RailWest

Published 1990 ISBN 1 870872 03 7 A quick Google shows that Abebooks has a 2nd-hand copy for sale....

Derek Phillips did do a "Steam on the S&D" book for Fox some years ago, similar to the others that treggyman mentions. Anyway, I asked George Reeve for some details :-) and he tells me that essentially it will be a photo album (about 95% previously unpublished views) with extended captions and track diagrams and signalling diagrams thrown in for good measure, covering the whole line from Bath to Bournemouth and all the branches. Should be available at the beginning of July.

I can't even find that small amount on the Irwell Press website :-( Does Byelines give a title and/or any idea of its content please?

I am aware of the plan in Judge & Potts. My problem is that the two sidings at the station end are not shown on a 1930 copy of the diagram for the sidings GF , although it is possible that it simply had not been updated since 1910. The signalling diagram in J&P is for the alterations which took place in 1938 and 1939, including replacement and relocation of the GF.

The 1938 RCH book does indeed specify 'G' for Bason Bridge. My problem is - what/where were those facilities ?

The sidings at Bason Bridge were provided initially for milk factory traffic, but was there ever any provision for public goods traffic? There are certainly references in the Minutes to proposals for that, but no clear evidence as to any actual provision. Immediately east of the level-crossing there were two short sidings on the Down side of the line (date unknown) were they perhaps used for public goods?

I'm bemused how this thread seems to have drifted so far from the original question and almost gone off into fantasy land...:-) Let us not forget that many early railways ran many miles of single-line track by block instruments only, a well-known example being the Somerset & Dorset. Even after the Foxcote disaster the BoT does not appear to have recommended TS&T (ETT not yet being available) and only made a 'recommendation' in 1886 after the second Binegar accident, by which time the S&DJR had started to use ETT anyway (albeit in a small way). Block working with TS&T did not require block instruments of necessity, you could for example simply use bell block, as was the case between Highbridge and Burnham right up until closure in the early 1960s. Both the S&D and GWR had some sections - admittedly very short - that remained worked by instruments only (no staff). Light railways often used used telephone block with TS&T, as did (and may still do) some 'heritage' lines - indeed I worked TS&T on the WSR for several years by telephone and (fortunately!) don't recall any incidents :-) It is true of course that TS&T does have it weaknesses and can fail if not worked properly, as was witnessed a few years ago on one well-known line in the south-east ...... one reason why, in a scheme with which I am involved at the moment in the heritage sector, we have banned it as method of working. Although 'bog standard' double-line block instruments would not be appropriate for use on single-lines, variants of them certainly did get used. The L&SWR used a 'single-line version' of their standard Preece 2-position blocks on many of their TS&T branches. Even in the late 1960s the rationalised IoW line used modified standard SR 3-wire 3-position instruments to provide Tokenless Block working, but you would be hard pressed to tell them from the 'normal' instruments just from a glance at them.

To be honest, that sums up my thoughts too :-) Perhaps this has become a case of 'over analysing' what was otherwise quite a simple question.

I'm afraid that I fail to understand the logic for that approach. If you have a single line between A and B then IMHO that is one block section, regardless of whether it is uni- or bi- directional and the type and number of 'instruments' that may be used to control it.

I shall have to go and take a look sometime then, as I don't remember seeing that....

This siding was on the Down side of the S&DJR single-line, just over ¾-mile from Bath Junction, almost directly opposite the site of the original Bath Ticket Platform. It's on NLS maps at https://maps.nls.uk/view/106019264 if you look near the bottom of the sheet just left of the middle. See also http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/railco/sdjr/bath-jcn.html#TCS . For a photo, see Plate 29 in the relevant Middleton Press volume.

AFAIK a set of the Minute Books for the meetings of the S&DJR Officers are held in file RAIL/626/16 at the National Archives at Kew. You should be able to check that reference online. Attached is a copy of the very first page, so as you will see they were certainly being printed in 1875. I would point out that I have not see the Kew files myself, the images which I have posted came from photographs kindly taken by a fellow enthusiast some years ago. Quite a few year prior to that, I did meet someone once (sadly I forget the name) who had a set of at least some volumes of the Minutes himself. I would suspect therefore that the Minutes were printed and copies made for distribution for various people/departments.

On another issue... Pix from the BR era show a small pent-roof hut in the south-west corner of the level-crossing, ie west of the road but south of the railway. Despite the claims by some commentators, this was not the GF hut (which was on the platform) so what was it for ???

Just for the record, in answer to my own question I have now found this Minute 5302 in the records for the Officers Meeting of 21-January-1902:- so it would appear that the work was done some time after that date. Given the absence of the first house in later maps, maybe it was demolished after the new house was built in order to provide access? It would seem clear now that it was the second house which unfortunately was burnt down in April 2020 ( see https://www.burnham-on-sea.com/news/photos-burnham-on-sea-fire-crews-tackle-property-blaze-in-bason-bridge/) . Does anyone know if it was still occupied at that time, or if it was empty then for how long?

Just as a long shot... Does anyone please have a copy of the Index for letters A-B for the S&DJR Officers Minutes for 1882-3 ? I have the B-G page, but that misses everything before Binegar

Pre-1900 maps show a building on land between the railway and the river, directly opposite the stationplatform. In later years there is a second building shown some distance further west towards Highbridge. The first of those buildings appears not to exist any more, is that the one which burnt down some years ago? The second building is marked on recent maps as (old) Station House. So which was the station master's house and what is the background to the two buildings please?

Thanks for the update....what a shame.

I notice a reference to the original signal-box being prepared for a move to the Swindon & Cricklade railway - does anyone know if that ever happened ?

>>>The symbols at the beginning of the Pryer books don't show the symbol for a hand point..... Well, it certainly does in Volume 3 :-)

Not entirely true IMHO. In the Down direction Williton used to work short section to Kentsford or long section to Washford. After Washford was abolished in 1952 the 'switching out' facility at Kentsford was removed...as noted on p102 of a certain book :-):-)

Err....surely that is the classic case for Normally 'IN' ? The difference with GFs is that usually, once the FPL has been pulled out, it can only be put back IN once the point is normal. However there have been examples where the GF can be locked with the point in either position when the FPL is IN - eg Bere Alston.

What were the gradients on those sidings - maybe it was all done by gravity?

The signals look very nice - but I do hope that, when installed, the weight levers do actually have weights :-)

I would suggest that the interlocking levers for the goods line were unrelated to block working, but provided simply to ensure that a box at one end could not signal a wrong-direction move into the loop without 'approval' from the other box, the interlocking levers being used as a means to lock conflicting signals worked by different boxes. Similar arrangements existed for example over various passenger lines between the Middle and West boxes at Exeter St Davids.

>>>It would be a cute use of signalling to indicate if the various turn outs were set correctly.. But that is a key feature of signalling anyway. You should not be able to clear a signal for a route which is not set and locked. A (rough) track plan of the layout are under cosideration would be helpful :-)