Black Country Blues

[Mark Forrest]

A search through my "bits" box earlier looking for something else entirely unearthed these:

 

 

Now since I had the soldering iron on and some brass rod to hand for the posts I thought I'd make some up for the layout - however, it occured to me that I'm unsure on placement and what our speed limits are likely to be.  My initial thoughts were a line speed of 40 or 50, possibly a lower limit over the viaduct or entering the tunnel? 

 

Would our trailing connections into the yard need a diverging line speed restriction sign like on the junction here:

Waiting for the road by geoff7918, on Flickr

 

As ever, appreciate your thoughts, comments and advice.

[2ManySpams]

Looking at the photo we need some big chimneys somewhere on our layout. Hope this helps.

[wagonbasher]

There you go Mark, Sod's Law! John had his suspicions that it would be a wooden post base but we found no evidence at the time for a suitable base. The only variable (saving grace) in our case might be the proximity of the canal to the cabin. There could be an argument that something more substantial was built to protect both the cabin and canal?

maybe it didn't have a canal to wash its foundations away ??

 

Andy

[Andy Y]

Heading northbound (towards tunnel) its about a mile and a half down the bank to the junction at James Bridge so I'd say a 30 before the tunnel would be right. T'other way it's a similar distance up a bank to Gospel Oak, maybe 40?

[Mark Forrest]

Looking at the photo we need some big chimneys somewhere on our layout. Hope this helps.

As long as they aren't the ones on the top of spam cans I agree

[Mark Forrest]

Heading northbound (towards tunnel) its about a mile and a half down the bank to the junction at James Bridge so I'd say a 30 before the tunnel would be right.

Between the viaduct and the slew bridge, like this?

 

 

T'other way it's a similar distance up a bank to Gospel Oak, maybe 40?

A sign here then maybe?

[wagonbasher]

Canal lining master - 1 part brick lining for towpath side and the steel shuttering for the raqilway embankment side

castings tomorrow...

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

Evenin' chaps,

 

Is it a freight only line....if not why not include one differential restriction to add interest?

 

Cheers

 

Dave

[Mark Forrest]

 

castings tomorrow...

 

tease

[Mark Forrest]

Is it a freight only line....if not why not include one differential restriction to add interest?

It is a freight only line, or at least it is in its current 1970s incarnation. Am I correct in thinking at, if there were a differential restriction in place when there was a passenger service the sign might still be there but with the numbers painted black?

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

I've not seen that Mark. Why not go for a TSR (temporary speed restriction) warning board as a way of adding another dimension?

 

Dave

Edited January 20, 2013 by Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71

[Andy Y]

The positioning looks logical to me Mark (even if they look like special offer burger prices ).

[beast66606]

Would our trailing connections into the yard need a diverging line speed restriction sign like on the junction here:

.

 

Generally shunting moves did not have PSR signs - the one in the photo is a facing connection.

[Mark Forrest]

An interesting page of temporary speed restriction signs here; guess we'd be looking at fig 14.14 gas lit warning for our period (or possibly an early 14.18).  Possibly something we could look to add at a later date.

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

....I think that a 14.14 would be eyecatching.

 

Dave

[Mark Forrest]

(even if they look like special offer burger prices ).

I wouldn't know anything about that.......

 

Generally shunting moves did not have PSR signs - the one in the photo is a facing connection.

Thanks that's what I thought - just thought I'd check

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

A PSR is more likely to apply to the viaduct than to the tunnel.

 

Dave

[Mark Forrest]

A PSR is more likely to apply to the viaduct than to the tunnel.

 

Dave

I think Andy's logic is that we're travelling downhill towards a junction, rather than the limit be imposed because of the tunnel.  Perhaps move it to between the box and the viaduct to cover both?

[Stubby47]

Had a bit of a light bulb moment today. Whilst surfing the internet for suitable sanitaryware adverts, I realised that the billboards can be made to suit the size and shape of the poster.

 

This mean long thin adverts or portrait style ones can all be used as the billboards will be interchangeable.

 

So, if anyone has any suitable images, please PM them and I'll make up a billboard to suit.

 

Nominal size is 75mm (long) x 38mm (height), but anything in those sort of dimensions will be fine.

 

Era is 1975, subject can be anything ( e.g. beer, smokes, films).

[Stubby47]

Will the operators be able to judge the speed of the trains, to ensure they don't exceed the speed limit, and will the signals be operational and, er, operational ?

[beast66606]

I know this may be a bit late but I was looking through some photos that I've bought over the years and I found one of Tue Brook signal box taken in 1952.

The photo was taken from the rear of the box which was situated on an embankment.

The box was an all wood type 4 of (I think) 24 levers and it was supported on the embankment by the corner posts being extended down into the bank.

I can't post the photo but I made a sketch from it.

 

There was a "landing" at the steps end of the box that presumably gave access to the locking room door. The window cleaning stage appears to go around the box and as a concession to safety there is a handrail on the back of the box.

I don't think the wall in the foreground supports the embankment but is only a boundary.

 

The wooden supports were to become the boxes' (yes it was a type 4) downfall, when it was replaced in the 1950s (rather strangely by a MR pattern box) a G2 was attached to the leg with a chain - and put in motion ... the outcome does not take too much imagination. The wall was the boundary at West Derby road.

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

If in doubt Stu keep them slow esp. the vac, partially or unfitted ones...there are a myriad of reasons why the driver of such might be cautious. It is however important to show differentiation e.g. faster speeds with light locos or air braked services. 

 

Dave

Edited January 20, 2013 by Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71

[Guest Phil]

A PSR is more likely to apply to the viaduct than to the tunnel.

 

Dave

I think Andy's logic is that we're travelling downhill towards a junction, rather than the limit be imposed because of the tunnel.  Perhaps move it to between the box and the viaduct to cover both?

Possibly, but also remember several local lines suffered from underground fires - the closest probably being the P&O climbing up to Princes End. A TSR over a section of embankment would be very relevant.

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

Phil,

 

....freight only implies lower investment e.g. lower levels of  maintenance of the viaduct, which makes it an obvious choice. Ground instability is another one e.g. your fires.

 

Dave

Edited January 20, 2013 by Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71

[TheSignalEngineer]

Possibly, but also remember several local lines suffered from underground fires - the closest probably being the P&O climbing up to Princes End. A TSR over a section of embankment would be very relevant.

That was probably the final straw for that line. I walked up there at the time of closure, there was a gap about six sleepers long in the trackbed. We had to walk on the sleepers (LMS concrete bullhead)  to get across and could feel the heat from the underground fire.

 

There were more regular ones at Hednesford. A driver stopped at No.1 box one day to tell the bobby that there was smoke coming out of the top of the Down Distant signal post.