Difference between Soft Call and Hard Call of points

[Saraswathi]

Could anyone explain me the difference between Soft Call and Hard Call of points?

[PJW]

Could anyone explain me the difference between Soft Call and Hard Call of points?

The usual arrangement (>95%) is a HARD CALL
a) route checks points for availability (already in desiredd position or free to move to it)
b) route sets and by doing so calls and locks the points in position
c) points cannot move again until the signal is At Red And Free Of Approach Locking, the route being restored fully Normal and the route locking between the signal and the points (or foul track to the points) being released.

Just occasionally we use a SOFT CALL.

This is generally for when we would ideally like to have flank, but there are disadvantages in demanding it 100% in that it would prevent another legitimate route. Perhaps there are two routes in a complicated area, the one ideally wanting it Normal and the other Reverse. If we insist that each uses a hard call then only one of the routes can be set at any one time.

So we drop back to a SOFT CALL
a) route sets irrespective of availability of points
b) at that time it checks to see if the points would be free to be called to desired position; if so it does so, if not it doesn't. There is no associated locking
c) a subsequently set route wanting (either soft or hhard) the points in the other lie will move them as it desires.

Hence the first route gets its flank unless there is actually a high priority use of the points. It is a bit like trying "to have cake but eat it". Fom a risk perspective, flak protection isn't guaranteed but is achieves as much as practicable, so a partial but not total mitigation to risk of a overrun at a protecting signal becoming foul of the route which is being considered.