Holcombe - an SDJR branch line terminus

[Gilbert]

9 minutes ago, RobAllen said:

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

 

 

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

It's excellent....

Chris

[RobAllen]

4 hours ago, RailWest said:

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. 

Ah! I guess that's why Burnham-on-Sea's was on the platform. Similarly, I see that Bridgwater's was up the line a bit right next to a level crossing, matching Phill Sutters's comments on an earlier plan  that the signal box would operate a crossing if it was close enough to the station.

Logical, when you know the thinking.
 

[RailWest]

10 minutes ago, RobAllen said:

Ah! I guess that's why Burnham-on-Sea's was on the platform. Similarly, I see that Bridgwater's was up the line a bit right next to a level crossing, matching Phill Sutters's comments on an earlier plan  that the signal box would operate a crossing if it was close enough to the station.

Logical, when you know the thinking.
 

Two comments here:-

 

1. Very little (ie nowt) is known about the earliest signalling at Burnham, but let's just say that the place became the S&DJR equivalent of Ashburton (GWR) in terms of minimalist signalling. Even the crossover almost in front of the box was worked by hand-levers! The box was worked by a porter-signalman who had very little to do other than to pull off the Up Home for an arrival and the Down Starting for a departure - inbetween that he simply pulled over the lever to unlock all the points and left the guard or shunter to work them all by hand.

 

2. The original SB at Bridgwater was on the Up side about 1/2 way between the level-crossing and the end of the platform (as shown in that excellent 7mm scale model of the station which appeared in the Rly Modeller some while ago). The precise original signalling again is unknown, but probably the gates were worked by a crossing-keeper from the adjacent house and maybe bolted from the SB. At some unknown early date (1905-10 ??) the first SB was closed and replaced by the one at LC with a new ground-level 'knee' frame. More here... www.trainweb.org/railwest/railco/sdjr/bw-branch.html 

[RobAllen]

3 hours ago, Nick C said:

(There aren't any similar SDJR termini to compare with!)

There's barely any SDJR termini! 😆 
Bath, Bournemouth, Bridgwater were all built by a separate railway. Wells was its own particular scenario, leaving only Burnham-on-Sea.

 

3 hours ago, Nick C said:

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

 

Looking at the signalling diagrams for Burnham-on-Sea and Bridgwater in Harman & Parkhouse's Pictorial Atlas, the home signal seemed to be a little way out from the station. Burnham-on-Sea diagram has "237 yards" noted next to the signal, and Bridgwater has "25 yards", but I don't know where they are measuring from. Maybe from the signal box?

As such, somewhere on the curve seems plausible, but I wonder if it would be more visible inside the curve or on the outside?
 

[RailWest]

44 minutes ago, RobAllen said:

There's barely any SDJR termini! 😆 
Bath, Bournemouth, Bridgwater were all built by a separate railway. Wells was its own particular scenario, leaving only Burnham-on-Sea.

 

 

Looking at the signalling diagrams for Burnham-on-Sea and Bridgwater in Harman & Parkhouse's Pictorial Atlas, the home signal seemed to be a little way out from the station. Burnham-on-Sea diagram has "237 yards" noted next to the signal, and Bridgwater has "25 yards", but I don't know where they are measuring from. Maybe from the signal box?

As such, somewhere on the curve seems plausible, but I wonder if it would be more visible inside the curve or on the outside?
 

Except in some rare circumstances, 'yardage' of signals and points was measured from the centre-line of the signal-box/lever-frame.

 

Somebody on RMWeb - I forget who - was working on a model S&DJR BLT based on Wells (Priory Road) without the GWR connecting lines. Actually the plan works quite well for BLT purposes IMHO if you look at it like that, albeit a bit more complex than it might have been as a 'pure' terminus.

 

Most of the signalling information in Harman's splendid book came from this book (2018 revised edition) :-)  Sadly some transcription errors crept into the final work, but such things happen in a 2-volume work of that sheer size.....

Edited March 1 by RailWest

[57xx]

1 hour ago, RailWest said:

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 !

 

I'm afraid I'm being very thick here. Surely if you set the facing point to going straight on to the goods yard and it is linked to the rhs part of the slip to act as a crossover to the loop, you'll only ever be able to go to the loop (assuming someone has manually set the lhs slip blades in the right direction)? Setting the lever for the rhs slip to be heading in to the yard would set the facing point in to the platform.

[5BarVT]

26 minutes ago, 57xx said:

 

I'm afraid I'm being very thick here. Surely if you set the facing point to going straight on to the goods yard and it is linked to the rhs part of the slip to act as a crossover to the loop, you'll only ever be able to go to the loop (assuming someone has manually set the lhs slip blades in the right direction)? Setting the lever for the rhs slip to be heading in to the yard would set the facing point in to the platform.

The ‘crossover’ is the facing point and the opposite end of the slip.  The hand points are the blades nearest to the facing point that dete4mine whether you go to the loop or the siding.

Paul.

[57xx]

6 minutes ago, 5BarVT said:

The ‘crossover’ is the facing point and the opposite end of the slip.  The hand points are the blades nearest to the facing point that dete4mine whether you go to the loop or the siding.

Paul.

 

Yes, I get that which end of the slip is being operated to form the crossover, it's on the diagram. 😉 It was the visualisation of the blades leading into the yard I was missing. Put on some better specs and it dawned on me, I'm getting it now.

 

As an operational thing, what safety measures would be in place to prevent a movement from the loop (moving right to left) across the cross over if the hand points are set incorrectly? Is that the shunting signal?

[Nick C]

1 minute ago, 57xx said:

 

Yes, I get that which end of the slip is being operated to form the crossover, it's on the diagram. 😉 It was the visualisation of the blades leading into the yard I was missing. Put on some better specs and it dawned on me, I'm getting it now.

 

As an operational thing, what safety measures would be in place to prevent a movement from the loop (moving right to left) across the cross over if the hand points are set incorrectly? Is that the shunting signal?

Hand points (except some modern designs) are generally trailable, I.e. you can go through them in a trailing direction when set incorrectly and the wheels will just push them across. Do that on controlled points however and you'll do a lot of damage! 

[Nick C]

2 hours ago, RobAllen said:

Looking at the signalling diagrams for Burnham-on-Sea and Bridgwater in Harman & Parkhouse's Pictorial Atlas, the home signal seemed to be a little way out from the station. Burnham-on-Sea diagram has "237 yards" noted next to the signal, and Bridgwater has "25 yards", but I don't know where they are measuring from. Maybe from the signal box?

As such, somewhere on the curve seems plausible, but I wonder if it would be more visible inside the curve or on the outside?
 

Distance is usually, as @RailWest says, from the centre of the box.

 

A signal on a curve would usually be on the outside, to make it easier to see.

[phil_sutters]

10 hours ago, RailWest said:

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

According to a 2022 study ( https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/190176/6/1-s2.0-S0950061822018815-main.pdf ) crushed limestone is among the best materials for railway ballast, although not as durable as granite, and Mendip is the most southerly source of carboniferous limestone in England. In the early days of the railways, the cost of transporting stone to the new railways, in the quantities needed, was such that stone from local sources was sometimes preferred to the better suited materials. The LBSCR's use of shingle and some of the disasterous consequences has been documented in some detail I believe.

So I guess that the S&D was fortunate to have considerable quantities of good quality materials close at hand.

[RailWest]

11 hours ago, Nick C said:

Hand points (except some modern designs) are generally trailable, I.e. you can go through them in a trailing direction when set incorrectly and the wheels will just push them across. Do that on controlled points however and you'll do a lot of damage! 

As @Nick C has said, hand points are trailable. Generally speaking [#] any shunt signals for moves which pass over hand-points are not interlocked with those points (which after all have no lever in the SB anyway) so it is down to the driver/shunter to watch where they are going :-) Equally, there would usually be no ground signal to control any movement from L to R out of the private siding - in a place such as this the traffic would be so light that what went in to the siding could come back out again without fear that there would be another conflicting shunt move by another train across their path.

 

[# There were instances where, for various reasons, signals were 'detected' through hand points and/or operation of the signal also bolted the hand-point in the required position, but that was not common in a situation such as suggested for this layout.]

 

It would be quite common for a shunt signal in rear of a trailing point to apply to both the converging routes. So here the signal for exit from the run-round loop over the slip to the main line would also apply to the exit from the adjacent sidings. Whether the signal would be placed to the left of the loop (in the 6-foot between the loop and the platform line) or between the loop and the sidings or even over the RH of the sidings is something which appears to be vary according to the taste of the signal engineer :-)

 

 As mentioned earlier, in some instances the 'slip' connection would be worked separate from the crossover and then it could have its own ground signal for exit from the sidings (cf Shepton Mallet up sidings for example), but I don't think you would need that here.

[RailWest]

I've just noticed that in earlier post about making 3D mock-ups you wrote "The dimensions are from the Bachmann Shillingstone goods shed..."

 

It's always baffled me how Bachmann managed to 'measure up' for that model, given that the original goods shed at Shillingstone was demolished at an unknown early date and replaced later by some concrete 'provender stores'. AFAIK only one photo of the original structure has come to light so far and that was only a distant background view of one gable end visible above intervening structures.

[RobAllen]

19 hours ago, RailWest said:

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.

 

Having read http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/railco/sdjr/yellow.html, I think that I the ground signals would be red as I'm assuming that there have been no layout alterations.

I'm not sure if the ground signals would be  Stevens 'flap' type or small semaphores though. Reading the ground signals section of http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/railco/sdjr/signals.html, I imagine either would be plausible?

I'm trying to understand what the ground signal to the right of the slip controls. As I understand it, this signal controls shunting movements onto the running line. Essentially there are two: Firstly a loco running around its coaches and secondly shunting wagons. I'm assuming that most shunt moves will use the running line as a head shunt. Does that mean that the ground signal needs to be off when shunting wagons from the goods shed to say the platform when making up the outbound train? If so, would the signal be easily seen by the local crew when coming from the goods shed, give that it's positioned facing along the runaround loop?

Edited March 2 by RobAllen

[RailWest]

21 minutes ago, RobAllen said:

 

 

 

>>>Having read http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/railco/sdjr/yellow.html, I think that I the ground signals would be red as I'm assuming that there have been no layout alterations.....

 

Whether a ground signal remained red or was changed to yellow was not necessarily related to layout alterations, more just a change in "custom & practice".

 

>>>I'm not sure if the ground signals would be  Stevens 'flap' type or small semaphores...

 

My working assumption for the type of signal would be that the original provision was the Stevens 'flap' type and that any change to the mini-arm type would have occurred only if (a) an existing needed replacement for some reason (eg damaged in an accident) or (b) a layout alteration required the signal to be moved, so the opportunity was taken to provide a new one at that time.

 

>>>I'm trying to understand what the ground signal to the right of the slip controls...

 

That would control ONLY movements from the loop or the sidings across onto the main line. In the original installation any train proceeding into the private siding would simply pass it 'on' as it did not apply for that route. So any shunting move which went out onto the main line, rather than use the start of the private siding as a head-shunt, would need that signal to be cleared. As to exactly where best to place it, see my previous comments and decide as you see fit :-)

[RailWest]

Looking ahead a bit and in an attempt to simplify the discussion on signalling, I've drafted a very rough sketch - clearly not one of my best :-)

 

Some comments for clarification and/or discussion:-

1.  Although the numbering is purely for identification, IMHO it is roughly along the usual 'typical' lines for an L&SWR-influenced installation - others may disagree?
2. I have assumed a worked distant originally, hence lever 1, but almost certainly by the OP's period it would have been 'fixed' and then 1 would have become a spare (or perhaps re-used for something else?)
3. 4 is the FPL
4. I have included 9 for completeness, even tho' it might be off-scene.
5. HP - Hand Point (local lever)
6. To be honest, for a mid-1880s installation I doubt that there would have been any shunt signals, but I've included them any for 'interest'. If we assumed none originally, but then added later, the numbering might well have been different.
7. It's a matter for speculation whether 3 + 6 might have been just on one push-pull lever (meaning one spare lever) and that perhaps 8 was also one half of a push-pull pair with another shunt at the loop end of that crossover.
8.  The L&SWR certainly had some 10-lever frames, but if you assumed a frame of 2 x 6-lever bays then you could have 12 levers with a couple of them being spares, so the numbering would have to be adjusted accordingly. But the provision of spare levers in early S&DJR frames, although not unknown, was uncommon - after all, spares cost money!

 

Make of that what you will :-)

Edited March 2 by RailWest

[RobAllen]

1 hour ago, RailWest said:

Make of that what you will :-)

That's super-helpful. Thanks!

I had forgotten about the facing point lock…

[RobAllen]

Changing tack, I've plugged in the DCC-Ex command station and Pi containing JMRI that I bought from Chesterfield Models and it works!

 

 

DCC conversions required to the rest of my stock and the minor matter of building a layout, but another step along the way.

[RailWest]

6 minutes ago, RobAllen said:

That's super-helpful. Thanks!

I had forgotten about the facing point lock…

Many people do - or choose to ignore them :-)

[RobAllen]

My card slipped at the Redditch exhibition today!

 

 

[woodenhead]

There are worse things it could have slipped in - I do like an 0-4-4.

[Graham T]

I have one myself Rob - it's a very nice loco!

[RobAllen]

Took the 1P to the club yesterday and put in one of the Hattons DCC decoders that I picked up in the closing down sale.
 

 

It's a very nice runner but needs dusting!

 

 

Edited March 6 by RobAllen

[RobAllen]

Today, I had another go at building a cardboard mockup of the station building. Now that I know that it's going look like the "standard" ones on the Bath Extension, I've use the scale drawings for Midsomer Norton in All About Midsomer Norton by J. Childs this time.

I started with my trusty cereal box and remembered that the ends have gables that need to be filled in this time:

 

The tops are scored and bent over so that I have something to attach the roof to later.

After cutting out the side, I had the basic shape done:

The roof is slightly longer than the building and is in the background. I added it and then started on the canopy:

This was glued onto the roof and then I realised that I'd need some sort of post to hold it down to the correct angle. I made up a couple of bits of angled cardboard that fix to the bottom of the building:

This horizontal part on the ground is then weighted down with a little bit of lead.

The track and points have arrived, so I've positioned everything on the board to see if the plan really was printed at 1:1!

 

Firstly the platform side:

 

and then a view from the other side:

To my eye the proportions look much better. I've not done the gents on the end of the building, but it feels like it'll fit nicely.

Next up is obtaining an electromagnet or two and experimenting with it. I was tempted with Dinghams/Flippems couplings, but they seem to be one way only, which feels limiting, so I'll probably go with Spratt & Winkle. I want to see it working on a bit of wood first.

[RailWest]

Are you going to have a bay window? It's questionable as to whether or not that would be needed at a terminus, depending upon what the rationale was for it in the first place.