This is the original forum of the Bristol Railway Archive that existed between 2003 and 2013. I finally rescued it after it seemed unrecoverable after a large crash. I have made it available for viewing. It is locked, all posts to the new version please!
Use this forum to talk about the railways in and around Bristol, or for any off-topic stuff you want to share. Also request photos and information that you are missing.
Ian L Jamieson wrote:Thank you, stationcat, for putting me in the picture. I made the mistaken assumption that there could only ever be one token for any given stretch of single line.
On a significant line it was common to set the units at either end up with 20 tokens - 10 at each end. Electrical locking over the signalbox bell wires meant once one was taken out all the others were locked in. There was also an interlck that you couldn't clear the starting signal unless all the tokens were in, and when you cleared that it locked the machine at the other end as well.
A predecessor system was "token and ticket", where there was only one actual staff but a series of coloured tickets for each section to be given instead to the first of a sequence of trains. The tickets were kept in a locked box in the signalbox which could only be opened with a key on the token, and it was then written out for the train in question and handed to the driver, part of which involved actually showing the token as well as proof that it was at this end.
Single line working always seemed to fascinate members of the public and I've heard some amusing moments over time, mostly on the DMU to Minehead in the last years of that line in the late 1960s. Two old ladies sat at the front watched the handover, one said to the other "we can't go until the stationmaster gives the driver that lollipop". The best though was father and small child watching the same process. "What's that dad?". "Ah, that's to make sure there isn't another train coming the other way. If there is, then our driver has to go over to the other driver and hit him over the head with it".
Bill wrote:There was also an interlock that you couldn't clear the starting signal unless all the tokens were in, and when you cleared that it locked the machine at the other end as well.
Nearly 40 years ago I did a bit of signal training on the Festiniog line. Whilst at Minffordd I committed the cardinal sin of giving the driver of a train awaiting departure the appropriate miniature train staff before clearing the signal (which at that time was simply a stop/go board hence no interlocking). My mistake was highlighted even more to me when a signal-savvy passenger on the train shouted out 'Remember Abermule!' as I was walking back to the station office. I didn't do it again!
I worked the Tytherington branch back in the mid 80's. At Yate the ground frame was operated by an Annett's key, released by Bristol panel.
Once a train was in clear on the incoming road at Yate, the ground frame was locked up and the key returned to its machine. We then requested a token for the single line to Tytherington. At the quarry there was a loop where trains were loaded. Once enough wagons had been loaded and the entire train was in the loop the token had to be returned to the machine so another train could make its way to the quarry. When the loco needed to run round its train at Tytherington, the token was required again to occupy the single line for a short while. This rarely happened: all the crews knew the score and a second train on the branch would always approach Tytherington carefully, in case the first train's loco was running round. Once the first train had finished loading and was in possesion of the token to return to Yate, the second train had to wait for the token to be given up at Yate before it could shunt onto the loading loop. Again, that didn't happen: once the first train was out of the way, the second one set back, entered the loading loop and started loading. Totally against the rules, but it saved a lot of time. I can hear the outrage from members of Bristol panel as I type
There was also an interlock that you couldn't clear the starting signal unless all the tokens were in, and when you cleared that it locked the machine at the other end as well.
Not correct. The procedure (not universally applied) was that the signal leading into the section was locked UNTIL a token had been removed at the departure end. It was the removal of a token which locked both instruments, nothing to do with the signals. The section signal release was "one pull only", so once pulled and put back it could not be pulled again until the token had been replaced in one or other instrument and a fresh one drawn.
I committed the cardinal sin of giving the driver of a train awaiting departure the appropriate miniature train staff before clearing the signal
The sin in that case would be if the driver left before the signal was cleared. On the other hand, if you clear the signal first he might leave without the token! The former was marginal less risky, 'cos if you could get the token out then at least you knew that there was not another train in the section. The latter was much more risky if there was NOT a 'token out' release on the section signal - which was certainly the case on many GWR lines! However the latter was the usual method, for the simple reason probably that having walked down the platform to give the driver the token, he could then leave (once give the right-away by the guard) wihotu having to wait for the signalman to walk back to his box to clear the signal.
The cause of the Abermule disaster was that the driver was given the wrong tablet and then he left without checking it.
tonyperks wrote:as another example for say the tytherington quarry line the train staff(basically a big key) used to unlock the ground frame allowing the points to be changed from the mainline into the branch, this was after the frame had been electrically unlocked as well by the power box at bristol. Once the rain was on the line no other train was allowed up the line until the staff was in posession of the train crew, not sure how they used to have two trains on the line?, maybe some one drove back to the junction with the staff?
Hi,
Just to clarify that when the Tytherington Branch was reopened in July 1972 the new Yate Middle Ground Frame was released by an annetts key held in an instrument controlled by Bristol Panel - not by the train staff. The train staff was held in a separate release instrument at Yate Middle.
Don't forget that there is an incoming and outgoing line at Yate Middle so a down train would need to run via the ground frame into Yate Middle while waiting for another to return from the quarry (that had the staff).
At some point Yate Middle ground frame was abolished and the points are now controlled by Bristol Panel directly.
I've been told that the One Train Working with Train Staff was later converted to No Signalman Token Block with Token instruments at Yate Middle and Tytherington. As i understand it these instruments were stolen during a period of inactivity and the line later reverted to OTW with a Train Staff. I haven't seen any evidence of this, it's only what I've been told by other Signalmen.
Thanks for that little snippet Alex, so no-one for definate can remember what used to happen , but there were definatly two trains at tytherington, sometimes, and other times in going trains waited at Yate in the loop for Either the staff to be brought down by car or Van, or waited for the outgoing train to return to Yate Branch loop and hand over the Staff.
This is probably the most stupid idea ever put forward, but could they have coupled two trains together to traverse the branch......,
Well, with double headed operation, the train loco (rear loco) carries the token. That's because if the first loco gets detached and runs away with the token - if the brakes didn't come on as the locos split - and if the leading driver didn't notice the missing loco and train - and he were to return token to the machine when he gets to end of section (all highly unlikely!) - it would leave the second loco and the train without a token and unprotected in a "clear" section. But it *could* happen .... so it is safer to carry the token on the second loco.
As to operating two entire separate trains plus their locos in double, well, I guess there must be regulations, as you'd maybe need to do it when assisting a failed train.
So perhaps not such an outlandish idea after all There must be rules for it ...
This is probably the most stupid idea ever put forward, but could they have coupled two trains together to traverse the branch......,
Well, with double headed operation, the train loco (rear loco) carries the token. That's because if the first loco gets detached and runs away with the token - if the brakes didn't come on as the locos split - and if the leading driver didn't notice the missing loco and train - and he were to return token to the machine when he gets to end of section (all highly unlikely!) - it would leave the second loco and the train without a token and unprotected in a "clear" section. But it *could* happen .... so it is safer to carry the token on the second loco.
As to operating two entire separate trains plus their locos in double, well, I guess there must be regulations, as you'd maybe need to do it when assisting a failed train.
So perhaps not such an outlandish idea after all There must be rules for it ...
The modern network rail rulebook has been changed so that the leading driver carries the token.
burnettsj wrote:
The modern network rail rulebook has been changed so that the leading driver carries the token.
Stephen
Is that because every train is now continuously air braked so if locos should part company both would be brought to a stand, therefore the 'pilot' loco would not get to the next signal-box/token apparatus ahead of the other?
