West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Its not really strange, alot of things change in 150 years

 

It's difficult to see how it was less cramped, even 150 years ago, unless the goods shed dates from the extension of the line to Minehead.

 

Just seen this years timetable on Steve Edge's WSR.org website, Impossible to do a round trip to Bishops Lydeard from Minehead on Red timetable days .

 

Just to prove that, once you get to Butlins, there is no escape.....

 

I can't find an original track plan (NLS maps doesn't go back that far). However, it is worth remembering that a platform with adjacent run-road loop (as for example currently at Minehead) was far from universal as a branch terminus layout. Many had a single platform line in which you had to propel back out to a loop outside the station to run round, then propel back in before departure. An advantage of that layout (in construction terms) is that you need a shorter platform for a given length of train, because you don't have what is essentially redundant point work (and its associated extra length to allow for fouling points) taking up platform length that can't be used for passengers.

A current example of what I mean is at Swanage, where the platform is physically probably about 7 coaches long, but the longest train that can be run round is only five - there is two carriage lengths of essentially wasted space at the end. (By "wasted" I mean "platform length not easily useable by a passenger carriage").

A West Country example of a station where you had to propel out to run round was Seaton before the SR remodelled it. I think Ilfracombe before remodelling was similar.

Tom

 

I think Pwllheli is a run in single platform then propel out to a loop to run round on the modern network.

 

Thank you, very informative. I have no knowledge of what or why what I saw was happening, but it was definitely Watchet - a) I've never been to Washford, and b) I was standing on the quayside at the time!

Steve B

 

Even when Ilfracombe was remodelled, at first there was no run-round crossover on the Down side until it was added later. An even better example perhaps would be Bridwater North, where you had an arrival platform from which trains were propelled out, run-round and then shunted back into a different departure platform.

 

What's needed is an Auto train

 

Now, why would you possibly think that??

 

IMHO yes.

 

IIRC, the max size of PP trains on the GW system is 2+loco+2. The SR/LBSC system handles 3+loco+3, though the only time I've seen photographic evidence of that max was during the sparking up of the North Kent lines and I doubt there are six suitable PP carriages still in existence. Delighted to be proved wrong, BTW.

 

Looking at the early Ilfracombe layout, the run round that exists is very short - I did wonder if run rounds were in essence achieved by propelling out of the station, running the loco into the yard, then gravitating the carriages back into the station. The SER did similar I think at Margate Sands.

Tom

 

The attached is the 1888 map on the Old-Maps.co.uk site. Is this any earlier than the NLS offering?

 

Memory must be playing tricks. It has never been possible to pass passenger trains at Watchet. Perhaps you are thinking of Kentsford loop, west of the town adjacent to the paper mill?

Robin

 

The oldest on the NLS site is the same date - 1886 survey, 1888 publication.

https://maps.nls.uk/view/106020779#zoom=6&lat=10212&lon=11976&layers=BT

Tom

 

I'll grant that my memory may be playing tricks as to what was happening, but it was definitely Watchet station, and I remember thinking at the time that "trains don't pass each other at Watchet". Thinking about it more with some of the explanations previously given, I wonder if it was on the occasion when the Prairie I mentioned earlier was shunting the yard, and perhaps the Hymec hauled train came through on the platform line with the Prairie in the loop at the time. Did Watchet have an intermediate block instrument to allow a goods train to be locked into the loop/yard whilst other movements took place? Or perhaps I'm just losing it - it was a long time ago!

Steve B

 

With respect, IIRC you mentioned there being a DMU in the platform and an 'exchange of tokens', which could not have happened as WT was not a token block post. On the other hand, WT did have an intermediate token instrument, so it would have been quite feasible for a passneger train to pass through whilst an engine or goods train was 'shut in' in the yard.

 

Thank you - I did mention a DMU, but there I think my memory was playing tricks with me - not an unusual occurrence these days, I'm afraid! Now that you've confirmed the intermediate token instrument, I'm more certain that it was the Prairie in the loop.

At least it has diverted the thread away from it's more usual fare...

Steve B