Signalling at Bodmin (General)

[Jeremy Good]

As has been mentioned elsewhere on the Forum, I am building a model of Bodmin (General) station in 1955. The layout is reasonably true to prototype up to the Beacon Road bridge over the station throat.

I am beginning to think about the signalling for the station now that the trackwork is nearly complete and nearly all working. Recent study of published photographs of the station has shown that the signalling arrangements changed at some point between 1952 and 1960.

It appears that in the early 1950's the signalling was largely square posted GWR signals with a signal situated in the V between the junction of the Bodmin Road and Boscarne Junction lines and quite close to the junction which protected the mainline (from Bodmin Road) from the branch (Boscarne Junction).

In later photos that signal has disappeared and the remaining signals replaced by more modern tubular posted equipment. I suspect that this means that the signal protecting the junction was moved to the other side of the bridge and away from the point where the lines meet. There was a crash in the early 1960's at this junction as the Pannier Tank on the Southern service from Padstow ran into a clay train that was being shunted. This may have been the catalyst for the change.

There is a published photo dated March 1957 that appears to show the original signalling arrangement in situ at the station and, although this implies that the original arrangement was correct for my timeframe, I'm keen to try and track down some more evidence to support this single photograph. As such I'd be grateful if anyone could provide or point me in the right direction for any information confirming when the station was re-signalled?

Thanks in advance.

Jeremy

[Tim V]

There used to be information like this on the SRS website - it seems to have been removed.

[John Palmer]

I expect you will have taken into account the contents of the report upon the 7 December 1961 accident that you mention - if not it can be accessed at https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/MoT_Bodmin1961.pdf. It includes a plan showing signal positions at the date of the accident and states that:

"The {Wadebridge line Home] signal used to be on the right hand side of the line close to the bridge but it was re-sited in 1955, when it was renewed, on the left hand side and further away from the station. It is now 251 yards from the signal box and about 100 yards from the fouling point of the junction."

The report recommended re-siting of the Wadebridge line Home to a position apparently similar to that which it occupied until 1955 in order to impove its visibility to the driver of an approaching train, the 1955 repositioning evidently being regarded as a retrograde step. Does the reference to renewal in 1955 imply that a tubular posted signal took the place of whatever form of construction this signal had previously taken?

[bécasse]

The (MoT accident) report recommended re-siting of the Wadebridge line Home to a position apparently similar to that which it occupied until 1955 in order to impove its visibility to the driver of an approaching train, the 1955 repositioning evidently being regarded as a retrograde step. Does the reference to renewal in 1955 imply that a tubular posted signal took the place of whatever form of construction this signal had previously taken?

A renewal in 1955 with the post moved almost certainly implies that the newly-sited signal was mounted on a tubular steel post. It seems likely that the remainder of the signalling alterations also date from this period, with the work either being done simultaneously as a "scheme" (was the locking and/or frame renewed, I wonder) or subsequently because the work on this one signal had shown that the remainder required replacement too. There was a lot of signalling renewal done throughout BR in the mid-1950s, effectively catch up from the war and subsequent austerity period when only absolutely essential work was possible.

I would question the 1957 date in that photo caption, I have learnt from experience to approach caption dating on the basis that it is wrong until it can be proved right.

[Jeremy Good]

Thanks both for your comments.

I had seen the plan from the accident report but not the actual report. It is interesting to note the comments that the station was resignalled in 1955.

I was rather wary of the date on the 1957 photo but I am struggling to find photos around 1955 to prove the position.

I think I’d rather model the earlier arrangement as it keeps the branch signal on scene so perhaps picking an early date in 1955 means I can get away with it!!

More digging needed to confirm.

Jeremy

[ianpenberth]

Hi Jeremy,

All these years of looking at photos of Bodmin and I'd never twigged that the bracket signal by the goods yard point had been replaced! After 27/5/61 and before 7/64 if Peter Gray's and CRS's photo captions are to be believed.

AFAIK, until at least the time of the accident in 1961, all the running signals were square post to the earlier pattern apart from the possible exception of the Wadebridge line home already mentioned. Can we guess therefore that their positions were unaltered during whatever resignalling took place in the 50s?

[Jeremy Good]

Ian

I hadn’t spotted the changes until I started working out what components I needed to build the signals.

As far as I can see all the signals, apart from the branch one, were replaced like for like. It’s just the branch one that seems to be causing me some confusion…

Jeremy

[Noel]

As far as I can see all the signals, apart from the branch one, were replaced like for like.

I have Peter Gray's "West Country Railways", which includes two photos of Bodmin North, dated to 10/9/1960 and 27/5/61 [the one referred to by Ian Penberth, I presume], the dates being taken from the photographer's contemporary notebooks, according to the Introduction, now held at Didcot. Both were taken from the road overbridge just beyond the junction. The first shows the home by the goods shed, the bracket at the junction, and the home over shunt signal by the bridge. The first two signals are unquestionably the original wooden post ones, and the one in the distance, by the goods shed, appears to have a white rather than grey post, so is also a wooden post. The arms are more difficult to judge, but the bracket, probably, and the home over shunt, definitely, still have wooden arms. The second photo only shows the bracket and the post by the goods shed, but both are white and the bracket is again still wooden; the loco in shot is a grubby 45xx with the later BR crest.

There had clearly been no BR WR replacement of any of these three signals by 1961, as any such replacements would have been in contemporary style, even if done 'like for like' in terms of function. The bracket is, from its appearance, quite possibly the original dating from the 1888 opening of the line to Boscarne. The implication would seem to be that there was no general replacement, only replacement of those signals either moved or unfit for further use.

[ianpenberth]

until at least the time of the accident in 1961, all the running signals were square post

Never assume! Would you believe it, I've just found another photo of the accident which clearly shows the tubular post replacement for the bracket signal in situ. So erected after 27/5/61 and before 7/12/61.

The accident report says only that signal 25 was re-sited, not a general resignalling.

Photos taken at the time of the accident show clearly the original pattern shunt signal (with the big 'S') for example, so I assume (ahem!) that it is unchanged since the thirties at least.