Page 1 of 1
| Swale area signalling plan 15/10/2022 at 15:39 #148375 | |
Andy174
90 posts |
If its of interest to anyone for future use I've attached a copy of the 1959 re-signalling plan that covers Sittingbourne, Faversham & the Sheerness branch. Most of the diagram would still be relevant in the period up to 2015 although the loss of most of the freight flows in this area by the late 90's would have resulted in a lot of the ground frames etc being out of use but the diagram would be useful for any sim set in the 70's to 90's.
Post has attachments. Log in to view them. Log in to reply The following users said thank you: GeoffM, headshot119, 9pN1SEAp |
| Swale area signalling plan 17/10/2022 at 09:17 #148397 | |
|
kbarber
1712 posts |
I believe the Sheerness Branch was controlled by US-style CTC technology as a trial to see if it would be worth adopting over here, hence the reference to Field Stations. I suspect Beeching put paid to further installations (the one that was planned, around Beverly in Yorkshire, was overtaken by the Beeching closure). I suspect the rapid development of TDM technology that was happening at the same time then met all future needs. If the necessary additional information were to be found I can imagine 58050 having great fun making timetables for this area! Log in to reply |
| Swale area signalling plan 17/10/2022 at 10:58 #148399 | |
|
Sacro
1171 posts |
kbarber in post 148397 said:I believe the Sheerness Branch was controlled by US-style CTC technology as a trial to see if it would be worth adopting over here, hence the reference to Field Stations. I suspect Beeching put paid to further installations (the one that was planned, around Beverly in Yorkshire, was overtaken by the Beeching closure). I suspect the rapid development of TDM technology that was happening at the same time then met all future needs.I think it was planned for Selby - Market Weighton, I have some plans where it has been (badly) tippex'd out. Log in to reply |
| Swale area signalling plan 17/10/2022 at 15:14 #148402 | |
|
Andy174
90 posts |
If a sim was produced that coveed the Medway area & Maidstone branch as well this would be a very interesting area combined with Swale especially if a TT could be produced covering the mid to late 80's with the then various freight flows, just one TC faliure on the Island could be enough to throw the whole area into disarry!
Last edited: 17/10/2022 at 15:14 by Andy174 Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Swale area signalling plan 25/10/2022 at 12:46 #148462 | |
Izzy
44 posts |
The Sheerness branch was signalled by having remote interlockings (Swale, Queenborough, Sheerness) controlled by a system called "DC Multiplex" which was basically a very early form of FDM and was regarded as a non-Vital FDM System, but it was not a Reed FDM system. It was supplemented by GEC type 2000 Reed FDM for non-vital indications. Most of the type 2000 FDM was between (Sittingbourne) Middle Junction and Swale from memory, and it was the only place i had ever seen or even heard of it in my 35 years on the S&T - although i am sure there were other small schemes where it was employed. As for being made of US style CTC technology...it could well have been, although i haven't heard this before. I am not familiar with the remote control/indication systems in use in the US, but this could well be one of the earlier ones - seeing as the major players in signalling technology in the 50's and 60's were 2 or maybe 3 companies it is quite probable this system was adapted for many different operational environments. I remember Sittingbourne panel as being quite a fun one to operate - the SGE twist and push system had many quirks and inconsistencies that i won't go into here for the sake of brevity - suffice to say it was very easy to give the wrong aspect class (e.g. shunt vice main), or even a wrong route, if you didn't keep your wits about you! I never saw the "new" panel they put in to replace the orginal SGE one, so i can't say if they made the operation a little less prone to errors or not. I apologise to everyone for the deep teccy stuff in this post - i didn't explain it deeper as i didn't want to be typing forever...i just wanted to give a little deeper detail. I'm pretty sure that the idea behind FDM and how it works if you are interested is easy to google - although information on the specific types may be much harder to come by - a couple of the ones i worked on in my early career were obsolete even by the time i got to them, and training consisted of the local tech teling me what he had learned over the years! - but the basic principle should be easy to find. To address kbarber - TDM and FDM were pretty much complementary systems, in most places that used multiplex technology, you would find a mix of both. TDM generally provided links between Control Centres and remote Interlockings (many functions needed between 2 distinct geographical points), whereas FDM tended to be used for the stretches of automatic signals between interlockings (one or two functions every mile or so over a long distance)...There were very few places that only used one or other, and these tended to be the earlier schemes where the advantages of each type were still being explored. 2 notable exceptions being Saltley and Trent, which were together comprised a unique idea to use only FDM with NO remote interlockings by AGS (later GEC). All of the interlockings on both schemes were at the control centre, and every single point machine or signal head was directly controlled from either Tent or Saltley relay rooms. Because there were no remote interlockings, there were no TDM's either...i suspect this was beacuse GEC didn't have a decent TDM system at the time. so they came up with a way of using FDM to do both jobs... The reference to field stations in British signalling generally refers to one end of a remote control system, not what it is connected to. TDM's are referred to as variously Master/Slave end, Master/Field end, Local/Remote, Control/Field end, amongst others. The field end will still be an interlocking, but one which contains the field end of a TDM system. When i first set out on my career, i used to think there there were hard and fast design principles and terminology that never changed which were completely standard across the railway. Now i have retired, and i spend my time trying to expalain it to others, i realise that there are way more exceptions to the rules than one would expect...oh well, back to a nice relaxing 1977 rush hour on King's Cross before my next comment/essay, LOL Last edited: 25/10/2022 at 13:08 by Izzy Reason: None given Log in to reply The following users said thank you: dhouk, GeoffM, postal, Jan, Hawk777 |
| Swale area signalling plan 28/10/2022 at 15:20 #148512 | |
|
0D07
63 posts |
The CTC Schemes of the 1960s the only plans draw up into great detail was the York to Beverley Line via Market Weighton. Hull Wilmington Jn to Hornsea and Withernsea, York to Harrogate. The Selby to Market Weighton line was never included in the plans as by 1961 it was already earmarked for closure by that point and the other 3 was abandoned as part of the Modernisation of British Railways plan. The only 3 of the plans that I have seen drawn in great detail with Signal, Point and T.C. Number and control tables was the York to Beverley lines plan. Thanks, 0D07 Log in to reply |
| Swale area signalling plan 29/10/2022 at 09:38 #148517 | |
|
Sacro
1171 posts |
0D07 in post 148512 said:The CTC Schemes of the 1960s the only plans draw up into great detail was the York to Beverley Line via Market Weighton. Hull Wilmington Jn to Hornsea and Withernsea, York to Harrogate. The Selby to Market Weighton line was never included in the plans as by 1961 it was already earmarked for closure by that point and the other 3 was abandoned as part of the Modernisation of British Railways plan.Can you still get hold of the diagrams and control tables? Log in to reply |
| Swale area signalling plan 30/10/2022 at 16:43 #148539 | |
|
0D07
63 posts |
Sacro, The documents are in a mates private collection and I do not think that he would be willing to lend them out. Thanks 0D07 Log in to reply |