mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 6, 2007 22:14:03 GMT
A couple of questions arising from the 1941 resignalling.
Elephant (BS) was provided with push/pull frame on 2/11/41; there are a couple of curiousities:
1. Lever 1 was full-stroke (SB semi-automatic home) and could be left reverse and had an 'A' light fitted. The 'A' would light every time lever 1 was reversed - were there any other similar installations where an 'A' light would be displayed even though the controlling signal box was open?
2. The 'X' signal - formerly EX146 (replaced by BS1) in the resignalling was BSX100, a draw-up in front of BS1, before the Inner Home/Calling -on BS10HL/BS3HL. Were there ever any other draw-ups that functioned as 'X' signals?
I appreciate these oddities may arise in part from this being a push/pull frame in Tube, rather than in the open. Any thoughts?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2007 22:43:02 GMT
sounds like lever 1 was a king lever way before my time but surely it was the only site to do it i know high st ken had a push pull lever frame so it might of had the same till it got resignaaled in the early 90's
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Dec 6, 2007 23:14:25 GMT
1's was a free lever and had no stick relay. I wasn't aware it had an A sign though.
As an aside, BR3, the SB starter at Lambeth North, does (though there is no circuitry for it).
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 6, 2007 23:32:07 GMT
1's was a free lever and had no stick relay. I wasn't aware it had an A sign though. Well, the only basis I've got for this is the 1941 peril - whether there was an basis in installed fact is a matter of conjecture! As an aside, BR3, the SB starter at Lambeth North, does (though there is no circuitry for it). Is that because BR3 is the old BR2?
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Dec 7, 2007 5:03:14 GMT
What makes signalling so interesting is its uniqueness. There are many standards but many more exceptions. As we always used to say, if one instance exists then it is a standard!
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 8, 2007 2:18:07 GMT
Provided the bookwiring(still) exists .
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Dec 8, 2007 9:28:42 GMT
Provided the bookwiring(still) exists . I worked all over the combine and site prints for many disciplines were out of date or missing. I also know that the drawings offices routinely microfilmed office copies and then binned the originals to save space, subsequently mislaying the copies but I never came acoss a case of a missing bookwiring except when it had been purloined by the local AET. This was the practice at some depots adjacent to IMRs. Of course mistakes and anomalies do occur from time to time, but we used to pick those up on wire counts, and some were discovered in the first tranche of IRSE Licensing tests as well.
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Dec 8, 2007 9:30:29 GMT
sounds like lever 1 was a king lever way before my time but surely it was the only site to do it i know high st ken had a push pull lever frame so it might of had the same till it got resignaaled in the early 90's I think Harrow-on-the-Hill was push pull
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2007 9:51:27 GMT
i think harrow is still push pull i cannot confirm this as i never been there just heard the horror storys from old locking fitters and aet's
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Dec 8, 2007 10:07:21 GMT
Surely Rayners Lane was push-pull, wasn't it?
|
|
Harsig
Posts: 983
Member is Online
|
Post by Harsig on Dec 8, 2007 10:10:18 GMT
sounds like lever 1 was a king lever way before my time but surely it was the only site to do it i know high st ken had a push pull lever frame so it might of had the same till it got resignaaled in the early 90's I think Harrow-on-the-Hill was push pull Still is, but if I've understood my signalling design history correctly, there are substantial technical differences between the push-pull frames at Elephant and Harrow. The early push-pull frames, such as Elephant or Rayners Lane, interfaced directly with the signalling in the local area, the only other levers provided were point levers which, during normal operation, were left in the mid- stroke position and locked there by a control lever. Later push-pull frames such as those found at Harrow or on the Central Line were arranged such that the route levers merely controlled levers in a remote air operated frame and thus were not directly interfaced with the signalling. Regulation G5 (f) of Appendix 4 to the Rule Book 'General Signalling Regulations 1984' gives a description of the operation of the earlier form of push pull frame: G5. (f) (i) Route-lever locking frames are generally provided with a control lever which must be in the "pull" position for route signalling to be put into operation, and must be in the "push" position to permit independent operation of the levers controlling points. To enable any points to be operated by means of individual levers, all route-levers must be placed in their normal ("mid") positions, the control lever must be placed in the "mid" position and all point levers must be placed in positions corresponding to their indications.* The control lever must be placed in the full "push" position. (ii) While independent point levers are in use, it is not possible for any signal to be cleared, and trains must therefore be hand-signalled in accordance with the relevant Rules and Regualtions. (iii) In order to permit the resumption of route-lever operation of signalling, the control lever must be placed in the "mid" position, point levers must be placed in their "mid" position and the control lever must then be fully reversed to the "pull" position. (iv) All trains within the area controlled from the signal box must be at a standstill before any change is madefrom route-lever operation to individual control or vice-versa, and where more than one control lever is provided the procedure described in sub-clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) above must be carried out for each section of the area controlled. * G5 (e) (iii) says: If a pair of points or a crossover is reversed by the operation of a route-lever, the points or crossover may remain reversed even after the route-lever is replaced to the normal position. In this event, they will be replaced to normal only by the selection of a conflicting route. Also note G5 (e) (iv) says: Special instructions concerning the operation of route-levers are in force at certain locations and the provisions of this Regulation may not apply at these locations. I'm certain this last is a reference to the later push-pull frames such as Harrow as the operation of the frame there is nothing like that described above.
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Dec 8, 2007 11:20:01 GMT
i think harrow is still push pull i cannot confirm this as i never been there just heard the horror storys from old locking fitters and aet's Yes it is still push pull. With 2 IMRs and a slave frame also in the cabin. Northwood is operated by a push button panel (when not in King)
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Dec 8, 2007 13:14:47 GMT
i think harrow is still push pull i cannot confirm this as i never been there just heard the horror storys from old locking fitters and aet's Yes it is still push pull. With 2 IMRs and a slave frame also in the cabin. Northwood is operated by a push button panel (when not in King) Yep, It's a few years since I was last in Harrow Cabin so I didn't know if it was still push pull or not. I do recall the slave frame though and watching the levers throw when the signalman was at the other end of the frame selecting routes. AIUI the points are all operated by WRs and they remain where they lay until a newly selected route either throws them or not and then locks them. Added. Most of the horror stories I heard about Harrow seemed to be to do with the moveable angles!
|
|
Harsig
Posts: 983
Member is Online
|
Post by Harsig on Dec 8, 2007 13:21:14 GMT
AIUI the points are all operated by WRs and they remain where they lay until a newly selected route either throws them or not and then locks them. Not at Harrow they don't. There the route levers only control the slave frames. If the route lever is restored to normal then any associated point and signal levers also move to normal and the points respond accordingly.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Dec 8, 2007 15:49:24 GMT
Provided the bookwiring(still) exists . I worked all over the combine and site prints for many disciplines were out of date or missing. I also know that the drawings offices routinely microfilmed office copies and then binned the originals to save space, subsequently mislaying the copies but I never came acoss a case of a missing bookwiring except when it had been purloined by the local AET. This was the practice at some depots adjacent to IMRs. Bookwiring masters are never microfilmed - they will always be a paper master. A lot of other stuff is filmed though.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Dec 8, 2007 15:57:23 GMT
As an aside, BR3, the SB starter at Lambeth North, does (though there is no circuitry for it). Is that because BR3 is the old BR2? Indeed it is.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 11, 2007 1:01:15 GMT
I think Harrow-on-the-Hill was push pull Still is, but if I've understood my signalling design history correctly, there are substantial technical differences between the push-pull frames at Elephant and Harrow. 'B', 'K' or 'N' - all to do with the reverse indication lock. The only difference between Heffalump and 'arrer is where the mechanical cross-locking is located: front or back. [1] There are more technical differences with the circuits - cold proving, contact bands made through differing degrees but very little difference with the 'frames - hence 'technical' - I suppose. [1] I'm not sure at this point in time.
|
|
|
Post by JR 15secs on Dec 12, 2007 17:33:29 GMT
I remember working the frame in the 70s, the only time I had to put BS1 to normal was to allow a main line shunt from the platform 4 to platform 3 as the south siding was already occupied. The other thing about the cabin was the platform track for Lambeth SB was shown you always knew when a train was about to drop on at Lambeth was the relay room door would rattle then the track would drop.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 13, 2007 1:20:04 GMT
I remember working the frame in the 70s, the only time I had to put BS1 to normal was to allow a main line shunt from the platform 4 to platform 3 as the south siding was already occupied. Ah! That's one bit of the locking I couldn't prove through Dutton, but I suspected for that move that that might well be the case. Many thanks. ;D
|
|