West Somerset Railway General Discussion

No one seems to have mentioned the use of a 'Bull Horn' on the side of the box to receive the token from the crew so the signalman only has to hand up the new one. Is this a rarity or just one of those quirky things that didn't last very long?

 

Thank you, that explanation makes perfect sense. Andy

 

Did anyone ever do a token exchange with an up train at Dduallt in the 1980s? As I recall, the down train would arrive first and wait for the up train. The up train would not be hanging around before hitting the spiral. It was a long time ago so maybe my memory thinks the up train was going faster than it was.

 

To answer your quibble about the bit of paper, this was introduced at the behest of HMRI. We have to have the stop boards at the south end of platforms 1 & 2 because they converge and, without them, every arrival would foul the opposite line. The stop boards prevent that. However, with trains longer than six coaches it is necessary for loco to pass the board to get the train fully on the platform. Prior to the introduction of the paper authorisation the signalman used to verbally instruct the driver to pass the board but HMRI did not like this arrangement of a shouted instruction which could be mis-interpreted. Having the paper authorisation also gives the driver proof that the permission has been given. I think that the only alternative would be to introduce working signals, which would be an expensive alternative. What are your thoughts?

 

Peter has answered your second question. With regard to your first, which rule book are you referring to? Certainly the BR Regulations dating from the 1950's required this and I suspect the regulations for the pre-nationalisation companies also required it. (I don't have copies of those.)

 

I did, and I enjoyed all 12 of the minutes.

 

Desperate people do desperate things.

 

Well...... I would go for the expensive alternative, but I do not control the budget so I guess I'll have to accept that it won't happen anytime soon.

That said, why not remove the Stop Board from Plat 1, which is the platform used 90% of the time, and retain it in Plat 2. If necessary, the Newbridge signaller could issue a chit for Plat 2, but there would be no need for it for the platform that is mainly used. If necessary Plat 1 could be a permissive platform and trains signalled into it as such. This would require no additional signals or expense that I can see. But I'm no expert on signalling regulations and I suppose that there are all sorts of reasons why it can't be done.

Well you did ask, Steve.

Peter

 

We do the Toddington exchange from the signal box window, but it's not a double exhange, only either handing the one token back or receiving it from the 'box.

 

See my earlier post. Don't want drivers thinking that sometimes is ok not to have a token of authority in the cab.

 

But with token working, that is what you have when double heading or running top and tail - the token is shown to the lead engine, and carried by the second engine - so the crew on the leading engine do not have the token in their cab when underway. There is only one physical authority, so by definition it can't be on two engines simultaneously.

The closest we have in our rules to an indivisible staff is when we have to institute pilotman working (i.e. if the token equipment fails). In that scenario, the rules require that the pilotman travels in the rearmost engine of the train (if worked with multiple engines) but there is no need to also give a ticket to the leading engine. If it is necessary to work multiple trains in the same direction, each train carries a ticket (carried on the rearmost engine if there are multiple engines in the train); and on the last train in that direction, the pilotman travels. That is directly analogous as far as I can see to staff and ticket working, with the pilotman being the manifestation of the staff, but nowhere does it say that a pilotman and a ticket travel on the same train.

Clearly everyone has their own rule book, but it seems odd to me, in that the whole point of a staff is that only one exists; the ticket is an explicit authority to inform the driver (who has physically seen the staff) that they can proceed without carrying the staff. So it seems odd to have a train on which both a ticket and a staff are both present, because to my mind, the ticket only exists as a proxy for the staff.

Tom

 

It may not be quite the same, but I know of a heritage railway situation where there is the equivalent of a stop board which is always obeyed by shunting moves, but always ignored by running moves - and that is covered simply by a written Local Instruction.

If I understand the Pickering situation correctly, then might it not be feasible at Pickering to keep both Stop boards, but have a permanent Local Instruction which states that a train may pass a board in order to get all its train into the platform provided that the other platform is not occupied? In effect therefore a sort of 'permissive stop', but one where the relevant criterion - namely 'unoccupied adjoining platform' is readily obvious to the driver. So, the first train in can pass its stop board, if necessary, but the 2nd one in could not.

Just a thought.....

 

I don't understand this.
EKT. 1 token issued. 2 engines. 1 carries the token, 1 does not.
Pat

 

This accords with everything I've ever read about token or staff and ticket working. I've been quite surprised reading this thread recently. With double heading, so long as the rules are clear as to which engine carries the token/staff, and both drivers see it, then the working should be clear.

Steve B

 

Steve the only ones I have access to are the current IOWSR book and a 1902 Belfast and Northern Counties Railway. They both tie with my understanding that the staff is shown to the lead engine and carried on the train engine.

The Belfast one has a caveat that when the assisting engine is pushing (top and tail) then the train engine carries a ticket and the rear engine carries the staff. I would post a picture but cannot seem to on my phone!

 

the way it used to work, is one , has the token, the other has the note giving permission to occupy that track section, i'm unsure, as its been quite a time, if the train engine carries the token , and the pilot has the note , but I can remember on one double headed run, being told to conferm I had seen the token, before it was given to the other crew as well as being asked, has the guard seen it I can remember it because we were on 92203, with 34105 , That's how long ago it was. and yes, I did grab the pines headboard just before we went off shed , so that's I guess keeping it on track.

 

Agreed, the principal as I understand it is that there is only ever one staff out at a time and that it is issued to the train rather than the loco as there may be more than one!

 

I did, and it is interesting to hear other views an ideas. I'm not too certain platform permissive would work. If vehicles are on your line it is a fairly obvious thing for the driver to realise this and stop before them. However, if it is a question of a vehicle on a converging line, a judgement then has to be made as to whether it is clear, or not.
Out of interest, are there any other two platform terminal stations with converging tracks where the convergence is such that trains have to foul the other track if the full platform length is to be used?

 

I guess that permissive working complicates things too much. But if you have a Stop Board at the end of Plat 2, then the approach signal at High Mill permits you to run only as far as that Stop Board - you cannot go beyond it without the signallers authority. If there is no Stop Board at the end of Plat 1, then the approach signal at High Mill permits you to go beyond the south end of the platform as far as the stop block in the head shunt, so no need for bits of paper to be issued at New Bridge. The signaller would not admit anything into Plat 1 unless he is sure that anything in Plat 2 is stationary and has not overrun that stop board. Track circuits will show this. Or is this too simplistic?

Peter

 

I agree that your idea seems reasonable but I'm not a signalling engineer. It's interesting that Pl.2 was originally intended as the main platform, which is why you get the feather for Pl.1 and there was no stop board on Pl.2, only Pl.1. The stop board on Pl.2 appeared in the 1980's.