Railway signalling discussion

Mixing mechanical and automatic signalling

British signalling of the past (UK, excepting Northern Ireland)

Re: Mixing mechanical and automatic signalling

Unread postby kbarber » Mon Aug 21, 2017 10:15 am

Interesting, in the 1959 layout, to see a directing distant (36) on the same post as 44, but 43 has just the one head with no directing information for 42/34 signal. Presumably it simply replicates the information previously given by semaphores but it seems curiously inconsistent for a c/l installation.
User avatar
Rest-day relief
Rest-day relief
Posts: 567
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:12 pm
Location: London

Re: Mixing mechanical and automatic signalling

Unread postby John Hinson » Mon Aug 21, 2017 11:08 am

I'm not sure on the policies or principles of the time but the same arrangement existed on the Up Main too so there was actually some form of consistency. The line speeds were pretty low here and it could be argued that splitting distants were barely necessary but I'm sure every effort was being made to keep traffic moving as freight traffic was very intense in those days.

At this time the Down distants were semaphore but years later when they were converted to colour-light different principles applied and a single distant cleared for both directions at the junction. Not too much of a big deal . . . except one route was electrified by then and the other not. The line speed may have been slow but not slow enough for a heavy freight to stop before it ran off the wires . . .

User avatar
John Hinson
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 6980
Joined: Thu Nov 8, 2007 1:13 pm
Location: at my computer


Return to Signalling - historical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests