Unsafe reversing

In terms of protection, I'm a little surprised no-one has mentioned about either trap points or catch points.

Both links lead to the same Wikipedia.org page

1-2 is widely accepted as the telephone code, although it's entirely unofficial (pretty sure I've both send and received it with inspectors in the next box, though!).

The NYMR do a similar thing with headcode/engine number.

However, it seems the SVR is the odd one out - there is no reporting number or headcode for an individual train, although the coach set gets a designation for the day, to indicate its service, of the form "CS1", where "C" is the timetable, "S" is the end it starts at (North or South), and "1" is its order of its first departure in the morning (so CS1 is the first off Kidderminster, CS2 is the next, and CN1 is the first from Bridgnorth, all on table C). Also, we don't know the loco number until it chuffs (or growls or clanks or rolls) around the corner! Those who do want to identify trains do it be their departure time from their origin (12:30KR, 12:25BY, 10:55BH), but plenty of signalmen don't bother.

1-2 is widely accepted as the telephone code, although it's entirely unofficial (pretty sure I've both send and received it with inspectors in the next box, though!).

" said:

1-2 is widely accepted as the telephone code, although it's entirely unofficial (pretty sure I've both send and received it with inspectors in the next box, though!).

Presumably only at locations where "ILC for Branch Freight?" isn't authorised? Or were these trains generally asked with the normal code because the signalmen knew the timetable anyway?

We don't use headcodes or reporting codes at Llangollen, so I don't think the SVR is the odd one out.

In our area, on AB, most signalmen booked the train bell-code in the first column with the headcode in the last column of the train-book. I didn't.
As for 1-1 bell-code, this was used only by a few signalmen (and me) as an acknowledgement to TOS and then call attention. In other words, in slack working, signalman B would bang out 2-1. If signalman A had a train to pass on to B the he would give 2 beats (1-1) to B and he would acknowledge it with call attention. Sig. A would then pass on the required train be1l-code.
Snatching was/is a dangerous way of signalling trains. Signalman B would bang out 2-1 and then turn the com to LC irrespective if sig.A had a train or not.
I thought 1-2 was to get a signalman on the phone? We never used it because we used 1 flat beat on the block-bell for that purpose.
As for semaphore signalling, if we didn't have a road, the outer and inner home-signals would be pulled off slowly.
If we wanted the driver on the phone, we would wobble the home-signal up and down a few times.
Adrian

Hoho. How 'twas really done!

1-1 was an official signal in some areas, usually those with a block phone (telephone handsets wired in the block bell circuit). Most boxes at the south end of the Midland Main Line had them so this was in regular use. The beats were usually given as flat ones. It didn't do to have the handset at your ear if the other box pressed his key - the crash was impressive to say the least.

Around the North London and the Great Central (what was left of it) 1-2 was used but this was to call you to the omnibus phone; there weren't block phones on those lines.

When I acknowledged train-out-of-section with 1 beat, I believe this to be some obscure working from the L&Y era. Also, it is similar to permissive working but only on the TOS side of things. Maybe it was brought over from Bury or Manchester Deal street.

I know that there was a crossover of signalmen from Bolton Great Moor St Station (L&NWR) to Trinity St (L&YR). Anyway, since I never went to signalling school, I picked up a mixture of bell-codes and peculiar movements. Also, one had to know why the rules and regulations were in place so as to know how to 'bend' them.

One peculiarity, which today, isn't done is: 'shunting into forward section' without using the block or bells. In my day 3-3-2 had to be authorised so that meant there was no AB rule to get round it, although a section-signal could be PAD for shunting purposes. One day I had an engine to assist going through my xover from the D to the U but the dummy was locked by the block because the S&T had abolished my starting-signal! I pulled the cross-over and told the driver to pass the dummy at danger and enter the section ahead. His boss chirped in and said I should send the loco on as a 2-3, give TES and then cancel it off 3-5, once the engine has been withdrawn. I said no. The 3-5 signal can only be sent if one finds out that the train is not going to proceed. I said the train has proceeded into the forward-section and then been withdrawn. My block-inspector backed me up all the way. Some will say we were was wrong and some will say we were correct. The use of the 3.3.2 bell-code was used in short-sections, to my knowledge, because the SB ahead would be able to see the shunt.

His boss chirped in and said I should send the loco on as a 2-3, give TES and then cancel it off 3-5, once the engine has been withdrawn. I said no. The 3-5 signal can only be sent if one finds out that the train is not going to proceed.

" said:

His boss chirped in and said I should send the loco on as a 2-3, give TES and then cancel it off 3-5, once the engine has been withdrawn. I said no. The 3-5 signal can only be sent if one finds out that the train is not going to proceed.

think I agree with Keith and this guys boss on this one, it should be offered, given TES then withdrawn.

3-5 isnt just cancelling a train that hasnt proceeded, its also for cancelling a train that has been drawnback (as with a train terminating and reversing in a through station) or for situations such as this. the box in advance can protect the loco with the block should any distraction occur. In fact I have used this method for signalling a passenger train into a station (with clearing point provided) then withdrawing it with 3-5 when drawn back as ECS.

rather ironically, if you ever get a chance to view the L&Y signalling school, which is the one you would have trained on at Man Vic, you could potentially see it done (I did it last december with a parcels shunt into forward section because i had a mental block and couldnt remember the code for Shunt into forward section :whistle: )

I didn't know the signalling school was still there at Victoria. If it is, I'll be having a look!

" said:

His boss chirped in and said I should send the loco on as a 2-3, give TES and then cancel it off 3-5, once the engine has been withdrawn. I said no. The 3-5 signal can only be sent if one finds out that the train is not going to proceed.

3-5 isnt just cancelling a train that hasnt proceeded, its also for cancelling a train that has been drawnback (as with a train terminating and reversing in a through station) or for situations such as this. the box in advance can protect the loco with the block should any distraction occur. In fact I have used this method for signalling a passenger train into a station (with clearing point provided) then withdrawing it with 3-5 when drawn back as ECS.

" said:

" said:

His boss chirped in and said I should send the loco on as a 2-3, give TES and then cancel it off 3-5, once the engine has been withdrawn. I said no. The 3-5 signal can only be sent if one finds out that the train is not going to proceed.

3-5 isnt just cancelling a train that hasnt proceeded, its also for cancelling a train that has been drawnback (as with a train terminating and reversing in a through station) or for situations such as this. the box in advance can protect the loco with the block should any distraction occur. In fact I have used this method for signalling a passenger train into a station (with clearing point provided) then withdrawing it with 3-5 when drawn back as ECS.

Done for every terminator at Exeter West as well. Surely belling a passenger train as a "Shunt" is even more wrong than cancelling a train that was never going through!

I thought 3-2-3 (Train drawn back clear of section) was for these circumstances?