Workings from multiple private sidings sharing a common line back in the day.

[McRhu]

Just looking at a 1:2500 map of the old Pinkston area of Glasgow around the canal area which was interlaced with a labyrinth of private sidings and associated works and wharfs, all feeding on to a common line. My question is - how were train movements organised? Would there be some co-ordinator or was it more or less a free-for-all up until the junction with the actual Railway Company/ British Railways?

 

[norbitonflyer]

This was not unusual. The Tanfield railway (wagonway) over the Causey Arch - the oldest railway bridge in the world, 300 years old next year - was a joint enterprise built to link various collieries to the to the staithes on the Tyne. It was double track and, you will not be surprised to learn given its age, originally horse-drawn.

 

[McRhu]

This was not unusual. The Tanfield railway (wagonway) over the Causey Arch - the oldest railway bridge in the world, 300 years old next year - was a joint enterprise built to link various collieries to the to the staithes on the Tyne. It was double track and, you will not be surprised to learn given its age, originally horse-drawn.

Same principal but with many of these incredibly dense swathes of businesses and private sidings in the cities up until the 50s/60s, all feeding on to the same limited channel, it must have been hard to monitor conflicting movements.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

Might be worth searching for the relevant area General/Sectional Appendix. Old ones will come up in some of those shops/web sites that sell old railway books and the like. Under the local instructions sections these can be a mine of detailed information in relation to how sidings, yards, branch lines etc were to be operated.

 

[Gloster]

There might have been agreements that instructed every move to stop and not proceed onto the ‘main’ line or past certain points without checking. It depends on who owns the main line: was it owned by the canal company, which might make some rudimentary rules for users, or did each company own the bit outside their own property, which would involve a certain amount of cooperation?

 

[McRhu]

Might be worth searching for the relevant area General/Sectional Appendix. Old ones will come up in some of those shops/web sites that sell old railway books and the like. Under the local instructions sections these can be a mine of detailed information in relation to how sidings, yards, branch lines etc were to be operated.

Yes. Having piqued my own interest by spending an inordinate amount of time poring over maps of Olde Glasgow's bewildering web of lines I think I'll take it further and do as you suggest. Thank you.

There might have been agreements that instructed every move to stop and not proceed onto the ‘main’ line or past certain points without checking. It depends on who owns the main line: was it owned by the canal company, which might make some rudimentary rules for users, or did each company own the bit outside their own property, which would involve a certain amount of cooperation?

I suppose there must have been some established protocols between the private operators. I've heard apocrypohal stories from days of yore about competing railway companies' drivers engaging in fisticuffs at conflicting junctions to establish right of way and it's quite entertaining to imagine something similar in this case, with the driver from MacTavish Chemicals Ltd ending up in the Forth & Clyde. As you say though, and as per Big Jumby's post, there must have been some more refined operating procedures.