Bellingham North Tyne

Discussions of the prototypes and how to model them. Show us how you do it.
John Palmer
Posts: 825
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 11:09 pm

Bellingham North Tyne

Postby John Palmer » Tue Dec 28, 2021 12:43 pm

Tony Wilkins' thread on turnout construction recently featured a discussion of pointwork at Bellingham which developed into an examination of the layout and signalling of this station. The thread featured an image of the Diagram of Signals at https://www.scalefour.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=5728&p=88168#p88163, which was a bit too indistinct for my taste so, rather than deviate excessively from the subject matter of Tony's thread, I thought it might assist to provide in a new thread a reworked version of the Diagram, as reproduced below:
Bellingham Signalling Diagram.jpg
In my version I've sought to maintain the differentiation between miniature arms and the drop flap shunt signals characteristic of NBR practice, and have shown 20 Shunt as an elevated signal, as can be seen at https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishswissernie/36234005273/in/album-72157686232283623/. No doubt this was to assist sighting of the signal from an engine at the far end of the shunting siding.

The putative spring points discussed in Tony's thread (adjacent to 9 Points) I have merely shown as being ground worked (I think there is a railway sketching convention for spring points, but could not track it down). The question of whether these were spring points or not found advocates on both sides so showing them on the diagram as ground worked may not be the last word on the subject but at least differentiates them from points worked from the frame in the signal box.

I have assumed that 10 Shunt reads to the main line from both of the loops, having been unable to see whether it was so marked on the diagrams previously posted.

Hope this assists any further discussion of the subject there may be.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Noel
Posts: 1975
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby Noel » Tue Dec 28, 2021 3:43 pm

I have been looking at the logic of your diagram, John, to see what conclusions could be drawn from it. I assume, incidentally, that 4 is the Up main starter, and 11/19 are the loop up starter and loop to shunting siding respectively. The layout seems to assume that shunting is normally by Up trains only, which can theoretically access the loop from both ends. 7 permits entry at the down end, for which two reasons can be offered. First is direct access to the loop by an arriving Up train; second is access to the loading bank siding for collection of a vehicle or vehicles. If both reasons are valid [I can't think of any other need for the layout shown], the point in question cannot be sprung.
Regards
Noel

John Palmer
Posts: 825
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 11:09 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby John Palmer » Tue Dec 28, 2021 6:12 pm

Noel,

The pull list posted by John (BorderCounties) in Tony Wilkins' thread does indeed indicate that 4 is Up Starting, 11 is Loop Siding to Main and 19 is Loop Siding to Shunting Siding.

Clearly the signalling installation was intended to accommodate movements to and from the loops at the Tarset end as well as the Reedsmouth end. Photographs show that the normal lie of the turnout adjacent to 9 Points is to the Loop Siding, so if it had a sprung switch a facing movement over it to the loading bank would not be possible unless there was a lever to override the spring and hold the switch reversed.

There's a picture at http://disused-stations.org.uk/b/bellingham/bellingham(ee_smith1960s)old2.jpg in which can be seen the distinctive North British point levers used to operate the turnouts into the loading bank and dock roads at the Reedsmouth end. Resplendent with fresh white paint it can be seen that these are quite bulky items, so if a lever of this type was installed at the Tarset end to operate the switch into the loading bank you might expect to see some evidence of it in photographs. I haven't seen any such evidence, but its absence is inconclusive as a lever of the 'concealed' pattern of which Martin Wynne has supplied an illustration might have been used instead. Alternatively, this was indeed a sprung switch – I don't see such an arrangement causing significant operational inconvenience.

Quite a high proportion of the pictures I have seen show Bellingham in the years in which it had become the BCR's northern terminus, meaning that all freight traffic arrived as a Down train and left as an Up. For example see https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishswissernie/36901419621/in/album-72157686232283623/lightbox/, which is carrying the lamp appropriate to a Down Class K. Although shunting the layout may have been more conveniently accomplished from the Reedsmouth end making use of the Shunting Siding, it was a fairly trivial matter to detach a Down train's locomotive and run it round to the Reedsmouth end for this purpose, and for this reason I'm reluctant to share the assumption that shunting was normally by Up trains only. On this point it would be instructive to see a freight timetable.

BorderCounties
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 6:19 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby BorderCounties » Tue Dec 28, 2021 7:14 pm

John, Noel

I'll stick my oar in again here! From 1949 the only timetabled freight on the BCR section was a pick up goods from Riccarton (d. 07:20am) which ran untimed to Hexham then returning when ready. The photos featuring freight trains on the Border Counties line which appear in Ernie Brack's album are from the period after 1st September 1958 i.e. after closure of the BCR as a through route leaving only the section from Reedsmouth to Bellingham. The weekly freight was then worked from Morpeth using North Blyth motive power - usually J21, J25 or J27. The engines appear to have been turned at Reedsmouth on the outward journey so are shown running towards Bellingham chimney first. After 11th November 1963, the Rothbury branch and the Woodburn-Bellingham section were closed, leaving Woodburn as the railhead.

Incidently, there are a selection of working timetables at the end of the photos in Ernie's album.

Even more incidently, under the North Eastern Region nomenclature signal 3 would be Up Home No 1, signal 4 Up Home No 2, and signal 5 Up Starting and would have a white band on the lever, which would also be locked until a tablet was released from the tablet machine.

John, you haven't got the wiggly bits at the ends of your SB diagram!

John Palmer
Posts: 825
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 11:09 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby John Palmer » Wed Dec 29, 2021 1:08 am

Hadn't noticed those timetables, so that was helpful. Looking at the timetable apparently dating from 1947, I see a 9.00 Up Class D from Riccarton that seems to be matched by an 8.20 Down Class D from Hexham. The asterisk convention is not one with which I'm familiar; does it serve to indicate an indeterminate timing? If these freights are shunting en route on an 'as required' basis, presumably the requisite meet would have to be arranged by Control on an entirely ad hoc basis?

My greater familiarity with West of England nomenclature has shown me up with my reference to a Starting signal that should have been described as a Home. Many thanks too for the tip that the section signal was released by the tablet.

Now that I've tracked down the appropriate symbol I've been able to set up a modified diagram showing the spring point, if such it was. I've also amended it to show the tablet release of the relevant starting signals:
Bellingham Signalling Diagram Mod 1.jpg
Missed the wiggly bits on the diagram? ¿Qué? :?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

BorderCounties
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 6:19 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby BorderCounties » Sat Jan 08, 2022 11:58 am

OK, I think I know what has gone on in the dim and distant past.

Levers 1 and 18 were the Up and Down distant signals before they were both "Fixed at Caution". From the numbering of the other two spare levers (2 and 6), I would suggest that 6 originally controlled the connection to the dock line from the Tarset end of the loop line and signalled by lever 2. The subsequent alteration removed this direct connection leaving the dock line worked only from the Reedsmouth end. The turnout may have been clipped for the direction into the loop but just as likely, given North Eastern practice, is the presence of a large piece of wood between the open switch and the running rail. I've seen it done quite a few times.

John

John Palmer
Posts: 825
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 11:09 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby John Palmer » Sat Jan 08, 2022 1:44 pm

That certainly makes sense to me as regards the distants. I couldn't see any good reason for these to have become fixed; why, at a wayside station such as Bellingham, would you not have provided the means for affording trains a clear run through if they weren't booked to call?

As to working into the road adjacent to what I have labelled the loading bank, I think you are suggesting that originally the post carrying Home 1 (lever 3) also carried a pair of subs reading separately into the Loop Siding and the Loading Bank road, rather than just the one (lever 7). So if what I have marked as a spring point was worked by lever 6 (along with the trap tongue on the Loading Bank road), and movements over this from the Tarset end were controlled by a subsidiary arm on the Home 1 post worked by lever 2, would you not also need an additional shunt signal to control exit from the Loading Bank road in the same way as Shunt 10 controls exit from the Loop Siding? That would require an additional lever in the frame and still leave you without any spares.

Alan Turner
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:24 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby Alan Turner » Fri Jan 21, 2022 9:47 am

Sorry to be late to the party but what is the purpose of 4?

19 gives access to the head shunt, 11to the main line and 5 is the section signal.

So why 4? I could understand if 4 were a section signal but it's not.

regards

Alan

User avatar
grovenor-2685
Forum Team
Posts: 3918
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby grovenor-2685 » Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:53 am

Hi Alan,
4 would be the up starter from the platform, as for 16 on the down.
Needed to hold trains in the platform while moves are made over 12 reverse.
Regards
Keith
Grovenor Sidings

BorderCounties
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 6:19 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby BorderCounties » Sat Jan 22, 2022 2:25 pm

Signal in question is here - https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishswissernie/36234005273/in/album-72157686232283623/. A lot of the signals on the BCR were sited thus.

John, to answer your question about Bellingham's distant signals fixed at caution - all of the block posts on the Border Counties (and the Wansbeck and Rothbury branches) had their distants fixed for the simple reason that token exchanges took place at low speed e.g. 6mph at Woodburn.

I doubt the good burghers of Bellingham thought of their station as "wayside" - it was the highest population centre between Hexham and Hawick!

John Palmer
Posts: 825
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 11:09 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby John Palmer » Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:04 pm

About the fixing of distants due to low speed token exhanges, I imagine that the vast majority of trains over the BCR actually stopped at each block post where such exchanges took place, so that one involving a non-stopper was exceptional. Do I correctly recall there being a freight conveying significant quantities of beer from Duddingston that represented one such exception? And were speed maxima for token exchanges specifIcally prescribed on a station-by station basis?

For comparison, the S&D's Branch between Evercreech and Highbridge retained worked distants throughout (even Highbridge C's Up Distant, 130 yards in rear of the home signal to which it applied), notwithstanding the fact that all tablet/token/train staff exchanges were by hand. A contrast to the S&D's Bath to Bournemouth route where the Whitaker apparatus mades exchanges feasible at up to 60 mph – clearly a superior form of single line working!

Bellingham, highest centre of population between Hexham and Hawick: the Megacentre Of The Universe As We Know It... :P

User avatar
grovenor-2685
Forum Team
Posts: 3918
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby grovenor-2685 » Thu Feb 03, 2022 3:24 pm

John Palmer wrote: A contrast to the S&D's Bath to Bournemouth route where the Whitaker apparatus mades exchanges feasible at up to 60 mph – clearly a superior form of single line working!

Always struck me as asking for trouble! Essentially the safety of token working relies, among other things, on the driver making sure he has the correct token. When is is collected in a nice leather pouch in the token exchanger at 60 the temptation to just assume its the correct one and carry on regardless must be quite high. Accidents from this seem to have been minimal, however. I wonder how often a wrong token caused a panic stop? Not something that would neccessarily appear in the records.
Regards
Keith
Grovenor Sidings

User avatar
Noel
Posts: 1975
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby Noel » Thu Feb 03, 2022 3:55 pm

grovenor-2685 wrote:Essentially the safety of token working relies, among other things, on the driver making sure he has the correct token. When is is collected in a nice leather pouch in the token exchanger at 60 the temptation to just assume its the correct one and carry on regardless must be quite high


The Midland and Great Northern Joint also used the Whittaker exchangers, and various Scottish lines used something similar. But many manual exchanges also used pouches, e.g. for Tyers tablets and Webb miniature staffs. I suspect that, as even on Whittaker equipped lines most exchanges would have been manual, it was probably automatic for the crew to examine the tablet, however it arrived on the loco, which is, after all, what the rules required. There are tales, though, from the S&D of tablets missing the loco exchanger and disappearing down the embankment, sometimes never to be found...
Regards
Noel

John Palmer
Posts: 825
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 11:09 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby John Palmer » Fri Feb 04, 2022 12:02 am

I've heard of only one occasion on the Dorset where the pouch was assumed to contain a tablet when the signalman had not, in fact, inserted it so that it was carried empty through the section (Corfe Mullen to Broadstone). Disciplinary action was taken against the driver, although, as was customary, it was his fireman who had actually conducted the exchange. Since it was a driver's responsibility to ensure that he was in possession of the correct tablet for the section he was entering, and failure to do so was liable to result in dismissal, he had a powerful incentive to instil into his fireman the importance of checking the incoming tablet and reporting it as being correct. Although the Whitaker exchanger, properly maintained, was a remarkably reliable equipment, there were inevitably also occasions when a pick-up was missed and this, with one exception of which I am aware (also resulting in disciplinary action), would lead to the train being immediately brought to a stand so that the crew could search for the dropped pouch and the vital tablet it contained. That was why fireman were taught to watch the progress of the exchange so intently.

Taking up the point at which Noel has hinted, a pouch containing a tablet looks the same whether it arrives on the engine at 6 mph or 60, so I see no reason to think that an exchange at speed per se increased the likelihood that the incoming tablet would be assumed to be correct – the more so since the fireman not the driver dealt with the exchange, so making the exercise one in which both footplatemen had an incentive to get it right.

Alan Turner
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:24 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby Alan Turner » Mon Feb 14, 2022 8:41 pm

grovenor-2685 wrote:
John Palmer wrote: A contrast to the S&D's Bath to Bournemouth route where the Whitaker apparatus mades exchanges feasible at up to 60 mph – clearly a superior form of single line working!

Always struck me as asking for trouble! Essentially the safety of token working relies, among other things, on the driver making sure he has the correct token. When is is collected in a nice leather pouch in the token exchanger at 60 the temptation to just assume its the correct one and carry on regardless must be quite high. Accidents from this seem to have been minimal, however. I wonder how often a wrong token caused a panic stop? Not something that would neccessarily appear in the records.


Ameliorated somewhat by, probably, not being able to pull the section signal without the correct token being released.

Advantage of the Tyer's No.9 in that the token is clearly visible at all times.

regards

Alan

User avatar
Noel
Posts: 1975
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby Noel » Mon Feb 14, 2022 10:13 pm

Alan Turner wrote:Ameliorated somewhat by, probably, not being able to pull the section signal without the correct token being released.


Which wouldn't stop the signalman handing over an empty pouch, having left the token by the machine...
Regards
Noel

Alan Turner
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:24 pm

Re: Bellingham North Tyne

Postby Alan Turner » Tue Feb 15, 2022 8:39 am

Noel wrote:
Alan Turner wrote:Ameliorated somewhat by, probably, not being able to pull the section signal without the correct token being released.


Which wouldn't stop the signalman handing over an empty pouch, having left the token by the machine...


Yes but as the token is out of the machine then a token cannot be removed from the other end. So as long as the signalman does not put the token back then the train will be safe. Of course if he does all bets are off.

regards

Alan


Return to “Signals and Control Systems”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ClaudeBot and 2 guests