iands

My guess is the box houses 'block repeaters' to show when a train is "on line", probably for a gateman to see that the line is "clear" so the gates can be opened.

Yes Kev, lots more, but it is from 2015 and doesn't show any of the works/proposals that are happening today.

A snap shot from the scheme plan of the current layout showing the gantry. Stalybridge station to the left, Diggle to the right.

If not from a loco or other rolling stock, possibly a bell-mouth for drainage or cables? Came across several of these in the New Cross Gate area when working on the East London Line project - believe one or two are still in use around there.

I'm not aware that Selby was bombed during WW2, my mum was born and brought up in Riccall not far away, and she never mentioned any local bombing although she remembered when York was bombed, she happened to be there at the time! That said, there was a tragedy in 1944 when a Halifax bomber on a training flight took the spire off St James church resulting in about 15 deaths all told. If the stopping train you refer to is in the Up platform (e.g. heading south) and the third coach has a white roof, then it is very likely the photos were taken on the same day (also a local train (for Goole?) is in the Up Bay platform. I suppose we'll never really know why the covered section was removed (as I speculated previously, the lime traffic may have ceased by rail and probably transferred to road transport). As for the rationalisation/singling of the drops is open to speculation. By 1948 the railways had been nationalised and there may well have been a drive to cut costs wherever possible. No need for two lines on the drops when one is more than adequate for the volume of traffic at that time. Attached is an extract of a 1945 diagram of the track layout at Selby clearly showing two tracks on the drops. The one that was removed being '18' and I suspect a fair length of track and some point work, and no doubt together with quite a bit of rationalisation of other sidings in the area, that would have been a sizable saving on the maintenance budget. Selby 1945 map extract.pdf

Thanks for posting. Can't be 100% certain from the image, but it doesn't look like a loco to me. Would you happen to have a date for the photo? Just wondering if it was taken the same day as an aerial photo I have from 1948, a panoramic view rather than overhead, which shows two open wagons in the same position.

Any chance you could share the photo?

Just a little earlier. 5th March 1969 to be precise, when the Down Branch Goods line from Selby South to Selby West secured OOU as well as sidings. Horse dock, Timber siding and coal drops all secured OOU. All signals appertaining to the branch and sidings to be abolished. At West, the down Branch Goods slewed into Down Branch Siding and shortened to 150 yds and named ‘Coal Siding’. The above info gleaned from the Weekly Operating Notice for the time held in the SRS archive.

In response to the 'lime' query in the 'coal drops' thread, I had a search through the LNER magazines to see if there was any reference to Selby. I couldn't find an answer, but I did learn that as well as the other usual industries and agriculture, lime was also used extensively in the processing of sugar beet. Sorry it doesn't provide an answer to your specific question, but may provide a pointer for me to search through other info.

As @Ken.W mentions, the last two drops at Selby could have been for Lime (as per Goathland), which might also explain why they look a slight different colour (lighter). It would also explain why these two were 'covered', to protect the Lime from the weather. It is possible that the covered section was removed because it was no longer needed if the Lime traffic ceased, or was damaged in some way. Not sure it would have been damaged by 'enemy action' during WW2 as I've not come across any evidence to suggest this, but then again ......

The photo caption says 'Delph station'.

I've got to ask, what would be the reason for limiting the weight for SO train to 385t, from 411t for rest of week? Genuine question as I don't have a lot of knowledge regarding coaching stock. Ta.

Always used to happen with BR projects and maintenance as well. When we joined Railtrack in April 1994, the 'new' management said that this practice would no longer happen as "all future projects would be properly costed and correctly budgeted". Oh, how we laughed.

Ah, sorry. I misinterpreted what you had written. My apologies.

It has happened at Colton Jcn, see my comment today on page 2. Not sure what you mean about no prior warning of the route set? Do you mean that the driver on approach to the junction gets no indication of which route is set, e.g. to Up Main or Up Normanton? If so, the attached screen shots from Signalling Notice 117 (WON April 1983) shows that signal Y766 (Up Main protecting the junction) is provided with a position '1' and position '4' Junction Indicator. Admittedly these are not shown on the current 5-mile diagrams for some reason.

Apologies for being a bit late to the party on this one, but yep, it does happen. I was on the 06:30 ex York to KX on the Up Main one Tuesday morning (on one of my regular weekly visits to London when working on the East London Line Project) when all of a sudden the driver thew the anchor out around Copmanthorpe. The leading DVT had just about reached the Up Normanton after Colton Junction, but the '91' was still well under the wires. The driver realizing at the last minute that that the route had been incorrectly set. Not sure if it was a signaller error or the blame was appropriated to ARS. No damage to infrastructure but a fair bit of delay waiting for the driver to walk back to the '91' and reverse wrong direction for half a mile or so, so the route could be correctly set, and then for the driver to walk back to the DVT again. Happy days.

Looking at the 1952 photo again, and cropping a slightly different area, another building is present that you may wish to include in your layout - even if you "re-position" it to fit it in. It is the one I have outlined in blue on the attached. It is the building associated with the 'weigh machine' as depicted on the NLS map of c1890.

It's difficult to tell from the 1932 photo, but there could have been windows the full length of the covered end, on the station side at least. There may well have been windows on the Abbey side as well, to let in light to enable staff to see what they were doing. Not sure if there would have been any windows on the end facing the river. I say windows, I can't be sure if they would have been 'glazed', but certainly it looks like there were framed 'openings'. Obviously the 'covered end' was still in-situ in 1932, but had gone by 1948, as evidenced in the photos I posted earlier. Unfortunately, whilst assisting with some research for the book "Selby's Railways Explored", I didn't come across any details of when the covered end was removed, but as you are modelling in the era pre-1939, I think it would be safe to assume it was still there at the start of WWII - unless, of course, someone can categorically prove otherwise! As to why the covered end was removed, your suggestion of allowing big hopper wagons to access the 'drops' would seem perfectly plausible. It could also be that some point someone included a bigger hopper in a consist of coal wagons and no one realised until too late when it was shunted on to the drops and it caused damage to the covered end, by which time the powers that be maybe decided to remove it anyway - only requiring a one-off cost for removal, as opposed to a repair bill and ongoing 'maintenance costs'. Pure supposition on my part, but possible.

I wonder if the inhabitants of 24 Station Road hear any ghostly rattling's of coal wagons being emptied as their bungalow sits on top of where the 'drops' used to be?

Just had a quick scan through the NERA site at the NER Traffic Committee minutes (as you do), and for 4th April 1895 (Min. No. 18767) the following entry is made "Selby: Wooden shelter for pony & cart". No details are provided on the actual location, so could be in the main goods yard/warehouse area, or could conceivably be adjacent/near to the coal drops. So if any buildings were to be provided on the layout you are modelling, a small agents office and a separate building to house a pony & cart would not necessarily be too unprototypical in general, if not strictly accurate for Selby.

Is this question specifically for Selby? Can't see any buildings in the photos (or on any drawings) I have, other than the 'covered end' shown in the 1932 photo. I suppose this could have housed a small office for the 'Coal Agent', but once it was demolished the Agents office would have been relocated probably on to the station. Can't say for other locations as I haven't looked.

With regard to Selby, there wasn't a short length of embankment or 'overrun'. Also not sure if there was a buffer stop, could have just been a 'scotch block' type of arrangement on top of the rails to prevent wagons disappearing over the end. A drawing and some photos that hopefully support my above observations. The drawing is a section of a much larger drawing of Selby and clearly shows the coal drops. However, the drawing indicates only 9 cells and not 12, but suggests there was no 'overrun'. This 1932 photo (zoomed into the coal drops) shows a covered end, so unfortunately doesn't help much in this instance. The second photo is from 1948 (again, zoomed in on the coal drops). The covered end has now gone and shows the 12 cells in full. Note that the last two (11 & 12 counting from right to left) appear to be lighter in colour. This could because this is where the covered end was, so wasn't exposed to as much 'muck' as the others due to the covered end, or it could suggest that coal wasn't actually dropped in these two cells, although the photo clearly shows a wagon over cell 11. Another photo from 1952, from the opposite side (again, zoomed in on the coal drops). By now one of the roads has been 'lifted'. It is unclear if buffers were, or had been, used, hence my comment above about a 'scotch block' type arrangement. Just for completeness, another drawing from just a few miles down the road at Riccall. This also shows the coal drops and suggests there was no 'overrun' here either. So it would suggest that 'overruns' weren't a design consideration. Of course these two examples were built by the NER, and inherited by the LNER. If the LNER constructed any 'new' coal drops after 1923 anywhere, they may well have designed the coal drops differently and included buffers and/or a short 'overrun'. Although the above examples don't answer your queries conclusively, I hope they are in some way helpful.

J2598 Love the 'mixed traffic'. Try running that combo on a layout at a show and see what comments are muttered!

This time without the blood stains.

Yes @RichardT, Foss Islands goods did have coal drops. Re the hoppers, sand was also delivered to Foss Island's in steel hoppers, for the Redfearn Glass works on Fishergate.