Dartmouth Townstal - Theoretical tunnelling out of Dartmouth

[Coombe Barton]

You could have a look at Google Streetview for Totnes Plains for ideas - the quayside area of Totnes just up the Dart. The converted warehouses and premises up there are right for both building design and constructional material.

 

Engineering, and not only marine, was a feature of Dartmouth, Thomas Newcomen hails from there - http://www.dartmouth.org.uk/Details/The-Newcomen-Engine.html (Part of my childhood when my parents saw my interest in engineering and encouraged me) - and there were a load of works in the area. I'm trying to remember where I saw an old Dartmouth directory giving the names and functions of the companies - I knew I used such a publications when I worked for Lucas - but that was more than 30 years ago. I was fortunate enough to be assigned that as part of 'my' area. And engineering for marine purposes doesn't always have to be on the shore - we were doing stuff in Coventry that was used at sea.

 

Other similar areas to yours are of course Penryn/Falmouth and Hayle (Harveys of Hayle, for instance - great buildings) - and of course if you have a high viaduct then the Calstock wagon lift (http://www.lswr.org/core.asp?Page=75&Id=1616300 and go down for a small pic) may be an excuse for serving other industries.

 

I've put some building resources on my blog - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/blog/258-layout-coombe-barton/ - and there's quite a bit of stuff in the Industrial Settlements initiative.

 

I will be very interested how your model develops.

[Coombe Barton]

And just another thought - Kelly's Directory could inform you about industry

• Modbury 1935 - http://genuki.cs.ncl.ac.uk/DEV/Modbury/ModburyKelly1935.html
• Devon 1902 - http://www.archive.org/stream/kellysdirectoryo00londuoft#page/168/mode/2up - page 169 is Dartmouth
• And in 1935 the area known as Hardness became known as Sandquay - right in your patch. http://www.dartmouth-history.org.uk/view_doc.html?Id=140&Hrow=0

And of course there's always the possibility of lime kilns

[Kris]

A mill on a creek would more likely be a tidal mill. Just because the creek looks like it is silted up would not preclude boat / ship building, it could have been dredged.

Given the amount of sheep and cows in the area how about a large meat / pie factory?

As a further thought, given the proximity to the naval collage you could assume that this expanded needing more stores to be brought in.

 

Looking at your map of your suggested routes of the line through the rest of the Southhams, I would suggest that were the station in the location that you are placing it the line may have carried on up the valley line of the creek coming up towards the line of the A381 rather than going down the coastal route. If this were the case the line could have then passed near to Moreleigh, joined up with the Kingsbridge branch just beyond Gara Bridge. I also suspect that had the line to Dartmouth have been built the residents of Kingsbridge and Salcombe would have pressed to have the line completed at an earlier date, work had after all been started in 1867 on the branch.

 

[cary hill]

And just another thought - Kelly's Directory could inform you about industry

• Modbury 1935 - http://genuki.cs.ncl...yKelly1935.html
• Devon 1902 - http://www.archive.o...ge/168/mode/2up - page 169 is Dartmouth
• And in 1935 the area known as Hardness became known as Sandquay - right in your patch. http://www.dartmouth...l?Id=140&Hrow=0

And of course there's always the possibility of lime kilns

 

Thanks for pointing me towards these excellent resources and also the ones in your previous post. I have just re-examined one of the old OS map extracts and there are "old lime kilns" marked in the immediate vicinity of my proposed location for the station. They could be incorporated into the design quite easily.

 

David

[cary hill]

A mill on a creek would more likely be a tidal mill. Just because the creek looks like it is silted up would not preclude boat / ship building, it could have been dredged.

Given the amount of sheep and cows in the area how about a large meat / pie factory?

As a further thought, given the proximity to the naval collage you could assume that this expanded needing more stores to be brought in.

 

Looking at your map of your suggested routes of the line through the rest of the Southhams, I would suggest that were the station in the location that you are placing it the line may have carried on up the valley line of the creek coming up towards the line of the A381 rather than going down the coastal route. If this were the case the line could have then passed near to Moreleigh, joined up with the Kingsbridge branch just beyond Gara Bridge. I also suspect that had the line to Dartmouth have been built the residents of Kingsbridge and Salcombe would have pressed to have the line completed at an earlier date, work had after all been started in 1867 on the branch.

 

 

Kris, thanks for your excellent comments.

 

I should have looked at the Google map view more carefully ,as it is clearly not taken at "high tide", and "Creekside Boatyard" is clearly marked on the map extract on the opposite bank of the creek. Boat building is clearly back on the menu.

 

Quite like the Naval College stores idea, too.

 

I can also see the logic of your suggestion relating to how the line might continue westwards. I was struggling to see how the "line" would have left the immediate Dartmouth area, without needing a fairly long tunnel, if heading south to the coast. The maps of the "real" proposed South Hams route that I have seen do not show how it would have reached Stoke Fleming without a tunnel(or tunnels). I just "chose" to show my version reaching the sea via the Blackpool Valley because it had some suitable contours, but as this still seems to be an attractive narrow valley ,which the railway might have spoilt, I am happy to route differently. I am not sure that much railway traffic would have been lost but wonder any of the coastal settlements might have developed to a greater extent with the benefit of a railway. Funnily enough I did once consider Gara Bridge as a layout subject but dismissed it as the width I had available back then was inadequate. Anyway I guess it would look much better" in the landscape" in N/2mm than in 00/4mm.

 

 

I am quite happy to bow to your greater knowledge of how the railways in the Kingsbridge, Avon Valley and Salcombe areas might have developed.

 

Thanks,

 

David

[Kris]

 

 

Funnily enough I did once consider Gara Bridge as a layout subject but dismissed it as the width I had available back then was inadequate. Anyway I guess it would look much better" in the landscape" in N/2mm than in 00/4mm.

 

 

 

 

So did I, it's still there in the back of my mind as it would make for a logical extension to my Avonwick layout, but I'm hoping that I will have more space available in the future so have some larger ideas.

 

 

[The Stationmaster]

The signalling needs a little work but that might be a consequence of the software you have used putting discs in 'not quite right' places That (and the double slip ) apart it looks very believable for that part of the world although possibly a bit late for an overall roof(?) but you still have a very 'operatable' plan there I reckon.

[Coombe Barton]

David

 

A diagram of the South Devon proposals, credited to R.E.Taylor, is in Kingdom, A.R. (1977) The Ashburton Branch (and The Totnes Quay Line). Oxford: Oxford Publishing Co. p. 70. It includes Yeampton to Dartmouth via Modbury, Kingsbride, Torcross (and presumably Blackpool), Totnes to Dartmouth down the west of the Dart, Yeampton to Newton Ferrers, Kingsbridge branch extension to Salcome, South Brent to Buckfastleigh, Ashburton to Exeter and various diversions of the GW main line. But it seems you may already have this from your existing information.

[Coombe Barton]

Lime Kilns stuff:

 

http://www.southdevonaonb.org.uk/uploads/Limekilns_leaflet%20_no_5.pdf - descriptive leaflet

http://www.brocross.com/industrial%20history/database/limekiln%20data.htm - Limekilns Database

http://www.lhi.org.uk/projects_directory/projects_by_region/south_west/devon/cornworthy_local_history_and_lime_kilns_project/index.html - some restoration (on the Dart)

http://www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/en-95887-limekilns-at-st-064-174-burlescombe - listed building

http://www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/england/devon/burlescombe - lists of listed limekilns

[cary hill]

Lime Kilns stuff:

 

http://www.southdevo...let%20_no_5.pdf - descriptive leaflet

http://www.brocross....kiln%20data.htm - Limekilns Database

http://www.lhi.org.u...ject/index.html - some restoration (on the Dart)

http://www.britishli...174-burlescombe - listed building

http://www.britishli...von/burlescombe - lists of listed limekilns

 

Many thanks for those references.

 

Very pleased to see kilns built into grass banks and with additional masonry works. Quite fancy a "double" kiln in good disused condition built into either the creek bank or "loosely" incorporated into a stone retaining wall arrangement which supports part of the railway embankment maybe.

 

The West Country examples seem quite similar to older kilns I have recently seen in the Peak District. I assume the "technology" employed, such as it was, would have been essentially the same in both areas. Presumably the later concrete "WW2 Atlantic Wall" type kilns at Millers Dale are an application of the same principles but on a grander "commercial" scale.

 

The main diagram I used for the various railways proposed in the South Hams was on pp34/35 of "The Kingbridge Branch" by Ken Williams and Dermot Reynolds, also published by Oxford Publishing Co(1977), and in series with your reference, which I also have. As you say the diagrams do show the proposed route as Yealmpton-Modbury-Aveton Gifford- Churchstow- Kingsbridge-West Charleton-Frogmore-Chillington-Stokenham- Torcross-Slapton-Strete- Stoke Fleming-Dartmouth. I suppose the coastal stretch might have been quite attractive. I suspect services using the route might be slow and infrequent, but I need to give this more thought when considering overall timetable and stock requirements.

 

David

[Kris]

Brunel did propose that the main line took the coastal route that you are talking of. I feel that this would have lead to a far larger station (than you are talking of building) and double tracking at Dartmouth but could have been a reason for some very intense traffic. I suspect that had this route have been taken the nature of the Southhams would be very different. I think that you would have seen Slapton, Torcross and Blackpool sands being very much larger than they are today. I don't thing that Dartmouth would have much larger but the station may well have become a junction for a line to Totnes, Buckfastleigh and Ashburton. There almost certainly would have been a branch from Kingsbridge to Salcombe, and the extra traffic that this would have brought to Salcombe would have given it a very different feel to that it has today.

 

If you want a lime kiln, I would suggest that you put it on the creek side of your station. This would have allowed for boats carrying coal to have supplied it before the railway came.

[cary hill]

Brunel did propose that the main line took the coastal route that you are talking of. I feel that this would have lead to a far larger station (than you are talking of building) and double tracking at Dartmouth but could have been a reason for some very intense traffic. I suspect that had this route have been taken the nature of the Southhams would be very different. I think that you would have seen Slapton, Torcross and Blackpool sands being very much larger than they are today. I don't thing that Dartmouth would have much larger but the station may well have become a junction for a line to Totnes, Buckfastleigh and Ashburton. There almost certainly would have been a branch from Kingsbridge to Salcombe, and the extra traffic that this would have brought to Salcombe would have given it a very different feel to that it has today.

 

If you want a lime kiln, I would suggest that you put it on the creek side of your station. This would have allowed for boats carrying coal to have supplied it before the railway came.

 

I'm quite content for the South Devon Railway to remain where it was built in the late 1840's as what I have in mind is a late mini-network of lines in the South Hams that, with hindsight, probably shouldn't have been built . Most construction would have taken place at roughly the same time as the North Cornwall Railway and the Great Central London Extension (late1890's-very early 1900's). I think both of these railways and my own South Hams network were "too late" in arriving to either give or receive the full range of economic and commercial benefits normally associated with the coming of the railway. I envisage, at best, a relatively lightly used secondary system, which didn't really live up to expectations, but one which was useful as an alternative route between Newton Abbot and Plymouth, although I suspect journey times would be much longer as the line meanders around the South Hams searching for population centres to serve.

[The Stationmaster]

But your 'diversionary route' will be a bit restricted for motive power as the bridge at the Plymouth end was only permitted (in its later years - I don't know about earlier) as 'Dotted Blue' with the additional restriction that a 'Blue' engine was not allowed over the bridge coupled to any other engine.

[cary hill]

But your 'diversionary route' will be a bit restricted for motive power as the bridge at the Plymouth end was only permitted (in its later years - I don't know about earlier) as 'Dotted Blue' with the additional restriction that a 'Blue' engine was not allowed over the bridge coupled to any other engine.

 

I certainly have no money left for bridge strengthening or replacement presumably it is one of the river estuary crossings you are refering to? With a view to a further re-write of the "script" I have just been having a quick look at my copy of "The Yealmpton Branch" by A.R.Kingdom (OPC 1974) and it does look like a bit of a sad affair, finally closing to passengers in 1947 and closing completely in 1960 ,if I read correctly.

.

In connection with the "Dotted Blue" restrictions (less than 25 mph?) am I right in assuming that the only 4-6-0 permissible would be a "Manor"? Presumably large Prairies and Moguls(not 93XX?) would also be allowed to creep about slowly . Would a 28xx be allowed, although I can't why see one would be needed here?

 

So the through "diversionary route" idea will be binned.and replaced with the entirely plausible notion(?) the that Dartmouth- Kingsbridge Junction(?)- Salcombe section is built to "Kingswear Branch" standards. This permits through trains from Newton Abbot and beyond via the Torbay Branch and Dartmouth.(not bothered about Kings - I can't believe they would be allowed over my 70' high River Dart bridge). Beyond Kingsbridge there exists just a very infrequent passenger service and some freight workings - I can live with that.

Getting the feeling that my modeller's licence is shortly in danger of incurring penalty points if I can't get my story right soon

.

David

[The Stationmaster]

Your story is perfectly ok but you can't divert 'big' engines unless you spend a lot of money on a bridge at Plymouth but you can use a 'Manor' or a 28Xx with perfect abandon so don't worry too much. And all the varieties of 2-6-2T plus the 43XX and most panniers except the 94XX and 15XX (although I can't think why you would want to use the latter).

So no problems with your carefully crafted history - but, I suspect, only until the line gets closed by Dr Beeching.

[flyingsignalman]

I've only just seen this thread (and I've read through it quickly) so apologies if I go over things already mentioned.

 

When I saw the position of the disused signal box I assumed that there would have been another one (formerly) at the other end too. This made me think, that when the platform box was provided, the double slip connection would perhaps have been simplified to be just a facing connection in the running line (the connection from the middle road being lost).

 

Unless the PWay, say, found a use for the disused box it would have been demolished, it's a bit far away from the station to be consdered as an office for the Station Master or Goods Agent).

Bala and Dolgellau (in Mid Wales, admittedly) retained former boxes on the platform as offices and Longville (on the Craven Arms to Buildwas line) had a goods shed that looked suspiciously like it had been converted from a former (or planned) signal box.

[The Stationmaster]

I've only just seen this thread (and I've read through it quickly) so apologies if I go over things already mentioned.

 

When I saw the position of the disused signal box I assumed that there would have been another one (formerly) at the other end too. This made me think, that when the platform box was provided, the double slip connection would perhaps have been simplified to be just a facing connection in the running line (the connection from the middle road being lost).

 

The double slip was the subject of earlier debate and should be a single slip (making a trailing connection in the running line - as noted in an earlier post but you have to look to find it) - typical GW practice and it survived into the 1960s in a number of places including some 'mainline' ones A running line facing connection in that position would be pretty unusual for the Western in pre early/mid 1960s onwards rationalisation days.

 

 

Unless the PWay, say, found a use for the disused box it would have been demolished, it's a bit far away from the station to be consdered as an office for the Station Master or Goods Agent).

Bala and Dolgellau (in Mid Wales, admittedly) retained former boxes on the platform as offices and Longville (on the Craven Arms to Buildwas line) had a goods shed that looked suspiciously like it had been converted from a former (or planned) signal box.

 

I would go along with you there although I do know of one that was retained as a PWay cabin (but with a new roof at the old operating floor level) and another which survived for over 40 years rented out and used as a greenhouse as it was right next to some (railway) cottages. Otherwise survival of old 'boxes, especially in that sort of position tended to be unusual on the GW although occasional oddments could be found in the deep west ; but if it in any way obstructed a Signalman's view of signals and points etc it would have been demolished. But it's his railway and keeping an out of use 'box has been a feature all the way through so I can see why he put it in.

 

[flyingsignalman]

The double slip was the subject of earlier debate and should be a single slip (making a trailing connection in the running line - as noted in an earlier post but you have to look to find it) - typical GW practice and it survived into the 1960s in a number of places including some 'mainline' ones A running line facing connection in that position would be pretty unusual for the Western in pre early/mid 1960s onwards rationalisation days.

 

 

I was thinking of places where the trailing connection into a goods yard had been replaced by a facing one; Hook Norton on the Banbury and Cheltenham line being one that sprang to mind.

At Newtown on the Cambrian, a similar single slip/trailing connection from the down line was replaced by a facing connection from the up. It led into a loading bay that was about a coach length or so. This was done in the 1950s, I believe, and was made using FB rail; all other rails connecting to it being bullhead.

[cary hill]

I have re-titled this thread and I am briefly reviving it, after a prolonged period of inactivity, due mainly to “real life†issues preventing progress, other than further research and conjecturing.

 

I have at least come up with some more background history which I can “rewrite†to suit my purposes.

 

What follows is lifted and twisted from “The Newton Abbott to Kingswear Railway†by C.R. Potts (Oakwood Press)

 

I have three real historical players Sir Henry P. Seale of Mount Boone House, Dartmouth, his nephew Charles Seale Hayne of Kingswear Castle and Richard Harvey, a Cornish copper magnate with Falmouth shipping interests, of Greenway House and hostile to the Dartmouth and Torbay railway.

 

“Historical Factsâ€

 

Sir Henry P. Seale seems at times to have alternatively blown hot and cold in connection with Dartmouth and Torbay Railway. He opposed the 1856 Bill for the line. He does not seem to have been keen on giving up control of his Floating Bridge Company to the D & T, although he appears to have been given shares and a seat on the D & T board as compensation. Later on, having earlier resigned from the D & T, once he realised the D & T had no intention of crossing the Dart to Dartmouth, he issued an injunction to prevent the D & T crossing the road access to the Floating Bridge not long before the line to Kingswear was completed.

 

Charles Seal Hayne (Chairman) seems to have been the driving force behind the D & T, although not averse to sharp practice when it suited him. He seems to have had a knack of aligning the D & T’s development very closely with the growth of his own not inconsiderable personal fortune. This may explain later success as a Minister in Gladstone’s last Government. He bequeathed a great deal of money to found an agricultural college at Newton Abbot, so he can’t have been all bad!

 

Richard Harvey, not surprisingly, objected strongly to the proposed Greenway Deviation Bill 1860, which involved digging up the lawns in front of his Greenway House and replacing them with one and a half miles of a three leg zigzagging railway at a constant descending gradient of 1 in 56 to the Greenway Ferry. Not sure how Engineer Brereton could seriously have argued that this line was far preferable to the authorised line of 1857. The real reason was, of course that the D & T was running out of money.

 

Alternative History

 

I will assume that Sir Henry P Seale somehow outmanoeuvred his nephew Charles Seal Hayne, rather than resigning from the D & T board, once he realised that the D & T was no longer going directly to Dartmouth. He did this by reaching an understanding with Richard Harvey that the D & T would cross the Dart at Greenway, but suitably screened from Greenway House (tricky in practice, I’ve checked in person). I’m not sure what money could have changed hands, but presumably Richard Harvey was happy to acquiesce, as Sir Henry Seale was committing a blunder by situating Dartmouth station along the shores of Old Mill Creek on his own estate, as this would not particularly help the development of Dartmouth as a vibrant port and therefore would not be a threat to Richard Harvey’s Falmouth shipping interests.

 

Subsequent years of complaints from Dartmothians about the inconvenient location proved Harvey right and eventually led the GWR to construct a new, more convenient Dartmouth Town station (no idea where though as the D & T seem to have had difficulties enough in locating the real Dartmouth station.)

 

The Dart would thus have been crossed in good time to permit the early development of the South Hams railway network. I quite fancy that the August 1865South Hams Bill received assent, as this apparently had the “support†of the LSWR, and would have certainly alarmed the SDR. This is fine by me, as the SDR seem to have bled the D & T dry since day one, presumably due to their own parlous financial situation, which was largely related to the aborted expense of the “atmospheric fiasco.â€

 

I will assume that the D & T struggled on independently until taken over by the GWR in 1876, as this seems a better fate than the real history of takeover by SDR and subsequent further betrayals of the D & T.

 

Poor old Sir Henry P eventually ended up in financial difficulties in real life. I have seen copies of property sale documents dated 1864, which suggest a bit of a “fire sale†of some of his substantial property holdings in Dartmouth, and have located copies of 1841 tithe listings and maps showing his property portfolio in the area. Apparently he sold up totally and left the area in 1873 and Mount Boone House was never occupied again (demolished 1905). I think I can blame this financial overstretch on the poor finances of the D & T and his failure to drum up sufficient enthusiasm amongst the local population for the South Hams Railway. The railway reached Dartmouth during his last period as Mayor of Dartmouth (1862-65).

 

End of the boring stuff.

 

A quick recap of the proposed trackplan for Dartmouth Townstall which is really Tavistock South with little or no disguise

 

 

A "schematic attempt" to fit the plan into the area and to incoroporate known historical features into the plan such as the limekilns, limeburners cottages and the Hermitage Castle a Seale family "folly"(with a bit of terraforming!).Still slightly flabby re width and length but getting there.The faint grey squares

equate to 1ft in 4mm.

 

 

Old postcards of the limekilns,limeburners cottages and Hermitage Castle.

 

 

 

 

The lime kilns and cottages were actually demolished in the early C20th but Hermitage Castle lives still - with an indication of where the railway bridge crossing the small inlet may be plus a couple of general Google views of the intended location and very rough alignment of the railway.

 

 

 

 

1841 Tithe Map showing the general area required for the station and the original buildings etc in situ

 

 

1841 Tithe Map of the West end

 

 

An interesting stone building in the boatyard across the Creek which I will borrow for use as a warehouse

 

 

I would like to take this opportunity to thank everybody on here for their help with sourcing additional photographs of Tavistock, station plans, correct signalling arrangements,help with basic timetabling queries, providing information on lime kilns and other suitable stone buildings for my proposed location and many other queries.

 

The prolonged hiatus is at an end and it is time to actually do some modelling at long last.

 

If you haven't been bored rigid so far, further comments or criticism are welcome

Edited July 17, 2012 by cary hill

[Nickinwestwales]

R.E centre roads between platform lines Haverfordwest also had one-was given to understand was a common way of using the extra space left over from the broad gauge

atb

[buffalo]

...was given to understand was a common way of using the extra space left over from the broad gauge

Broad gauge wasn't that broad! You would need at least another six feet to fit in a third narrow gauge line. The common way of using the extra space, though usually at a somewhat later date than the original narrowing, was to slew the lines together and widen the platforms by a couple of feet.

 

I must have missed this thread when it first appeared though, now I've found it, it will now be one to follow. Good to see so much thought being put into a 'what might have been' layout. I'll now have to go back to the start and read through all of it.

 

Nick

[Guest Moria]

I tend to agree that China Clay traffic is out - I feel I can mess with geographical location of "Tavistock" ,as I have ,but altering the geology is a "bridge too far" for me. I am looking for a "signature" building or industry for the "country end" of the plan.

 

David

 

Hi David, will be watching with interest as I am a lover of the Dartmouth area, in fact I will be visiting in a couple of weeks time

 

Signature can be many things, but up until 1990. there had been over 100 years of timber traffic going up the dart to Totnes by boat. Theres always the opportunity of assuming that Reeves (I think) at Totnes, had another location and that there was a timber offloading facility, and manufacturing at Dittisham. Theres also the Totnes warehouses by the river that could have a use for you.

 

Regards

 

Graham

[cary hill]

I have at last managed to complete draft plans of the main cluster of railway buildings and structures which will eventually form the centrepiece of Dartmouth Townstal. These are lifted entirely from Tavistock South and relocated within Devon.

 

First of all I should express my thanks to John Brenchley who is building an excellent 2mm Finescale model of Tavistock South see http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/album/1878-tavistock-gwr-2mm-finescale/ and http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/user/13676-john-brenchley/

 

He very kindly contacted me and offered me copies of the official plans of the station buildings and trainshed elevations and other detailed drawings which he had and numerous additional photographs showing various previously obscure details. He also confirmed that there are no official plans of the Goods Shed, Signal Box or footbridge but offered me great help with these also with copies of his notes and assumptions.

 

Obviously any subsequent errors and misinterpretations are my entirely own doing.

 

I attach "skinned" versions of the plans - all textures are conjectural at this stage and are purely to give me an idea of the overall feel feel of buildings, as I find this impossible to gauge from my line drawings alone.

 

 

 

I'm hoping the final result will be better than recreating another version of G.W.Ratioshire, but having never scratchbuilt anything bigger than small platform waiting shelters, we shall see.

 

Any comments, criticisms or observations would be most welcome before a start is made.

[cary hill]

I forgot to attach my Dartmouth Townstal impressionistic Monet to the previous post. It gives a better idea of how things will eventually fit together.

 

 

It's just a quick and crude "Paint" alteration of an Aerofilms 1928 (?) aerial view of Tavistock South to force it to resemble the assumed fictitious location of Dartmouth Townstal up Old Mill Creek.

 

Whilst doing it I was surprised to see how many of the smaller "details" sometimes omitted from model railways are still very clear even from a height above - point and signal rodding, ground signals. telegraph wires, walls and fencing and so on. More things to put on the "to do" list, although I see that there are recent very helpful live threads on RMWeb on how to tackle some of these.

[cary hill]

I am currently struggling to decide the most prototypical method to shunt a pick-up goods working at Dartmouth Townstal.

 

I attach a track diagram the layout of the various facilities(apologies for the quality but I hope it will serve):

 

 

The scenario is that the 5.50 a.m. Goods from Hackney to Kingsbridge has just arrived at Dartmouth Townstal at approximately 8.10 a.m. and needs to drop off various vans and wagons and pick up a few vans and wagons for Kingsbridge. It probably also needs to sort out some traffic for the return trip to Hackney later in the day.

 

The track plan is based on Tavistock South, although I have done away with the pinch-barred kickback coal siding, which would have been at the bottom right of the plan, as the yard seems enough of a "pig" to shunt already.

 

I am assuming that Hackney has made a reasonable attempt to assemble the wagons in a logical order for disposal - possibly cattle wagons at the front, general goods for the Goods Shed next,then domestic coal and feed vans and finally traffic not for Dartmouth.

 

Although I've read the GWRJ article on Tavistock South and the shunting procedures there, I seem to have created some problems for myself by "reversing" the main traffic flows i.e they are from Newton Abbot rather than from the Plymouth direction, which was the reality at Tavistock South. Mirrow-imaging the procedures described in GWRJ article doesn't seem to work too well.

 

There is approximately one passenger train per hour in each direction, which I assume comes into play, as some(much?)use of the station loops will be needed.

 

I don't want to create a one wagon at a time shunting puzzle, so could someone with more knowledge of prototype practices indicate a railwaylike outline sequence of moves to solve my "problem".

 

Thanks in advance.