Distant signal moved between 1900 and 1938

[BlackFivesMatter]

I'm looking at ordnance survey map of my home town, Largs a terminus on the Clyde coast. In the map dated around 1914 the distant signal is almost outside our house! In the 1938 os map it is a further half mile away from the station. 

During the intervening years there were no changes to sidings, no additional reasons for the signal to be moved. 

 

Does anyone know why the fixed distant would have been moved? 

 

I have seen that the ministry of transport passed legislation regarding distant signals being yellow not red in 1925 but no mention of distance from the nearest home signal. 

 

As I said a terminus, no home signal changes, no sidings added. I can understand had it been a loop and distant moved for longer trains, greater stopping distance but not an issue on a suburban terminus. 

 

Any help out there? 

 

[Reorte]

Might simply be an error in one of the maps?

[Cwmtwrch]

Any new structures, such as bridges, which would have reduced the sighting distance for the signal in the original position?

[5BarVT]

Possibly complaints from drivers that the braking was a bit tight?  It is downhill into Largs.

Paul.

[BlackFivesMatter]

2 hours ago, Cwmtwrch said:

Any new structures, such as bridges, which would have reduced the sighting distance for the signal in the original position?

No, no new bridges etc. On fact the re-sited signal would be against the sunset at some times of the year.

[BlackFivesMatter]

3 hours ago, 5BarVT said:

Possibly complaints from drivers that the braking was a bit tight?  It is downhill into Largs.

Paul.

Good point. I wonder though, as Largs is a terminus that drivers would either know the route or have a pilot man?  After all, as happened with the emu in 1995, if the brakes fail as you are descending the hill north of Hunterston, a signal isn't going to stop anything. ( An electric unit heading into Largs had a total brake failure and ended up 100 yards on the other side of the stopping blocks. Fortunately no casualties, early morning working). 

 

This was why I wondered if the same regulations on dolour of distant signals also concerned distance from home signals. 

[5BarVT]

No regulations on position of distant signals as far as I know.  Some companies adopted a standard distance (MR I think) others had a ‘variable’ distance depending on gradient (I.e a set fig for rising, level and falling) (GWR I think).  Some included sighting in the distance.

What was adequate for the weights of trains capable of being lifted by 19th century locos became inadequate as loco capability increased and loads became heavier (still unbraked wagons).  So I wouldn’t rule out it being moved for such a reason, but neither would I claim that must have been why it was moved.

Paul.

[RailWest]

Try sending an enquiry to the SRS at enquiries@s-r-s.org.uk . They may well have a relevant specialist for that area/company and/or even a copy of a relevant Instruction or similar about its alteration.

[Stephen Freeman]

Or it could be a fault in the map. Not I think relevant to OS maps but some map makers put in errors on purpose as a copyright protection.

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, 5BarVT said:

No regulations on position of distant signals as far as I know.  Some companies adopted a standard distance (MR I think) others had a ‘variable’ distance depending on gradient (I.e a set fig for rising, level and falling) (GWR I think).  Some included sighting in the distance.

What was adequate for the weights of trains capable of being lifted by 19th century locos became inadequate as loco capability increased and loads became heavier (still unbraked wagons).  So I wouldn’t rule out it being moved for such a reason, but neither would I claim that must have been why it was moved.

Paul.

It sounds as good a reason as any other, early distant signal siting could well become underbraked as train weights changed and larger locos came along.  I also wonder if an additional Home Signal was provided for some reason (to facilitate the working at the station) which meant that the distant had to be moved back?   There is nothing on the Railways Archive about any sort of collision at Largs but something which wasn't reportable might have happened which led to a review of signal siting

 

Addendum

A bit of research into local websites indicates that the station building was rebuilt in the 1920s but what I can't establish is when the large turntable (which could take a 'Britannia') was provided or if the three separate platforms date from the opening of the station.   However the rebuilding of the station building could well be indicative of a wider range of improvements and changes in the 1920s which would have led to signalling alterations. There was asignal box by the large turntable so it might be pertinant to try to establesh when that box was provided.

Edited April 23, 2022 by The Stationmaster

[Wheatley]

What SM said.  Signals can be (and occasionally still are) moved if it becomes clear that they're under-braked, and train weights would have increased rapidly and significantly during that period. In 1914 you're looking at predominantly 6 wheeled Manson coaches and 43' bogie coaches. By 1938 you are well into the era of Stanier 57' steel bodied (or at least steel clad) period 3 coaches. . It would have been a lot easier to move it back then though ! 

 

I occasionally still put a photo of the 1995 crash in "What could possibly go wrong" presentations for new starters. If I remember correctly the driver's minor injuries were sustained by colliding with something in the second or third saloon back !

 

 

[Cwmtwrch]

Regulations for distant signal locations would have been very difficult to produce. For example, in very busy locations, with boxes close together, it was not unknown for distant signals for one box  to be slotted by the box in front in order to maintain stopping distances for that box.

[Ian Smeeton]

I came across this photo somewhere else.

 

The track layout appealed, being so nicely symmetrical.

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/373180514226

 

Regards

 

Ian

[pH]

On 22/04/2022 at 08:28, 5BarVT said:

Possibly complaints from drivers that the braking was a bit tight?  It is downhill into Largs.

Paul.

 

On 22/04/2022 at 12:14, BlackFivesMatter said:

Good point. I wonder though, as Largs is a terminus that drivers would either know the route or have a pilot man? 

Is it downhill into the station at Largs?

 

The line is virtually flat at water level from Fairlie to The Pencil. Is there a bump in the cutting between there and Largs station?

 

There was a much earlier (1885) buffer stop collision at Largs, described by David L. Smith where a crew, completely inexperienced on the Largs route (the driver had done one trip, the fireman had never been there before) approached too quickly through the cutting.

[pH]

On 22/04/2022 at 12:14, BlackFivesMatter said:

After all, as happened with the emu in 1995, if the brakes fail as you are descending the hill north of Hunterston, a signal isn't going to stop anything. ( An electric unit heading into Largs had a total brake failure and ended up 100 yards on the other side of the stopping blocks. Fortunately no casualties, early morning working). 

I was surprised to find that there hadn’t been an RAIB inquiry into that. What there was, was a Joint Rail Business Group inquiry:

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/297294/response/726377/attach/html/4/FOI201501007 SMIS entry.pdf.html

 

According to that, the cause was driver error in braking on the approach to the station.

 

If a train lost brakes on the descent past Hunterston into Fairlie, I think it would have to be going at some speed to make it all the way to Largs along that stretch of flat track.

 

(A question, not directly relevant to this accident. Do EMUs have hand/parking brakes? - I would assume they do.)

[Wheatley]

No RAIB in those days, and no-one killed or seriously injured, so minimal formal interest from HMRI. 

 

There is a post on UK Rail Forum suggesting that a hard copy HMRI/HSE report exists but its not on Railways Archive or anywhere electronic.

Edited April 24, 2022 by Wheatley

[Trog]

On 23/04/2022 at 21:48, pH said:

If a train lost brakes on the descent past Hunterston into Fairlie, I think it would have to be going at some speed to make it all the way to Largs along that stretch of flat track.(A question, not directly relevant to this accident. Do EMUs have hand/parking brakes? - I would assume they do.)

 

Trains roll very well a driver I knew had his loco fail as he passed the neutral section at Bourne End south of Berkhamsted, and coasted all the way to a signal at danger half way down Camden Bank. Where he used the SPT to report that his loco had failed at Bourne End. It was then agreed that the signalman would set him up with the straightest available run into a suitable platform. The driver then released the brake and coasted the last half mile into Euston.

 

I have also seen a picture taken from the window of Watford PSB showing four or five members of BR staff pushing a gapped 501 unit back onto the con rail. Would love to see a safe method of working written up for doing that with a loaded passenger train these days.

 

I have also done a considerable amount of hand, JCB and excavator shunting over the years, a JCB can easily shift a dozen loaded wagons with its rear arm. The secret is to pull on the load not the end of the wagon, so the pull on the wagon is distributed, and you don't end up trying to explain how the end of the wagon came to just fall off in your hands.