Nearholmer

I've got a vague recollection that the main building at Kemp Town was let out to a firm that bottled or pickled things, hence need for an office in a van for the railway staff, and, possibly a van rented out to store jars of pickled things in. I will try to check later to see if my memory is ciorrect. Kevin Nope! It was Lewes Road station, the other side of the tunnel, that was a pickle factory.

Perfect, Karhedron, many thanks. My time-span is c1935-c1955, so ideal. So far, in all pictures of ex-GWR locos, even the black and white pictures, the locos look green to me! It's a subliminal thing. K

While we are on "Halls", can anyone clue me up as to when/whether/how many/which ones were painted in BR black mixed -traffic livery? I have a Lionel 0 gauge one, which I intend to tidy up a bit and re-livery (the factory green is a really strange, pale, shade); a pal will be doing his in GWR green, so I'm hoping for justification to have mine in early BR black. Thanks in advance, K

Gents "Station signals" were, I think, quite a common device in the earlier years of railways,before things settled down to the "1889 pattern", so maybe those light railways that used them were simply repeating archaic practice. Herewith "Lordship Lane Station" by Camille Pissarro, wherein is a LCDR station signal. Kevin

Put 'em both on the same post. Go on; go on; go on; go on; go on ............ Aw, well .......... Don't then. Kevin

Just because I like the cheerful colour, really! Clever chaps, the Southern Railway management; they knew how to project a modern, go-ahead, image for not much more than the price of some advertising posters and a few tins of paint. Kevin

RailWest I should think a WTT for the EKLR in passenger days would be rare as hen's teeth, because BR withdrew the passenger service within months of becoming the delighted owners of it, and the goods service withered back to be only as far as Eyethorne and Tilmanstone colliery within about two years. I doubt whether the full line even made it into a sectional appendix. There was an article by Peter Handford in "Steam Railway" in 2007, giving a first hand account of a ride over the line in 1944, and when talking about Canterbury Road he says : "there was no evidence as to train working, but it appeared, at any rate over the Eastry-Wingham section, to be on the one-engine-in-steam principle".". The two books on the EKLR that I have are very unhelpful when it comes to signalling - one says that most of the signals were out of use by c1935, but there are photos from later dates that show some still in-situ, and apparently still in use (although one blew down in a gale, and was not re-erected!). Anyway, I fear I might have hijacked Andreas's thread. Apologies, Sir. Kevin

Yes. The reason they ended-up terminating the passenger trains in the goods siding, was that the road became very busy, so too difficult to "flag" across. Railways are so dull now, by comparison, aren't they? K

SM Hard to tell what position the signals were normally left in, and pictures seem to show trains passing them in three positions: on; off; and, hard to tell, really, because of advancing decay. And, passengers often embarked/disembarked in the goods siding ".... using a sack barrow as a ladder....". Logical? To spend money on two signals and associated gubbins in the circumstances of Canterbury Road, where surely the ground frame must have been released by a key on the train staff? Only to signalling engineers. ;-) Thanks BGJ - should have checked the map myself! Kevin

Chaps An example from the East Kent Light Railway to ponder on: The Case of Canterbury Road. Here is a link to background material http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/w/wingham_canterbury_road/ Below is a sketch based on what I can work out from photographs in books. It may not be absolutely correct, in that I can find a picture that shows the ground frame (or whatever else it was) clearly. The presence of the signals seems to indicate that this was the end of a token section, with it being possible to have two trains present at once .......... But, I think it was actually operated as a "one engine in steam" section. What do you think about it? Kevin

SM Good. I've got the 1928 set, but I don't carry it with me (very remiss, I know) - the 1950 one is easy to find on line! One of the points(!) I'm trying to make, though, is that locking bars seem to have been rare, if not absent altogether, even where the frame was quite a distance from the points, and the view from one to the other could conceivably be obscured. I had a delve into photos of the EKLR for ten minutes yesterday evening. Utterly fascinating/baffling from a signalling point of view! It seems to have had signals where none were necessary, and none where there seems to be a need ........ More reading and peering at pictures to follow. Kevin

Here is nice little installation on the PD&SWJR. http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/images/gf/b-alston.jpg And, here is loads more interesting stuff about the signalling of that line. http://www.trainweb.org/railwest/railco/sr/cal-boxes.html#LAT If this website belonged to Railwest of this locale: thank you sir, it is exceedingly good. Kevin

In this thread "never say never" is an especially important caution, but I don't think I've ever seen a picture showing a locking bar on a light railway that was designed as such from the outset. However, I have seen many directly-driven bolt-locks on light railways, in pictures and "in the metal". Here is what the 1950 version of the Ministry of Transport Requirements has to say in its appendix about exceptions for light railways: "Paras. 20 to 22. Points.—An economical type of facing point lock, that is, one which enables the points, bolt lock, and locking bar (when used) to be worked by one lever, is recommended. A locking bar will not be required when the lever working the facing points is alongside them. Rodding for the mechanical operation of points may not be necessary." Economical locks weren't always used, in many cases there was a tiny two-lever ground frame. Locking bars were absent, even when the ground frame was a considerable distance from the points (Aberffrwd is the example again, ditto I think possibly Devils Bridge). And, I think the strange sentence about rodding is pointing to the fact that "economical" levers could be right next to the switches, rather than some form of magic! I must get around to scanning some photos, because I took quite a few of these sorts of things during my long "light railway phase". Kevin

Just dipped into this thread in passing, and it reminded me of something that made me laugh a lot when I was a young trainee railway engineer. I was working in the office next door to that of "Road Motors", which was presided over by a very small (c5ft) Yorkshireman with an exceedingly loud voice. One day we could hear him taking down details of a damage to one of his vehicles, as they were read to him over the 'phone. Final question: "Name of Driver?" Deep groan as he repeats name, which he has obviously heard many times before. Then, very loud indeed: "Next time that man wants transpoort, give 'im a fooking bike!!" K

Excellent! I love 'em all! If I might be permitted to suggest further brews: - JC! (named on first seeing one of Craven's locomotive designs) - Five Belles (obvious) - Marsh Umber (a rich, nutty ale, for Autumn) - Volkanik (a very strong ale, brewed by the dynamo-electric process) - Seagulls Dropping (a prediction about the rest of the season in the Championship) - Quadraphoenix (a legendary bird, on a motor scooter) - Pinky's Pleasure - Daddy Longlegs - The Works - Weathered Groyne All my ideas that seek to reference Devil's Dyke seem to come out badly. Apologies! Kevin

Andreas Despite a fairly thorough hunt, I can find no examples of the equivalent of Tapeztaflen or H-tafeln in UK public-railway practice, even where virtually identical operating practice applied. It seems that UK train drivers knew where they were supposed to stop on the basis of folk--tradition, rather than signage. There was/is a very good system of block working for use on military-controlled railways, designed to be implemented in the event of an army taking over a railway where all the signalling infrastructure has been destroyed, and that relies on fixed signage and "signal boards", which are can be "knocked-up" from locally available material very easily/quickly. Kevin

DonW There were a few railways that ran across airport runways ........ Another good modern example is on the Stoomtram Hoorn-Medemblik in the Netherlands, which is a "light railway", rather than an urban tramway. It crosses a huge dual-carriageway, and all the traffic stops to let an antique steam train puff across. When we went on it, the stop at the road was lengthened by the local Women's Institute outing, which consisted of what seemed like hundreds of women with bicycles. All the bikes had to be woman-handled up into the train, while the traffic was waiting! Kevin

Kevin Very interested in what you say about 40" radius ........ You might want to follow the link at the foot of my posting,mot have a look at my layout-in-the-making and my diatribe on the topic of how 0 gaugers have convinced themselves that they need huge-radius curves. You might want to try making "drop-link" couplers, as used by us coarse-scalers, by soldering three-links rigid. They still look fine, but can then be used to propel wagons with a guarantee of no buffer-locking. You might need to fit tiny "up-stands" to the hooks, to prevent them jumping out, but they can be almost invisible bits of fine wire. Kevin PS: fond memories of sawing-up a flush door to make a baseboard 30+ years ago. My reason then was extreme skint-ness, due to new flat, a new baby daughter, and new mortgage - and a door that came free!

I skived-off for a few minutes from my allotted domestic tasks, and had a look in books about the W&LLR. I now know more, but am not sure I'm any wiser! Initially, W&LLR was "one engine in steam", with a single train staff, incorporating a key to release the various ground frames along the way. In 1907 they created a passing place at Castle Caerinion, with a signal-box, and home and distant signals in each direction, but no starters! And, they seem to have retained the ground frames there too, and one book says that the points could be worked by either the GF or the 'box, which seems a bit hard to believe. The box had 9 levers + 1 spare, which fits with points and FPLs at each end of the loop, four signals, and one siding point. The system of working is described as "train staff and ticket by telephone", and the Inspecting Officer seems to have been a bit foxed by the absence of block-telegraph, but, after pondering, he decided it was safe enough. And, when they didn't need two trains in service, they reverted to the previous OES, with one staff for the whole line, locking the new staff away in a safe place. The signals were eventually removed, but whether the line could still be operated as two sections after that, I can't work-out, and after the passenger service was withdrawn it didn't matter. Andreas - I will get back to you about the signs after further reading. I'm beginning to think that, at unstaffed passing places, worked by "staff and telephone", it was acceptable to have neither signs nor signals - just "nominated stopping places". Kevin PS: I've found some chaps in another forum discussing the exact same stations, and they have diagrams, which I've borrowed - I don't think they will mind.

Thanks 231G Trust the date given by Mr Green, not me. And, now you mention it, I remember seeing what you describe on the LBNGR many times too. Next one to check is the W&LLR in its original form. Kevin

Agree about the ground frames, see my recommendations about Jackfield in post 16. But, I'm far from sure that it is necessary to have a member of station staff to act as "block man". I think that it is possible for train guards to deal with this, at an unstaffed station - I'm not totally sure about the situation if it involves issuing a "ticket", but if it only involves the "staff" for each section then it seems fairly simple. I have a recollection of seeing the guard of a train unlock the station at Aberfrwdd on the VoR, put the staff for one section on a hook on the wall, take the staff for the next section, and lock-up behind him (there was no train to pass on this occasion) - this was in the early 1970s, so a bit of a dim recollection! What do you think, SM? Kevin

If you want to see some still in use, go to Ireland. The Bord na Mona 3ft gauge "bog" railways use so much loco-sand that there are " sand stations" at a couple of places,where they can top-up part way through a journey. Some of the runs are getting on for 40km, with a c160tonne train, hauled by a 12tonne loco, and some pretty stiff gradients. Kevin

Brian A good loco, on a suitable train! Have you see these http://www.meccanoindex.co.uk/MMpdfs1.php? The 1930s ones have excellent little articles,suggesting how to recreate near-prototypical trains and operations with the products of Binns Road. It is actually quite funny to see how the writers "stretched a point" to try to sell more of 'whatever', by finding excuses to use it on a layout. Kevin [edited to provide link to an easier-to use set of meccano magazine PDFs]

Chris - but that is a "railway tramway", not a "tramway tramway". ;-) AndiMax - top quality fixed scotch-blocks were effectively the same as fixed gleissperren, but there were all sorts of much cruder things too, which amounted to large pieces of timber that hinged across or over the rails. Anyway, I think that the gradient renders a scotch-block unnecessary at s3, so we now have trapping resolved at no cost! Echo - ditto Brill and several of the other "stations" on the Brill Tramway, at least for some of its history. I seem to remember that one of them is sort of still there. Westcott maybe? And, there was the Selsey & Hundred of Manhood Tramway, a.k.a West Sussex Tramway, which was really more of a light railway .......... And that had raised platforms. It might even have had the odd signal, but I'd need to check on that. It's always the exceptions that prove the rule! Kevin

Yes, what you have drawn in both options looks about right for full trapping, to me. But, here comes light railway cheap-skating again, you could use scotch-blocks (gleissperren) instead of all that extra pointwork. Or, you could invent a rule that says that no vehicle can be left in the runaround loop without a locomotive attached to it, and trap the coal/gasworks/locomotive shed siding using s2-s4, leaving only one scotch-block st s3, and that could be an old sleeper, chained and padlocked to the rails. Or, declare yourself a tramway, and not bother with any trapping. Very nice modelling in that photo ....... I look forward to seeing how the rest of this layout emerges. Kevin