TCB- degraded working

[RobMorel]

Although not included in the December 2017 Rule Book changes various trials have taken place of 'E S W ' (Emergency Special Working) a 'change that drags Temporary Block Working kicking and screaming into the modern railway.
No entry or exit handsignallers (flagmen) on the ground
No requirement to clip scotch and padlock pointwork in affected area if detection available
Traincrew carry paper ticket and fill it in on dictation from signaller.
Wessex area and I believe Western route have trialled it which leads to this question;.......
-=
When was TBW first introduced, did it replace Time Interval Working Directly or (on TCB) did another method of degraded working take place ?
=
Hoping to get authority for a trial on Southern end of Midland Mainline (WH box area) during 2018, benefit being exit signal marked with an 'EW' sign similar size to Temporary speed restriction stencils but as no flagmen standing at signals all 4 lines can have ESW rather than now only a nominated 3 as one line must be blocked to afford flagman a position of safety in relation to 10 foot area.
Appreciate all replies, seasons greetings to forum users

[RDNA]

Rob,

My first recollection of something like what we now call TBW was 'Ticket Working', pre-planned and authorized in the weekly notice to cater for disconnections during signalling alterations.

As late as 1980 I remember 'Block Working' being improvised between geographical locations on Saltley PSB area during widespread failures of the 'Frequency Division Multiplex'.

From memory I guess it was the mid to late 1980s before TBW was formalized in the Rule Book.

Of course it only applied on TCB lines, the Absolute Block Regulations detail their own instructions (or used to!).

Dave Blower

[Fast Line Floyd]

Rob,

My first recollection of something like what we now call TBW was 'Ticket Working', pre-planned and authorized in the weekly notice to cater for disconnections during signalling alterations.

As late as 1980 I remember 'Block Working' being improvised between geographical locations on Saltley PSB area during widespread failures of the 'Frequency Division Multiplex'.

From memory I guess it was the mid to late 1980s before TBW was formalized in the Rule Book.

Of course it only applied on TCB lines, the Absolute Block Regulations detail their own instructions (or used to!).

Dave Blower

Not just TCB because I can remember carrying out ticket working at Cricklewood Junction in 1980 whilst Finchley Road underwent it's final transformation to being just a block post on four lines, this area was absolute block before and after the work had been completed.

[RDNA]

Rob,

My first recollection of something like what we now call TBW was 'Ticket Working', pre-planned and authorized in the weekly notice to cater for disconnections during signalling alterations.

As late as 1980 I remember 'Block Working' being improvised between geographical locations on Saltley PSB area during widespread failures of the 'Frequency Division Multiplex'.

From memory I guess it was the mid to late 1980s before TBW was formalized in the Rule Book.

Of course it only applied on TCB lines, the Absolute Block Regulations detail their own instructions (or used to!).

Dave Blower

Not just TCB because I can remember carrying out ticket working at Cricklewood Junction in 1980 whilst Finchley Road underwent it's final transformation to being just a block post on four lines, this area was absolute block before and after the work had been completed.

Sorry FL Floyd - I'm guilty of a sweeping generalization there.

Modern "Temporary Block Working" should not be applied to signalling failures in Absolute Block Sections where the signalmen at each end can confirm Train Out Of Section. But of course layouts where there may be several signal sections between boxes only one of which is worked by block instrument 'muddy' the definitions.

'Ticket Working' could be applied where and how ever the Weekly notice stated.

Dave

[John Hinson]

At the London end of the West Coast Main Line I knew it only as "District Inspector's Block" and as far as I know this had been in use since the 1960s. I don't remember seeing it in the Weekly Notices but in practice it tended to be adopted during major signalling outages which of course were not pre-planned. In fact I am struggling to think of any occasions when it was implemented by prior arrangement.

John

[S&TEngineer]

At the London end of the West Coast Main Line I knew it only as "District Inspector's Block" and as far as I know this had been in use since the 1960s. I don't remember seeing it in the Weekly Notices but in practice it tended to be adopted during major signalling outages which of course were not pre-planned. In fact I am struggling to think of any occasions when it was implemented by prior arrangement.

John

I remember it being used quite a few times during remodelling at Kensal Green/Queens Park and Willesden. Must have been mid-1970s.

[RDNA]

At the London end of the West Coast Main Line I knew it only as "District Inspector's Block" and as far as I know this had been in use since the 1960s. I don't remember seeing it in the Weekly Notices but in practice it tended to be adopted during major signalling outages which of course were not pre-planned. In fact I am struggling to think of any occasions when it was implemented by prior arrangement.

John

I did a Saturday night shift at Grange Junction GE33 in, I think, 1977. My function was to give the drivers a printed ticket authorizing them to pass GE33 and the two Longport Junction running signals and obey signals from Bradwell Sidings onwards, I'm pretty sure they were not expected to stop and give up the ticket.

That was pre-planned for alterations to the frame at Longport.

Dave

[StevieG]

Sorry if this is getting a little too far away from TBW, but I think I have some recollection of reading around the early 1970s of some arrangement which may accord with either or both of John Hinson's and S&TEngineer's posts, but possibly more like the latter - (if it had been unplanned responses to difficulties, I was unlikely to have read about it).
My memories are that - I was not personally involved - with details pre-published; presumably by Weekly Notice - trains were halted by a controllable signal (possibly even an Auto with a SPRS) where a handsignalman verbally instructed (it could be said 'reminded') where/which published signal, train was now authorised to proceed to, thus ignoring all others irrespective of any displayed, or absence of, aspect [I don't recall that any ticket was to be issued.]
I certainly recall that what I'm remembering involved floodlighting the number plate of the signal at the end of the authority, where I think there may've been another handsignalman, although I may be wrong, as in those days it could have been thought 'why would you need one?' if the signal was workable/working, if there was no ticket, and it could've been thought that the signalman/men correctly knowing which train was expected to next emerge was sufficiently reliable so no need to confirm identity.

[John Hinson]

I certainly recall that what I'm remembering involved floodlighting the number plate of the signal at the end of the authority, where I think there may've been another handsignalman, although I may be wrong, as in those days it could have been thought 'why would you need one?' if the signal was workable/working, if there was no ticket, and it could've been thought that the signalman/men correctly knowing which train was expected to next emerge was sufficiently reliable so no need to confirm identity.

In those days the observation of the tail lamp on each train was paramount.

John

[S&TEngineer]

I certainly recall that what I'm remembering involved floodlighting the number plate of the signal at the end of the authority, where I think there may've been another handsignalman, although I may be wrong, as in those days it could have been thought 'why would you need one?' if the signal was workable/working, if there was no ticket, and it could've been thought that the signalman/men correctly knowing which train was expected to next emerge was sufficiently reliable so no need to confirm identity.

I remember fitting those floodlights to the signal number plates but I don't remember a handsignalman at the exit signal......

[RDNA]

I certainly recall that what I'm remembering involved floodlighting the number plate of the signal at the end of the authority, where I think there may've been another handsignalman, although I may be wrong, as in those days it could have been thought 'why would you need one?' if the signal was workable/working, if there was no ticket, and it could've been thought that the signalman/men correctly knowing which train was expected to next emerge was sufficiently reliable so no need to confirm identity.

I remember fitting those floodlights to the signal number plates but I don't remember a handsignalman at the exit signal......

I guess the floodlights were fitted some time prior to the commencement of "special working", when they started sending trains through the temporary block section they would, as John says, need a means of confirming that each train had left the section complete - possibly a 'Tail Lamp Man'.

[Fast Line Floyd]

I certainly recall that what I'm remembering involved floodlighting the number plate of the signal at the end of the authority, where I think there may've been another handsignalman, although I may be wrong, as in those days it could have been thought 'why would you need one?' if the signal was workable/working, if there was no ticket, and it could've been thought that the signalman/men correctly knowing which train was expected to next emerge was sufficiently reliable so no need to confirm identity.

I remember fitting those floodlights to the signal number plates but I don't remember a handsignalman at the exit signal......

I guess the floodlights were fitted some time prior to the commencement of "special working", when they started sending trains through the temporary block section they would, as John says, need a means of confirming that each train had left the section complete - possibly a 'Tail Lamp Man'.

A tail lamp man was used according to my memory, remember we are still back in the time of a few unfitted and partly fitted freight trains.

[StevieG]

Thanks all.
I'd forgotten about the need for tail lamp monitoring.

[S&TEngineer]

Thinking a bit more about it now (well it was some 40 years ago....) there might of been a 'Tail Lamp' man at the exit signal, but I'm sure that when I cab rode through one of the sections, signal sighting, that the ticket wasn't given up at the exit but was just thrown away by the driver?

[kbarber]

Thinking a bit more about it now (well it was some 40 years ago....) there might of been a 'Tail Lamp' man at the exit signal, but I'm sure that when I cab rode through one of the sections, signal sighting, that the ticket wasn't given up at the exit but was just thrown away by the driver?

I recall TBW (though it wasn't actually called that in the notice) instructions in the WON for significant resignalling works and, if I recall rightly, the ticket was indeed to be 'disposed of' after the train had passed through the affected section. This would've been mid- or late-80s I suspect. The signal numbers were laid down in the notice and the number plate of the last signal was to be illuminated. When I read of it, it always seemed to be for some job on the WCML.