|
2010 Layout
|
I have another attempt in the year 2010. It seems I cannot find the answer comparing my attempt. I would appreciate it if I can get any feedback to improve my attempt.
It is very difficult for me to deal with level crossing. Could you please kindly review with my level crossing design? Thanks in advance 
Overall it was not a bad attempt
Some misunderstanding of depiction of trap points and GPLs but nothing else that would cause great alarm apart from that level crossing! An ABCL is not appropriate for the speed or level of traffic on the line; you should have used a form of full barrier crossing (either controlled by the signaller if local (MCB) or provided with television picture (MCB-CCTV) or a local gatebox or the most modern type with obstacle detection (MCB-OD)- suggest play safe and draw MCB-CCTV with 4 barrier booms to completely block the road. rather simpler and don't have to worry about SIP and all the signs, but probably ought to make a note of when the signaller would be alerted to an approaching train by turning on the picture, or an Auto Lower sequence initiated. You need to start the process early enough such that the crossing clear can be given and all the signals clear before an approaching train sees a cautionary aspect due to aspect sequence. The freight line was not signalled in the most appropriate manner, but not too bad. The depot needed a little more (or at least a description of intended operation) but again not too bad- just a bit unclear about whether they were supposed to be Hand Points on DE track section and needed to think a little more re the Wash Plant- this is a detail and, as per the freight branch, nothing here that would prevent a Pass being achieved. A few other things- a) a ROL was provided beyond 109 for which there is little justification given level of and timing of the traffic, whereas one was not provided beyond 120 even though a note on the left hand end of the plan explicitly stated such a need; b) providing 4 aspect signals for a stated 10 minute headway requirement and only a scheduled 2 trains per hour on the line beyond station G is totally excessive. Other than these things it looks quite reasonably signalled and the Operating Requirements were addressed, so you should feel pretty satisfied with this attempt- just a few things to tighten up on. (22-06-2014, 07:01 AM)asrisaku Wrote: I have another attempt in the year 2010. It seems I cannot find the answer comparing my attempt. I would appreciate it if I can get any feedback to improve my attempt.
PJW
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
