Pylle

[RailWest]

Pylle was the first station up the Branch from Evercreech Junction to Highbridge. In 1891 it was upgraded to have two platforms and a passing-loop for passenger trains. At that time the existing old S&DJR Type 1 signal-box was re-locked (or perhaps had a new frame?) to work the layout shown in the attached diagram.

 

Now, what puzzles me about that layout is the crossover (points 9) between the Up and Down loop lines. This is not a feature seen at other S&DJR passing-loops and it's hard to see what purpose it might have served. Any thoughts on this please?

 

About 1/2-mile to the west of Pylle station lay the Pylle Line Works siding, which was opened in 1869 and closed in 1912. This siding was shunted by trains which ran from Pylle and then back again (see http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/railco/sdjr/sh-staff.html#pylle-staff ). I wonder therefore if it is just a coincidence (or not) that the crossover was taken out-of-use in December 1912?

 

[Blandford1969]

For such a small station in a very rural area it is a mystery. Were it a busier location you might speculate as to if it were somehow to have wagons on part of the loop and be able to run round them. However the why is a mystery. Do the Officers minutes give any clues?

[RailWest]

Sadly no clues from the Minutes, other than to refer to the decision to remove it in 1912 as it had had little use.

[phil_sutters]

Was the full length loop the one put in when the second platform was added or was that the shorter version, which served the passenger platforms adequately, with the additonal length added when the siding was put in, to allow for longer goods trains. Alternatively could it have been that the added loop allowed both goods and passenger trains to be held there, while a train in the other direction passed. From the sound of it, it proved to be an unnecessary bit of pointwork.

[RailWest]

24 minutes ago, phil_sutters said:

Was the full length loop the one put in when the second platform was added or was that the shorter version, which served the passenger platforms adequately, with the additonal length added when the siding was put in, to allow for longer goods trains. Alternatively could it have been that the added loop allowed both goods and passenger trains to be held there, while a train in the other direction passed. From the sound of it, it proved to be an unnecessary bit of pointwork.

AFAIK the passing-loop and Down platform were concurrent additions in the 1891 alterations, but sadly I don't have a copy of MT6/566/3 for reference.

 

As regards the part which I have emboldened, I don't understand that :-(

[Compound2632]

16 hours ago, phil_sutters said:

Alternatively could it have been that the added loop allowed both goods and passenger trains to be held there, while a train in the other direction passed. 

 

I think the suggestion is that, having received a train from West Pennard, a second train could be accepted before the first had departed for Evercreech Junction. But such permissive working sounds rather unlikely.

 

Reading the documents linked in the linked website in the OP, the guard had to accompany the train from Pylle to the lime siding, with the engine always being at the west end, i.e. propelling back, there being no run-round at the siding. If the guard went, then presumably so did his brake. 

 

The requirement for the engine to be at the West Pennard end coming and going implies that lime siding traffic was worked in an ordinary up goods train from Evercreech Junction. Prior to 1891, either the whole train worked to the lime siding and back, or there was a front brake van and the lime wagons were marshalled at the front. In any case, on return to Pylle, the train must have gone on to West Pennard, as there appears to be no instruction permitting it to be propelled all the way back to Evercreech Junction. After 1891, the returning portion of the train would run right line into the down loop - points 8 normal and home signal 2 off, then set back onto the up loop via the crossover points 9, then couple up to the remaining portion of the train, ready for right-away to West Pennard. 

 

So the crossover points 9 avoided having to run wrong line into the up loop, a move for which there was no signalling.

 

This does all beg the question why the lime siding GF wasn't simply released by the Pylle - West Pennard staff, tablet, token (whatever) and shunted by the train in section, since the train had inevitably to go on to West Pennard anyway!

Edited April 2 by Compound2632
up and down corrected (I think)

[RailWest]

39 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

The requirement for the engine to be at the West Pennard end coming and going implies that lime siding traffic was worked in an ordinary down goods train from Evercreech Junction.

 

Prior to 1891, either the whole train worked to the lime siding and back, or there was a front brake van and the lime wagons were marshalled at the front. In any case, on return to Pylle, the train must have gone on to West Pennard, as there appears to be no instruction permitting it to be propelled all the way back to Evercreech Junction. After 1891, the returning portion of the train would run right line into the up loop - points 8 normal and home signal 2 off, then set back onto the down loop via the crossover points 9, then couple up to the remaining portion of the train, ready for right-away to West Pennard. 

 

So the crossover points 9 avoided having to run wrong line into the down loop, a move for which there was no signalling.

 

This does all beg the question why the lime siding GF wasn't simply released by the Pylle - West Pennard staff, tablet, token (whatever) and shunted by the train in section, since the train had inevitably to go on to West Pennard anyway!

I think you've got your Up and Down confused!

 

[Compound2632]

9 minutes ago, RailWest said:

I think you've got your Up and Down confused!

 

Ignorance! I had assumed one went down the branch from Evercreech but stand corrected. Post amended! Notwithstanding that, what do you think?

Edited April 2 by Compound2632

[bécasse]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

This does all beg the question why the lime siding GF wasn't simply released by the Pylle - West Pennard staff, tablet, token (whatever) and shunted by the train in section, since the train had inevitably to go on to West Pennard anyway!

 

I think that the answer to that lies in the long 1 in 100 gradient down on to the Somerset Levels which eased through Pylle station but was otherwise long and continuous. Presumably when the Lime Works sidings were shunted the only vehicle left on the running line was the well-screwed-down brake with the rest of the train (which quite possibly had a further brake tailing its formation) left in relative safety at Pylle.

 

Incidentally getting up and down mixed up for this route is commonplace, it does help to remember that it was built from the Highbridge end.

[RailWest]

I would agree that traffic would have gone on a Down goods, which probably continued on towards Glastonbury etc afterwards - I doubt it warranted a special trip from Evercreech Jcn and back, but who knows, where was the loaded traffic destined for?

 

Knowing the tendency of railwaymen to do the jib by simplest/easiest safe method possible, I would guess that they left the main train in the Up loop at Pylle, went to the Lime Siding, propelled back to Pylle, came to a stand at 2, then the signalman reversed 8 and hand-signalled them back into the Up loop. Simples all round :-)

[Compound2632]

17 minutes ago, bécasse said:

I think that the answer to that lies in the long 1 in 100 gradient down on to the Somerset Levels which eased through Pylle station but was otherwise long and continuous. Presumably when the Lime Works sidings were shunted the only vehicle left on the running line was the well-screwed-down brake with the rest of the train (which quite possibly had a further brake tailing its formation) left in relative safety at Pylle.

 

Ah, yes, that makes a great deal of sense! 

  

17 minutes ago, bécasse said:

Incidentally getting up and down mixed up for this route is commonplace, it does help to remember that it was built from the Highbridge end.

 

The distance diagrams give the continuous distance from Bath Junction, increasing towards Highbridge, and the milepost mileage in brackets , decreasing towards Highbridge. The sheets covering the S&DJR don't give the distance from St Pancras Passenger station by the shortest route!

 

  

17 minutes ago, RailWest said:

Knowing the tendency of railwaymen to do the jib by simplest/easiest safe method possible, I would guess that they left the main train in the Up loop at Pylle, went to the Lime Siding, propelled back to Pylle, came to a stand at 2, then the signalman reversed 8 and hand-signalled them back into the Up loop. Simples all round :-)

 

I dare say that's what happened in practice, hence the disuse of the crossover 9, but was not what the p/way and signal engineers intended! What goes up, goes by the up, and what comes down, by the down, was the usual rule and, I think, the intention here. 

Edited April 2 by Compound2632