Signalling for Victorian LSWR Canal Wharf

[Schooner]

I don't think there would be any signals for the layout below, set at the turn of the last century at the end of a short spur from the local goods yard in LSWR territory (who are presumed to have taken ownership of the canal two decades earlier):

 

 

..but I would appreciate the advice of those who know better than I what period practice was likely to have been. 

 

Likewise on whether a ground frame would have been used - I don't believe so, but would be happy recieve correction  

 

Wizard do appropriate (I think) Ground Signals, so there are options in that direction if required.

 

Cheers,

 

Schooner

 

ps. Layout planning thread here

[bécasse]

No signals and points all on hand levers so no ground frame either.

[Jeremy Cumberland]

I take it there are no passenger trains.

 

Hand levers and no signals seems right to me, but a motorised gate would have been rather unusual in 1900, I think

[RailWest]

IMHO a motorised gate would be unusual at any date.

I'm assuming that it is simply the OP's annotation of how it will be worked on the model....

[Grovenor]

A gate would be unusual in such a situation, it would just be a man with a red flag to accompany the train and wave down any horses and bicycles.

[bécasse]

11 hours ago, Grovenor said:

A gate would be unusual in such a situation, it would just be a man with a red flag to accompany the train and wave down any horses and bicycles.

I wondered about the gate but came to the conclusion that one would be provided to enable the entrance to the yard to be closed off. It would be hung at the other end to that apparently indicated and, when open, fold back against the back of the loading bay. It would be a yard gate, not a level crossing gate, and would never close across the road - as Keith says, train movements along the public highway would be accompanied by a shunter with a red flag (motorising that should be "fun"!).

 

[The Stationmaster]

I too consider a gate would be provided as part of the fencing of the site - simply being opened in order for a rail movement to enter or leave the yard and the movement would be accompanied by a Flagman (or two etc depending on the road layout).   And yes, such a gate would be very unlikely to block the road when opened for a rail movement - the usual thing was for them to be folded back against the boundary fence, or against a building in the yard as 'bécasse' has described

[bécasse]

Here is a rough (but to scale) drawing of a typical LSWR yard gate, the length (and thus the angle of the iron rod diagonals) would be adjusted to fit the requirements of the site so I have just added a single height dimension to facilitate scaling. It would have been painted a pale stone colour with black ironwork.

[Rivercider]

I have a booklet 'Topsham and the Quay Railway'.

It mentions how the line was worked and refers to opening the gates to the quay.

Also 'we put chains from one side of the road to the other, supported by trestles with red flags on, in the middle of the road.'

Another memory 'the two lines had gates across them, only opened to allow trains across.  Also each side were two winches holding light chain that was pulled across the end of Fore Street, Monmouth Hill and the Strand to block them whilst the train crossed and there was also a man with a red flag.'

 

cheers

[Schooner]

Thank you all for the kindly and informative replies. Great stuff, and much appreciated  

 

22 hours ago, bécasse said:

No signals and points all on hand levers so no ground frame either.

 

Ideal, thank you.

 

20 hours ago, Jeremy C said:

I take it there are no passenger trains.

Indeed not - it's just jumped up shunting puzzle  And...an excuse to spend more on little old industrial locomotive kits than is strictly necessary , obviously!

 

18 hours ago, RailWest said:

 

I'm assuming that it is simply the OP's annotation of how it will be worked on the model....

Correct - the layout plan functions as a rolling set of notes as well as a 'strict' plan! The idea of having a motorised gate is to give me some experience with wiring accessories as much as anything, with a side-benefit of confirming how the points are set. I like the idea of moving the switch level for the access road and seeing the gates open up to permit a train to pass

 

18 hours ago, Grovenor said:

it would just be a man with a red flag

Noted - that's part of the plan already, and nice to have it confirmed  

 

6 hours ago, bécasse said:

one would be provided to enable the entrance to the yard to be closed of

5 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

a gate would be provided as part of the fencing of the site

This is what I meant it to be...funnily enough, I rationalised my way out of a second Flagman thinking that if the gate could be hung so as to block the road when a train was entering/leaving the wharf (and I could see no reason why not), then it would be in order to minimise the number of people required. I know labour rates weren't what they are, but this was, I thought, more plausible. Correction noted and happily taken on board - thank you both.

 

@bécasse That's brilliant, thank you!

 

@Rivercider Ah, one of my favourites - I'd love to model Topsham (indeed, it forms a key part of a rather different long-term plan of mine, which may be familiar to you)! Always good to get more information on it and relevant practice.

 

Thank you all again for your feedback. Please do feel free to critique any part of the plan that crosses your mind, it's all most welcome!

 

Cheers,

 

Schooner

[Nearholmer]

No signals; hand points; gate to prorect railway boundary, opening inward onto railway property.

 

I had a look in the SR 1935 sectional appendix for instructions regarding the Newhaven West Quay line, which dived out of railway property and off down the public highway. Nothing, so it must have been very local instructions or "grandfather's knee". But, some photos show a man with a red flag on an impressively long stick that looks like a bit of recently-lopped tree branch ambling along in front of the train.

 

Deptford Wharf to Government Stores Branch likewise ran down the highway, and that has a detailed entry. Basics are a man with a red flag walking in front of the train, and the train to stop before entering the gate onto railway property, where an elaborate ceremony was necessary because as the train ran into the yard it was going up hill and crossing two gated highway crossings over other roads, both of which had to be proven open to trains before it could proceed, none of which applies here.

 

I don't have a Western Section appendix, so can't check the very similar Poole Town Quay line, but I'd bet it was the same.

 

PS: Is this wharf railway property? If not, there may not be a gate, and if there is one, it may not be a railway-style gate, maybe something more useful to keep pilferers out, whereas the railway ones are about delineation of boundary and deterring naive trespassers.

 

Edited December 10, 2020 by Nearholmer

[Nearholmer]

PPS: If the tramway section between this wharf and the main railway yard is any length, you may need a brake-van in tow, so that during the propelling move on the way back the guard can keep a look out. The Deptford case certainly requires that, but then the trains could be up to 25 wagons, snaking down the street!

[Schooner]

Thinking about gates...

 

Advice so far has go us here, at Option A:

 

...which makes the wall behind the open gate look out of place to me. Is it right, though?

 

Removing the wall but leavung the gate rigged the same way gives us Option B:

 

Re-hanging the gate for Option C:

 

I like B and C for, to me, improved aesthetics. I'm also a fan of it opening up the rear platform face as a potential secondary spot to give the Inglenook puzzle a little twist.

 

B seems more likely, but C opens up operations more effectively.

 

What do we think?

 

@Nearholmer Wonderful information, as ever, cheers! I envisage the wharf as railway property...but mostly because I'm only really aware of the GWR's practice in the West Country (TLDR: buy it, kill it), and my only bit of useful 4mm is a LSWR shunter  I'd very much like the future to include some Victorian industrial locos (High Level, RT Models and CSP Models) which opens the floor up to alternative approaches, but these would be a secondary project in their own right*. The layout can accomodate one loco, I have one lovely loco so that's me happy...I'm still on the lookout for the eight required wagons though...

 

Train length will be 5 wagons, no brake, as dictated by the puzzle/headshunt lengths...

 

...but small very early/contractors wagons may be a way to get longer trains on scene...I was having idle thoughts about contractors wagons carry spoil from a dock extension away by barge. I blame RT's wagon kits   Using the 'back' platform face as a secondary spot would allow for 6 wagons to have a use in the puzzle, but headshunt limits and gate interference would make operations tricky, so again is being contemplated as hypothetical future development only.

 

Cheers all, happy Friday!

 

Schooner

 

*Unless it looks like I'll finish up with enough in the warchest to have one built on commission. I've no idea what costs this might involve, but it's at the back of my mind just in case!

 

 

[MarcD]

This my sort of layout I pre grouping shunting. 

You could still have Mr Drummond's bug pay a visit.

Marc

[Nearholmer]

Just to point out that the wharf doesn't have to be railway property for it to have railway company owned locomotives present on it.

 

I don't think that, for instance Poole Town Quay was railway owned, it predated the railway. TBH, I'd envisaged your wharf as being "canal age", so unless the railway has bought the canal, which did occur in multiple places, it seemed in my head to belong to the canal company, perhaps with the railway company providing a short tramway down the street to it.

 

The Deptford case was odd, in that the street section of railway I think was built by the London County Council to serve their cattle market, certainly it was operated by a LCC-owned loco until WW1, when the access to it from the railway was upgraded to take longer trains, and railway company owned locos were used thereafter.

 

In short, all sorts of things happened, and the locos running down the streets on these various SR bits of railway didn't wear skirts, have speed governors, or SFAIA have bells either.

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, Schooner said:

Train length will be 5 wagons, no brake, as dictated by the puzzle/headshunt lengths...

 

Could you not leave the van at the back of the dock while you shunt, making headshunt length irrelevant?  The Kernow 10t Road Van would seem to be appropriate.

[Schooner]

35 minutes ago, Furness Wagon said:

This my sort of layout

I'm glad you think so, as I'm hoping to grace it with some of your wagons! I'll send you a PM to ask about 4mm options if the near future, if I may.

 

@Nearholmer All noted, thank you. Will have to mark and inwardly digest over the weekend

 

@Flying Pig Absolutely possible, and the thought had crossed my mind too, as long as it doesn't foul the gates!

 

EDIT - over-hasty postage! I suppose the thing really is the question of if I could have a brake van, then if I should have a brake van.

 

Undecided on the pros and cons, but you're quite right to highlight the possibility, thank you.

 

 

Edited December 11, 2020 by Schooner
Premature sendification

[Rivercider]

Whether you want to attach a brake van to the trains is entirely down to you and the local appendix to the Working Time Tables. For example the Topsham Quay line was worked with a brake van leading down (due to the gradient down to the quay), but the Exmouth Dock branch did not require a brake van even though trains were also propelled to the dock, and also crossed a public road. At Topsham there were double gates into the quay, but no mention of gates at Exmouth Docks.

The booklet I referred to earlier about Topsham and the Quay mentions that until the 1950s part of the quay was owned by the railway, (Steamer Quay), while Topsham Quay was owned by Exeter City Council, the two halves were separated by a fence made of wooden sleepers.

 

cheers 

[MarcD]

Yes by all means. I'm scaling things down all the time. 

Marc

[brianusa]

Surely, more than likely horses would at this date be used for shunting trucks around the wharf with no runaround tracks.  B4s or similar could be used but horses are cheaper!  But this is modelling and a shunting layout so B4s win!

      Brian.

[MarcD]

C14 would work well. CSP models have the former Aginoria range.

Marc

[The Stationmaster]

The Instructions for the Poole Tramway, summarised

Maximum speed 4 mph.

Freight trains only

Propelling prohibited

Maximum load = 25 loaded wagons from the quay to the station, 30 empty wagons from the station to the quay

A man with red & green flags, or at night a red light, to walk 20 yards in front of the trains 'to warn the public of the aproach of the train'

Line open 24 hours but trips with wagons to or from the quay not to be made between 08.00 and 18.00

 

A brief note re Farnborough where, of course the railway over public streets was worked by the Air Ministry.  But noted that there is a gate and 'a catch point' (sic) at the end of the siding near the public road.

 

Vastern Road crossing on the (G)WR (sorry) at Reading had wheel stops on both sides of the highway (inside the gates) to prevent wagons running away into collision with the gates or out onto the road.  This crossing linked the good yard with a coal yard and other sidings on the opposite side of the roads and provided a level route between the two without going up the steep gradient to High Level and then down the other side on another steep gradient.   I'm old enough to remember its presence in the days before I joined BR and working Instructions were still in force in 1960, and for a few years beyond that, but I don't think it was much used by then.  Road traffic was stopped by a couple of shunters using red flags and by its later years it was crossing a busy main road

 

[Schooner]

More thought-provoking stuff, thank you all.

 

Wharf ownership Being familar with Railway-owned canals, but not canal-owned railways, I had assumed that the wharf would by c.1900 likely be owned by one of the larger pre-Grouping players. Given the LSWR loco, they were the natural choice. This in turn suggests the Wey Navigation or Basingstoke Canal* to me as possible prototypes for the canal itself, of which the former was a) almost pre-'canal age' opening in 1653 and b) kept going under its own name, and with commercial traffic until 1983**. It's not unreasonable to think of the wharf still under Canal Coy ownership, then. Having a defined prototype for reference will help when deciding likely cargoes etc to lend coherence to the layout, although see *.

 

What does this mean for the model, and how could it be portrayed? Gate style has been mentioned, and is one of those small touches that I think could be very effective. I had intended to have L&SWR writ large (and in full) over the front of the Depot, but perhaps an alternative would be better, eg:

 

Building style: In terms of architecture, I'm not sure what would give buildings of c.1890-1900 (for the 'New Wharf', RHS of the layout) away as either Railway or Canal company. Due to time pressures for the building the layout I'm relying on available kits for Depot (butchered to fit) and Stables. Could I do better?

 

Operation: Working through Mike's info for Poole

• <4mph - check
• freight only - check
• propelling prohibited - not applicable due to track plan
• maximum load - taken care of by track plan, 6 wagons max
• Flagmen - check
• Working hours - oh good, an excuse to worry about functional lighting!

With the slightly lengthened sidings, approach/departure road and setting, there is scope to relax a strict interpretation of an Inglenook as has been noted above. However, I'm not going to worry too much about these potential evolutions - I don't think they're required to make a success of the current plan. Options for larger puzzles, second locos etc can naturally develop over time.

 

Sorry, we seem to have got away from signalling rather! 

 

Thanks again,

 

Schooner

 

*I'd prefer more South and more West in my London & South Western, but then again this is 'just' glad-rags for a shunting puzzle, so maybe I shouldn't worry too much  

**Sort of. The last commercial barge ran until 1969, but there was traffic to Tilbury afterwards...and turning a blind eye to that fact many connected systems withered and died from the 1850s on, with the coming of the railways.

[The Stationmaster]

Unless you use two engines you will have to propel on the roadway section in one direction because you can't run round   (There is of course nothing wrong with using two engines.)

[Nearholmer]

If they could happily propel 25 wagons down a busy street in Deptford .......

 

My guess is that it was banned at Poole because one part of the route was down a very narrow, curving street, and the van, and any signal from the guard, would be invisible to the driver.