Making a Start - The Peak District Midland / Monsal Dale pre 1903

[Armchair Modeller]

The bicycle looks Edwardian and positively gleams in the photo, so may be quite new.

[Le Corbusier]

The post is situated around midway between the home signal and the trailing crossover to the goods yard. Which seems a little odd.

Photos I have seen of tall MR shunting signals had a crossbar fitted.

Whatever its purpose it does seem unusual. May be worth asking the experts in the Midland Railway Society or on the Signal Box Forum http://forum.signalbox.org/index.php

EDIT

also just noticed there are no shunting signals at all on the other photos - not even where you might normally expect them. Just wondering if normal shunting was signalled by hand signals from the signalman?

This is some earlier advice I received from Dave Harris at the Midland Study Centre

There are two ways of looking at this: The first thing to say is that the layout at Monsal Dale is absolutely classic Midland… the small goods yard on one side of the station with the crossover forming a single slip to allow vehicles to set-back into the yard or 'across the road', and a separate trailing connection to allow engines to run round. I am quite sure that the layout would have been like that throughout its existence. The signal box would control the points within relatively close range (there was a maximum distance over which the Board of Trade would allow points worked by rodding to be from the signal box but off the top of my head, I don’t recall what it was). Clearly the ‘outlet’ from the siding was beyond this distance and so a “stage” worked by the guard of the train, but locked from the signal box, was provided. Again, very common.

Note also the complete absence of ground shunting signals; movements would be hand signalled… again, classic Midland.

At this point he was unaware of the shunt signal shown in the picture.

ext notes that pre 1904, standard ground/dwarf signal was of rotating type, cylindrical, with red disc, one quarter of body green with a green glass for 'off' (as we see in pic), the remainder white -also just discernible.

Wouldn't this mean that the shunt signal would have been in use as shown in my pre 1905 period?

[Armchair Modeller]

I'm not an expert, but given there were definitely no other shunting signals at the station, can we be sure that is was what this signal was for?

See https://signalbox.org/signals/crossbar.htm for examples of the use of similar signals (though with a crossbar) for warning of quarry blasting etc. for example. It might have had some specific purpose unique to this particular location.

Judging by the signalman's dress and the bicycle, the photo could easily be within your period, I would have thought.

Edit

I think Dave Harris means that semaphore ground signals weren't introduced until c.1904. It would take a long, long while for all of the old type to be replaced.

[Noel]

Semaphore ground signals were commonly referred to as 'Independent' ground signals, because they were operated by the signalman using a separate lever, controlled by the locking, and by detector slides on the point. The rotating ones were non-independent, as they were operated by the point rodding, and rotated when the point was changed [and could rotate when the point had failed to move properly]. This one has, apparently, a counterweight on the post, which seems to indicate, therefore, that it is wire operated. That, and the absence of any other point indicators, does suggest that it is a special purpose installation. Earlier photos show a sign for a "Spar Mine" above the station, so a blasting signal seems to be a possibility.

[Noel]

I think Dave Harris means that semaphore ground signals weren't introduced until c.1904. It would take a long, long while for all of the old type to be replaced.

One survived at Wenvoe on the Barry Railway until at least 1964, although it and the linked point were no longer in use by then.

[Le Corbusier]

I sent the picture to Dave and this was his response...

The post your refer to also caused some excitement as this is a quite rarely photographed feature -- and even less so in such sharp detail. It was worked from a lever on the stage at the far end of the Down siding, which would cause it to rotate through 90 degrees presenting the ‘disc' (and lamp) we can see facing the running line, toward the signal box. This would be the indication to the signalman that the guard or shunter at the lever stage wanted it unbolting. The indicator would be returned to the position shown in the photograph when the stage could be rebolted. It was later replaced with a circular brass disc about 5 inches across mounted on a flap in the signal box. The rodding from the lever stage acting in the same way, causing the disc to move upwards and face the signalman.

[Armchair Modeller]

Funnily enough I almost suggested this earlier, as the photo suggests that the signal wire leads away from the signal box, not towards it.

It is amazing the number of queries a simple station like Monsal Dale can raise!

The mineral workings were a mine, by the way rather than a quarry, so blasting would be unlikely

https://www.flickr.com/photos/53774935@N00/2692079776/

[billbedford]

Except the wagons are loaded with limestone not lead ore.

[Alan Turner]

The mine was for fluorspa. It can be seen in the photos up the hill from the station.

Regards

Alan

[Armchair Modeller]

Except the wagons are loaded with limestone not lead ore.

Sorry Bill, why do you say that?

The mine was originally for lead ore, but Fluorspar was the product extracted from the time the railway arrived up to the 1930s. They even went through the old lead mining spoil heaps, as fluorspar and other minerals had previously been discarded. There was no limestone quarry in the area to send limestone out from Monsal Dale station - and I don't understand why limestone would be delivered to such a remote station in such quantities.

The load possibly looks very 'white' because it is a very bright sunny day?

[Le Corbusier]

The load possibly looks very 'white' because it is a very bright sunny day?

Derbyshire Fluorspar looks pretty white in its raw form (or at least the loads that came from the Stoney Middleton Quarry

mineral-sample-of-fluorsparfluorite-from-derbyshire-DXF3TX.jpg

[John Palmer]

I sent the picture to Dave and this was his response...

The post your refer to also caused some excitement as this is a quite rarely photographed feature -- and even less so in such sharp detail. It was worked from a lever on the stage at the far end of the Down siding, which would cause it to rotate through 90 degrees presenting the ‘disc' (and lamp) we can see facing the running line, toward the signal box. This would be the indication to the signalman that the guard or shunter at the lever stage wanted it unbolting. The indicator would be returned to the position shown in the photograph when the stage could be rebolted. It was later replaced with a circular brass disc about 5 inches across mounted on a flap in the signal box. The rodding from the lever stage acting in the same way, causing the disc to move upwards and face the signalman.

I can't make out details of the mechanism that rotates the shaft/disc/lamp, but, so far as I can see from the position of the balance weight, the photograph shows that the lever on the stage has been reversed, yet the disc is facing the track rather than the box. Could it be that the disc represents the 'normal' aspect of the signal, and that whatever different aspect is being presented to the box in the photograph represents the 'clear'/'please unbolt' condition?

[billbedford]

Except the wagons are loaded with limestone not lead ore.

Sorry Bill, why do you say that?

Lead ore is much denser than coal. So standard mineral wagons loaded with ore, as in the photos, would be grossly over loaded.

[Armchair Modeller]

OK, but we know for sure it is not lead ore as it is well documented that only fluorspar was mined there in railway days.

[Le Corbusier]

Except the wagons are loaded with limestone not lead ore.

Sorry Bill, why do you say that?

Lead ore is much denser than coal. So standard mineral wagons loaded with ore, as in the photos, would be grossly over loaded.

How much mined/quarried fluorspar could a mineral waggon take as a load? Is freshly extracted spar rather than refined less dense? If limestone ... would one assume it was ballast? Bill Hudson references documents relating to the fluorspar being shipped out by rail so it would be interesting to bottom this out.

[Armchair Modeller]

According to http://www.aqua-calc.com, Fluorspar is fractionally heavier than limestone.

3.18 gram per (cubic centimeter) or 1.84 ounce per (cubic inch) vs Limestone weigh(s) 2.71 gram per (cubic centimeter) or 1.57 ounce per (cubic inch) -

That is solid. The ore would be in lump form in the wagons with air gaps between the bits.

For comparison, Anthracite solid weigh(s) 1.51 gram per (cubic centimeter) or 0.87 ounce per (cubic inch).

EDIT

Should have added that Galena (Lead ore) is...

weigh(s) 7.5 gram per (cubic centimeter) or 4.34 ounce per (cubic inch)

Way, way heavier than Fluorspar.

The difference in weight between coal and Fluorspar could be the reason for different height wagons, reinforcing the idea that the 2 tall ones at the back of the siding are for coal and the 2 leading ones Fluorspar.

[Noel]

On the figures given, Fluorspar is over twice the density of Anthracite. So if a wooden mineral carrying its rated load of coal was almost full, it should only be about half full if the load was Fluorspar, unless it was very seriously overloaded, to the point of being dangerous.

[Le Corbusier]

On the figures given, Fluorspar is over twice the density of Anthracite. So if a wooden mineral carrying its rated load of coal was almost full, it should only be about half full if the load was Fluorspar, unless it was very seriously overloaded, to the point of being dangerous.

would the same also be true of limestone ... based on the figures quoted?

[Armchair Modeller]

All things being equal, the same wagon could only carry a maximum of 47.5% the same volume of Fluorspar, 55.7% the same volume of Limestone and 20.1% the same volume of Lead ore, compared to Anthracite.

Different wagons could be rated for different tonnages though. In a photo like the one of Monsal Dale, we may not be looking at wagons with identical maximum tonnages. I guess the rear two would probably be the same, but not necessarily the front two.

[Le Corbusier]

does this mean that the wagons themselves would be rated such that they were suitable for the given load ... or would the quarry be responsible for weighing the load and filling the wagon accordingly?

[Armchair Modeller]

Goods wagons had a tare weight and a maximum load painted on the sides, like this example.

W1.jpg

At a weighbridge, they would weigh the wagon with load then take the tare figure from the total weight to work out the actual weight of the load.

The Fluorspar may well have been weighed at the mine site, before being loaded onto carts. Monsal Dale station didn't have a weighbridge. Whoever loaded the wagons would probably know from experience roughly how much to put in each wagon. The railway company would have weighed them somewhere en-route, I think.

Wagons could potentially be provided by the mine company, the customer or the railway company. Sometimes, the quarry company and the customer would be one and the same, of course. If there was regular Fluorspar traffic for one customer, they might have a pool of wagons specifically for this traffic. They would be sent empty from the customer to Monsal Dale and returned full to the ironworks (or whatever) specified. Alternatively, the supplier could arrange for the Midland Railway to provide wagons for any traffic as required.

That is just a brief summary - not a comprehensive description!

[Le Corbusier]

Interesting

I wonder if there was a specific wagon which could be completely filled by fluorspar as seen in the siding ... I assume so as I am certain I have seen ballast wagons fully filled and your figures suggest no great difference between the two loads.

I will see if I can track down any historic photos of fluorspar loaded wagons

[Noel]

In the 1960s, 16T mineral wagons passed to the Engineer's Dept. for carrying spent ballast. There was a rash of derailments due to overloading - the people on the ground at relaying sites filled the wagons, which put them well over the 16 ton load limit. In the end they had to cut holes half-way up the sides to show the maximum load it was safe for them to carry when so used. Specialist ballast wagons, such as Grampus, were much lower.

At the turn of the 20th century large capacity open wagons were very, very rare. Even for coal traffic there were probably significantly more 10T or smaller wagons than 12T ones. The normal stone carrying wagon was 3 planks high. It is difficult to be sure, but the three high wagons appear to be 6 planks high, which would make them 10T capacity at most if they are standard RCH design. All are mineral wagons as the top plank is continuous. The lower one is probably a 4 plank 10T traffic open as it appears that the top plank is not continuous. The main point to note is that RCH coal wagons could not be back-loaded with Fluorspar with the wagon full. Specialist wagons capable of carrying a heavier load could have been produced, I would think, but this looks like just a random selection of minerals and opens, so it seems reasonable to assume normal capacities. I suspect that the loads are all coal.

[Armchair Modeller]

In 1889, the Railway Clearing House started to standardise the design of mineral and goods wagons. This article may be of interest

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mineral_wagon

The period you are modelling is between 1889 and the stricter standards introduced in 1909. It would have taken a long time for changes to be fully implemented, so don't assume all wagons around the end of C19 were to RCH standards. I doubt it would be cost effective to design new wagons specifically for Fluorspar traffic.

The Butterley Company had its own wagon works and built wagons for other customers as well as for its own extensive fleet. If the 2 wagons at the front of the siding in Monsal Dale are Butterley Company-owned wagons, they could just be old wagons repaired, strengthened and reused for the Fluorspar traffic when larger wagons came into use for coal - or just whatever was available at the time.

Getting an exact match would be challenging, I suspect

[Noel]

The RCH specifications first appeared in 1887 as Wikipedia states. The 1909 version did not require hydraulic buffers or oil axle boxes AFAIK.

Although not everyone used the latest [or any] RCH spec when building wagons, they were adhered to, to a large extent, because any Company could refuse traffic if it didn't approve of the vehicle. The RCH specs provided an assurance of minimum standards. They also made repairs simpler. By the grouping any wagon not showing compliance with RCH designs or better would not be acceptable, i.e. no company would register it as fit to run. The MR wagon might well not be an RCH design, as most companies had their own designs. Nevertheless, they would normally be a reasonable equivalent in terms of materials and construction.