were a number of stations with the same basic design, so Midsomer Norton will work just as well for me as Wellow. No matter how much research I think I’m doing, there’s always more that can be done.

 

As an aside....

 

A few years ago now I saw a nice S&DJR-themed layout at an exhibition and my discussion with its builder got around to the subject of the model of the goods shed that he had just built, based on the one at MSN. Very nice it was too, but....it had been built from buff-coloured Plasticard (or similar), so I asked when he was going to paint it. He looked puzzled....

 

It transpired that he had done all his research from B&W photos and had never been to the Radstock/MSN area. Consequently he had assumed that all the buildings had been made from nice golden-buff Bath stone, rather than the actual dirty-grey Mendip limestone....oh dear :-(

[RobAllen]

23 minutes ago, RailWest said:

It transpired that he had done all his research from B&W photos and had never been to the Radstock/MSN area. Consequently he had assumed that all the buildings had been made from nice golden-buff Bath stone, rather than the actual dirty-grey Mendip limestone

 

Ironically, I was talking with @Compound2632 recently at the MRS meeting in Kettering about how hard it is to work out colour of locos and rolling stock from photos. At least with buildings, we can generally find later colour photos that give at least the right flavour.

Related : Although out of my timespan, l’ve been staring at colour photos of the SDJR to try and get a feel for the ballast colour and am hoping that the colours in the 30s weren’t that far different from the 60s.

[KeithMacdonald]

14 hours ago, RobAllen said:

l’ve been staring at colour photos of the SDJR to try and get a feel for the ballast colour and am hoping that the colours in the 30s weren’t that far different from the 60s.

 

That raise an interesting question:

Which quarries were most accessible to the SDJR, and which ones would the SDJR have used for ballast?

There's a couple on the SDJR northerne section near Shepton Mallet - Windsor Hill and Downside

https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=16.7&lat=51.20429&lon=-2.55464&layers=168&b=1

I think both would have been quarrying the dirty-grey Mendip limestone.

But then again, wasn't that on the Bath section, that opened later than the rest of the SDJR?

So wouldn't ballast have come from other places as well, before and/or after?

There's lots of them in the Mendips.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarries_of_the_Mendip_Hills

 

And some further south e.g. Henstridge on the southern section, near Templecombe (buff/brown colour)

https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=15.6&lat=50.97610&lon=-2.40356&layers=6&b=1&marker=50.9742,-2.393

[phil_sutters]

On 27/02/2024 at 11:47, KeithMacdonald said:

 

I think both would have been quarrying the dirty-grey Mendip limestone.

But then again, wasn't that on the Bath section, that opened later than the rest of the SDJR?

So wouldn't ballast have come from other places as well, before and/or after?

There's lots of them in the Mendips.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarries_of_the_Mendip_Hills

Holcombe would be off the northern section. There are several quarries right on its doorstep. At Coleford, just over the hill. we could hear the warning sirens and the blasts. When travelling in the area, you could sometimes find the road blocked by a guy with a red flag, a precautionery measure in case any fragments flew out of the quarry when the blasting took place.

It's the Somerset Central that would have had to access supplies from the quarries around Cheddar and Wells and those further east.

Edited March 1 by phil_sutters

[Nick C]

On 26/02/2024 at 20:22, RobAllen said:

 

Which reminds me that I need to work out signalling for Holcombe. Hoping that it’ll be simple!

It will be - two running signals and three ground signals (I think the SDJR generally followed LSWR practice for signalling, and the latter tended not to use more than they needed!)

 

Home signal somewhere on the curve on the way in, starter at the end of the platform (which needs to shift about a coach-length towards the bufferstops so that the starter is clear of the crossover), ground signal at the toe of the crossover, yellow ground signal RH end of the slip, and a ground signal at the toe of the loco release crossover.

 

If you've got an up-to-date version of the trackplan I'll draw it on...

[RailWest]

2 hours ago, phil_sutters said:

Holcombe would be off the northern section. There are several quarries right on its doorstep. At Coleford, just over the hill. we could hear the warning sirens and the blasts. When travelling in the area, you could sometimes find the road blocked by a guy with a red flag, a precautionery measure in case any fragments flew out of the quarry when the blasting took place.

It's the Somerset Central that would have had to access supplies from the quarries around Cheddar and Wells and those further east.

Access to quarries is one thing. Suitability of the stone extracted there is another matter, about which I have no knowledge.

[RailWest]

4 minutes ago, Nick C said:

It will be - two running signals and three ground signals (I think the SDJR generally followed LSWR practice for signalling, and the latter tended not to use more than they needed!)

 

Home signal somewhere on the curve on the way in, starter at the end of the platform (which needs to shift about a coach-length towards the bufferstops so that the starter is clear of the crossover), ground signal at the toe of the crossover, yellow ground signal RH end of the slip, and a ground signal at the toe of the loco release crossover.

 

If you've got an up-to-date version of the trackplan I'll draw it on...

Well, yes, no or maybe, could be more or less.....it depends upon on the date of original installation and any imagined changes thereafter :-)

 

But an up-to-date track-plan would be a good start, I've lost track (no pun intended!) along the way....

[RobAllen]

1 hour ago, Nick C said:

It will be - two running signals and three ground signals (I think the SDJR generally followed LSWR practice for signalling, and the latter tended not to use more than they needed!)

 

Home signal somewhere on the curve on the way in, starter at the end of the platform (which needs to shift about a coach-length towards the bufferstops so that the starter is clear of the crossover), ground signal at the toe of the crossover, yellow ground signal RH end of the slip, and a ground signal at the toe of the loco release crossover.

 

If you've got an up-to-date version of the trackplan I'll draw it on...

 

This is the current plan.
 

While not germane to the question of the signal locations, a few notes:

• The double slip exists as I couldn't work out how to fit a point and a trap point into that space such that the next point wasn't over the baseboard joint. I would have gone with Phil's idea of taking the private siding off the main line otherwise.
• Another compromise is that , it uses large radius points at the cost of a tighter curve at 62cm radius. Not sure if that's the best idea, so maybe I should use medium radius and loosen the curve a little.
• Signal box position is a complete guess. I assumed that the signalman needs to collect/give a token the box should be close to where he'd do that. Mind you, Burnham-On-Sea's signal box was on the platform itself.

 

[RailWest]

10 minutes ago, RobAllen said:

 

This is the current plan.
 

While not germane to the question of the signal locations, a few notes:

• The double slip exists as I couldn't work out how to fit a point and a trap point into that space such that the next point wasn't over the baseboard joint. I would have gone with Phil's idea of taking the private siding off the main line otherwise.
• Another compromise is that , it uses large radius points at the cost of a tighter curve at 62cm radius. Not sure if that's the best idea, so maybe I should use medium radius and loosen the curve a little.
• Signal box position is a complete guess. I assumed that the signalman needs to collect/give a token the box should be close to where he'd do that. Mind you, Burnham-On-Sea's signal box was on the platform itself.

 

IMHO position of the SB  is OK, but more likely to be close to/at/on the end of the platform ramp - for a quiet place like a BLT it might be manned by a porter-signalman, so why make him walk too far from the station office if not necessary?  Most tablet exchanges would take place while the train was in the platform anyway. The less distance to the engine release crossover, the more likely to bring that within the limit for working  from the SB rather than a local GF. 

 

Main criterion really is good visibility and location to control the working of the station.

[Nick C]

Something like this

[RailWest]

12 minutes ago, Nick C said:

Something like this

Maybe, for a start :-)

 

What period are we talking about please for the model?

 

Some random thoughts:

• provide an Up Advanced Starting
• move the Down Home closer to the facing point
• provide a shunt signal FROM loop over release crossover onto plaftorm road?
• would they have upgraded to a 'yellow' shunt anyway , for that and/or the one by double-slip?
• Down Distant signal - admittedly off-scene - probably worked originally, but 'fixed' later.
• if the 'industry' is a private siding, the some sort of boundary gate would be provided, tho' probably not bolted from the SB as the siding does not feed directly onto the main line.

[KeithMacdonald]

2 hours ago, RailWest said:

Access to quarries is one thing. Suitability of the stone extracted there is another matter

 

Too true. Along my part of the M&SWJR there are loads of chalk quarries.

Access? Yes.

Suitable? No.

[Nick C]

25 minutes ago, RailWest said:

Maybe, for a start :-)

 

What period are we talking about please for the model?

 

Some random thoughts:

• provide an Up Advanced Starting
• move the Down Home closer to the facing point
• provide a shunt signal FROM loop over release crossover onto plaftorm road?
• would they have upgraded to a 'yellow' shunt anyway , for that and/or the one by double-slip?
• Down Distant signal - admittedly off-scene - probably worked originally, but 'fixed' later.
• if the 'industry' is a private siding, the some sort of boundary gate would be provided, tho' probably not bolted from the SB as the siding does not feed directly onto the main line.

I'd assumed mid-30s going by Rob's photos of his stock earlier?

• Up advanced would probably be off-stage, assuming the change in colour marked the scenic break - same with the Down Distant.
• The reason for pushing the down home back is to allow a loco to run-round without going outside it (and thus needing to occupy the section), but both variants are found at similar LSWR termini (There aren't any similar SDJR termini to compare with!).
• Shunt from loop over the release crossover doesn't seem to be a commonly signalled move (again using LSWR examples - Swanage is the only one I can see)
• I'm not sure when yellow shunts became common, a red one would do just as well, but would then need to be cleared for access to the industry (though I'm assuming Rob isn't planning on working shunts anyway...). The closest example is Lyme Regis, but that has a separate trap and the shunt positioned for that rather than for the slip, so access to the kickback doesn't pass the signal.
• Rob's already drawn a gate on the siding. I'd imagine it'd just be padlocked in real life.

[RailWest]

52 minutes ago, Nick C said:

I'd assumed mid-30s going by Rob's photos of his stock earlier?

• Up advanced would probably be off-stage, assuming the change in colour marked the scenic break - same with the Down Distant.
• The reason for pushing the down home back is to allow a loco to run-round without going outside it (and thus needing to occupy the section), but both variants are found at similar LSWR termini (There aren't any similar SDJR termini to compare with!).
• Shunt from loop over the release crossover doesn't seem to be a commonly signalled move (again using LSWR examples - Swanage is the only one I can see)
• I'm not sure when yellow shunts became common, a red one would do just as well, but would then need to be cleared for access to the industry (though I'm assuming Rob isn't planning on working shunts anyway...). The closest example is Lyme Regis, but that has a separate trap and the shunt positioned for that rather than for the slip, so access to the kickback doesn't pass the signal.
• Rob's already drawn a gate on the siding. I'd imagine it'd just be padlocked in real life.

I couldn't see any gate :-( I would agree about padlocking.

 

For yellow shunts please see my notes at www.trainweb.org/railwest/railco/sdjr/yellow.html   Based on examples elsewhere on the S&DJR, I doubt they would have made the dummy work for the route into the private siding anyway, the driver would just ignore it or get a hand-signal.

 

I take your point about the location of the Down Home, but I'm not sure that they would be too bothered by having to Block Back? In any case, clearing the dummy would allow the engine to proceed out "as far as the line was clear" towards the DAS, so it might well have passed the DH and they would need to BB anyway. Also, moving the DH in then gives scope to have the Up Advanced within the scenic bit without it looking too cramped - it all depends really on what the distance would be between the two in terms of the length of train. 

 

[57xx]

2 hours ago, Nick C said:

Something like this

 

The "pair of points" you have labelled on the left have got a hand operated point in between them, so maybe I'm missing how they can be operate as a pair for the crossover? I don't see how you can operate the double slip in conjunction with a 3rd point for the purpose described. Say set the left most point to go straight on to the goods yard, you can't then have the right side of the slip being tied in to it to set the route for the run around loop.

[Tim Dubya]

I have only one question... where's The Duke of Cumberland in the plan?

 

Looking good, as @Captain Kernow mentioned earlier, that HMRS book is a must!.  ISTR that it may even have track layouts underground at Norton Hill pit?

 

Essential publication for the S&D fan 👍

[RailWest]

38 minutes ago, 57xx said:

 

The "pair of points" you have labelled on the left have got a hand operated point in between them, so maybe I'm missing how they can be operate as a pair for the crossover? I don't see how you can operate the double slip in conjunction with a 3rd point for the purpose described. Say set the left most point to go straight on to the goods yard, you can't then have the right side of the slip being tied in to it to set the route for the run around loop.

It is only necessary to work from the SB as a pair the facing point off the running line and the two RH ends of the slip which act as the trap-points from the run-round loop and the sidings. The two LH ends of the slip, which merely control whether trains coming off the main line or out of the private siding go into either run-round loop or the sidings can be controlled by a hand-point.

 

There were examples where the latter 'slip' part was also controlled from the SB as well, perhaps even with its own ground signal for coming out of the siding, but the traffic needs probably would not have justified the extra cost of the signalling. Keep it simple and cheap !

[RobAllen]

29 minutes ago, Tim Dubya said:

I have only one question... where's The Duke of Cumberland in the plan?

I suspect that I would need a bigger baseboard! Lovely building though… 🤔

 

30 minutes ago, Tim Dubya said:

Looking good, as @Captain Kernow mentioned earlier, that HMRS book is a must!.  ISTR that it may even have track layouts underground at Norton Hill pit?

 

Essential publication for the S&D fan 👍

 

It arrived 30 mins ago. My initial skim shows that it is every bit as good as foretold!
 

[RobAllen]

3 hours ago, RailWest said:

 

What period are we talking about please for the model?

I'm working on the assumption of ~1935-1938. My current stock is post the 1932 renumbering. I may possibly one day back-date to the 1920s for the SDRJ livery. 

 

3 hours ago, RailWest said:

if the 'industry' is a private siding, the some sort of boundary gate would be provided, tho' probably not bolted from the SB as the siding does not feed directly onto the main line.

Yes. There'll be a gate at edge of the grey area in where the industry is as I'm assuming is the land that the industry owns. It's probably a brewery, dairy or something like that; I'm keeping options open.