Ormskirk branch working

Bletchleyite · 11 Jun 2019

I was on the Ormskirk-Preston line at the weekend, and I noticed that the train staff was seemingly not being used for the Rufford-Ormskirk section. I also noticed a new signal at the Ormskirk end of Rufford platform though this still has a RD (RufforD) number.

Has this section been track-circuited or had axle counters installed to substitute for the train staff (which used to be quite large, so wouldn't have been hidden - the driver definitely returned from giving back the Midge Hall token without it)? Or has it been replaced with something much smaller that would have been in the driver's pocket?

There is nowhere for a second train to go, so it would not have been train staff and ticket.

If so is there any plan to do the same for Rufford-Midge Hall, which would take a minute or two off the timetable by removing the stop at Midge Hall?

It seems surprising that any significant signalling work would be done on the branch without transferring control to Preston?

RailUK Forums

geoffk · 11 Jun 2019

Can't answer this one but there is local support for a station at Midge Hall, with plans for more homes in the area, so removing the operational stop would be less important.

Bletchleyite · 11 Jun 2019

geoffk said:
Can't answer this one but there is local support for a station at Midge Hall, with plans for more homes in the area, so removing the operational stop would be less important.

It would be nice to build the long-overdue Burscough Mill Dam Lane station too, though with both of those the 3-way circuit may well not work any more and require an additional unit to allow the new (and from an anecdotal look on one visit seemingly quite popular) clockface hourly service to be maintained.

(Of course Merseyrail to Burscough Bridge would solve that - a single unit hourly service would work fine then)

Foggycorner · 11 Jun 2019

rufford ormskirk is one train in section working and has been for the last 20 years at least

Bletchleyite · 12 Jun 2019

Foggycorner said:
rufford ormskirk is one train in section working and has been for the last 20 years at least

Indeed, and it was always controlled using a train staff. However, the driver definitely returned to the cab without the train staff on Saturday having returned the token at Rufford.

Or are you saying the train staff ceased use 20 years ago?

The Planner · 12 Jun 2019

Rufford to Ormskirk is OTNS, one train no staff. Last update of the sectional appendix for that route was October 2016 so its 3 years minimum if it has changed. Signalling diagram shows OTNS using sequential track circuits to Ormskirk. That was last updated 7/3/17

Bletchleyite · 12 Jun 2019

The Planner said:
Rufford to Ormskirk is OTNS, one train no staff. Last update of the sectional appendix for that route was October 2016 so its 3 years minimum if it has changed. Signalling diagram shows OTNS using sequential track circuits to Ormskirk. That was last updated 7/3/17

Cheers. I did notice that some track has been replaced since I was last up there and paying attention (a few years ago) particularly in Ormskirk station, but there are several long lengths of CWR now on that end of things, I guess track circuits were added at the same time.

Does make you wonder why, though - I can't see much of a disadvantage of train staff for a "dead end" line like this.

MarkyT · 12 Jun 2019

Bletchleyite said:
Does make you wonder why, though - I can't see much of a disadvantage of train staff for a "dead end" line like this.

Manual token or staff exchange procedure can often take more time than alternatives. It may not be significant but OTNS in this case could be important for allowing the additional station call you describe.

Bletchleyite · 12 Jun 2019

MarkyT said:
Manual token or staff exchange procedure can often take more time than alternatives. It may not be significant but OTNS in this case could be important for allowing the additional station call you describe.

Midge Hall and Mill Dam Lane aren't stations (the former was but closed years ago, the latter never has been), though there is a good argument that they should be.

It may well be the case that they wanted to track circuit it for years but hadn't done so because of the poor state of the track. Now much of it has been replaced south of Rufford (I was surprised to note CWR, it was all jointed last time I paid any attention, some of it quite unusual long-section jointed) I guess it becomes feasible. That said I'm surprised they didn't do it with an axle counter instead, they'd only need one.

Tomnick · 12 Jun 2019

One of the major changes, and presumably the motivation for the scheme, appears to have been the conversion of train-operated points at both ends of the loop to conventional motor-worked points, which in turn has required the provision of a couple of additional signals (there was just a points indicator to come off the Ormskirk single line previously, I think?) and more track circuits. It was probably easier to convert it to OTW without staff as to design the interlocking between the new section signal and the staff - I don’t know if there was even an instrument for the staff previously.

The whole section doesn’t need to be track-circuited - sequential operation just requires a couple of track circuits towards the single line, to prove that a train has gone into the section and to prove that it’s come out again (albeit not proving that it’s left complete).

Bletchleyite · 12 Jun 2019

Presumably that was done to reinstate the ability to pass trains there e.g. if there are delays? I'm sure I heard that the old setup was no longer certified for such (or maybe I'm confusing it with Llanrwst). Surprised it wasn't plainlined, though - when was the last time a passenger service passed there? About 1994?

MarkyT · 12 Jun 2019

Tomnick said:
The whole section doesn’t need to be track-circuited - sequential operation just requires a couple of track circuits towards the single line, to prove that a train has gone into the section and to prove that it’s come out again (albeit not proving that it’s left complete).

The mechanism involves two track circuits and a treadle, all operated in the correct sequence and within set timings to register an absence on clearing the single line stub. It can be thought of as a single ended version of 'tokenless block'. An advantage of OTNS is you don't need a starting signal to reverse at the terminus. That is a mandatory requirement for lines converted to TCB (with continuous multi-section track circuits or with an axle counter). Some older installations ARE TCB without the reversing signal nonetheless, but they're only allowed to keep that arrangement under grandfather rights until subsequent resignalling, and there's usually a local instruction to telephone for permission to reverse in lieu of movement authority being given by a signal aspect. That can help the signalller manage any uncontrolled level crossings in the section.

Bletchleyite · 12 Jun 2019

What would be the reason for not using a simple axle counter instead? Which would of course have the advantage that unless you're pratting around with a low-loader you'd know what went in did actually wholly come out?

MarkyT · 12 Jun 2019

Bletchleyite said:
What would be the reason for not using a simple axle counter instead? Which would of course have the advantage that unless you're pratting around with a low-loader you'd know what went in did actually wholly come out?

See my reply above, but as Tomnick says above, the track circuits used may exist already in the vicinity of the loop points. Individual track circuits are cheaper and simpler than axle counters generally, especially low voltage DC ones applied to very short sections like in branch line passing loops and through points, and there's the skill-set issue to consider too for local staff. Axle counters might also demand better power supply etc for reliable operation, which may not be so easy in some rural areas. The technology is very good, however, for avoiding large numbers of multiple track circuit sections through long block sections and is quite correctly the default solution for completely new signalling installations, as opposed to minor alterations.

MarkyT · 12 Jun 2019

Tomnick said:
...albeit not proving that it’s left complete

That just means that only continuously braked trains are allowed under normal operations. The idea is that if a train splits, then the continuous pipe should ensure both parts come to a stand within the section and the leading one won't be able operate the sequence to reset and clear the block. A similar principle can be applied in double ended tokenless block areas, although these often hosted a more varied selection of train types in the past, so where working between manned blockposts, tail light observation directly, or with a CCTV camera, was usually employed, with a Train Arrived Complete button provided to be operated by the signaller or sometimes train crew.

Ormskirk branch working

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

geoffk

Established Member

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member

Foggycorner

Member

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member

The Planner

Veteran Member

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member

MarkyT

Established Member

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member

Tomnick

Established Member

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member

MarkyT

Established Member

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member

MarkyT

Established Member

MarkyT

Established Member