Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2012 Q11 Aspect Seq Attempt
#1
Hi again,

Mod3 2012 Q11 attempt - any feedback welcome.

Ta,

Andy


Attached Files
.pdf   AMunro Mod 3 2012 Q11.pdf (Size: 154.07 KB / Downloads: 200)
Reply
#2
You have spotted some of the deficient braking areas and dealt in some way with them. You have also described the aspects give and them meaning and listed several valid assumptions.

A couple of things wrong or not clear what you have shown.

The * from the FY on 207 - what is this showing. What you have shown means that the driver has had FY in 207, but you are then implying something about 209 stepping up by the condition given - do you mean this to be the condition for 209 to step up from Y + JI to G + JI. If so, it is shown in the wrong place. This would also explain why you have shown an aspect in 209 as Y+P4/G+P4 which does not make sense.

If you have passed 207 at Y but are going through the crossover, you have given no means of showing a proceed aspect in 209 with the JI. If the 209 B was not set before the train got to 207 (ie in time to see the FY, then 209 would be MAR and this needs to be shown.

The way you have drawn 209 signal leaves the JI entries floating in mid air and you should be clear about which signal they belong to.

If you have followed UK practice, it is not normal to allow a flashing sequence through a junction if the signal beyond the junction signal is at red (Unless all trains would normally come to a stand (eg at a station)) so FY -> Y+P4 -> R+OL would not be valid.


Again for 105, you have not shown the MAR condition if the conditions for the flashing sequence have not been met.

The same applies for you * on 105

You have given 103 a ROL. ROL (and hence warning routes) are only provided where the full overlap is not available because of the lie of trailing points, hence there may be overlaps both ways, but they would be full overlaps.

Peter
Reply
#3
Hi Peter,

Thanks for the feedback - appreciated.

Yes - the * at 209 is meant to show 209 at Y+P4, stepping up to a 'free' aspect (on timed occupation of berth TC) depending on the state of 111 ahead, however I note you points around this - (a) that showing Y+P4/G+P4 makes no sense; (b) that FY sequence no good for train that has passed 207; © FY sequence no good if 111 at red; (d) the presentation is not great - with this 'floating' text.

If I'm on the right track, the 'fix' would be to provide a separate MAR path with 209 at red, stepping up to Y+P4 or G+P4 dependant on state of 111. The FY path should show 207 FY - 209 Y+P4 (stepping to G+P4 dependant on state of 111).

Question - how should I separate out the 111 Red path from the others? - I've shown #4 comment stating that only the MAR up to here is legitimate - is their a better way?

I've attached a re-work, (hopefully) addressing your comments - incuding the one about not showing separate Y up ROL's on the the 2011 question.

How does this look? (Just noticed I still haven't fixed the floating text!)

Thanks again,

Andy


Attached Files
.pdf   AMunro Mod 3 2012 Q11 (re-work).pdf (Size: 34.15 KB / Downloads: 121)
Reply
#4
(29-09-2014, 12:09 PM)AndyM Wrote: Hi Peter,

Question - how should I separate out the 111 Red path from the others? - I've shown #4 comment stating that only the MAR up to here is legitimate - is their a better way?

You can put the condition on the line leads up the the FY of "111 OFF" in the same way that you can put a TC condition on such a line. That step through the aspect sequence chart is then only valid when the condition is met.

Your attempt here looks much clearer and tidier.

Peter
Reply
#5
(19-09-2014, 03:56 PM)AndyM Wrote: Hi again,

Mod3 2012 Q11 attempt - any feedback welcome.

Ta,

Andy

I would like to ask that is that possible to arrange "Approach control from red" only, instead of Flashing Yellow with "Approach control from red" for turnout at 105 and 209 signal?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)