Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2006 Attempted Layout - Part 1
#11
(30-09-2010, 05:39 AM)alexgoei Wrote: Hello PJW,

Thank you for the reply

Sorry to belabour the issue concerning MAY-FA but the second row does mention permissible approach speed of 40 - 75 mph (64 - 120 km/h) and divergence speed of 25 mph (40 km/h).

Cheers

Alex

So it does- my apologies.

Standards change and one ends up not knowing what one thought one knew. In reality I think that recent change has been made particularly for getting a freight train off the main line into a Goods Loop faster, but yes it does seem that your solution is compliant and I was wrong. One advantage of having to learn from scratch is that you read what is written, rather than being pre-conditioned by previous knowledge and experience. I certainly haven't encountered a flashing aspect in such a scenario, but perhaps this will become the way of the world. In my defence I think that if you look at the compliance clause of the instruction published in September 2006 that it would NOT have been applicable for a layout signalled at the very beginning of October 2006 (joke!)

One problem that you have to face is the examiners might take exactly the view I did, but without the opportunity to discuss afterwards. The mindset of presenting a candidate a layout with certain turnout speeds higher than most others certainly suggests that they are expecting the signalling to be different........... I think I'd still advise caution over what may be seen as the overuse of flashing aspects. [There are risks associated with MAR and risks associated with MAY-FA which are hard to balance; I believe that one of the motivations for NR to amend its standards has in fact been commercial pressure from the train Operating Companies- compare the wording agasinst that of the older Railway Group Standard that is still in force].

I think where the turnout speed is as low as 25mph which as you note is the minimum permissible speed, you really need to consider whether you would provide MAY-FA. Whereas it may be compliant to do so that doesn't actually mean that it is appropriate. I think in that case I wouldn't depict it on the plan but add a note that it could be an option. If you provide in such circumstances then probably worth a note that it is compliant and quote the standard number, so the examiner is perhaps jogged into looking it up rather than relying on their experience!
PJW
Reply
#12
Hello PJW,

I see some advantages of showing both if they do occur in the exams. One demonstrates to the examiner one can produce two types of junction signalling.

Thanks

Cheers

Alex
Reply
#13
(01-10-2010, 01:55 AM)alexgoei Wrote: Hello PJW,

I see some advantages of showing both if they do occur in the exams. One demonstrates to the examiner one can produce two types of junction signalling.

Thanks

Cheers

Alex

Absolutely. However what I am saying is that if you have already shown MAY-FA for the juncyions having whatever the "high" speed is on that layout, then show MAR for all the "default speed" turnouts
PJW
Reply
#14
Hello,
Having attempted the 2006 layout myself, I am pleased to see that my layout is very similar this one.
However, it took me almost 3 hours. Others I have done were slightly less, but nether the less I am worried about the time allowed in the exam.
Does anyone have any exam advice? Perhaps trying to signal around the main junctions first to demonstrate to the examiner that you at least understand what you are doing, even if you haven't tim to finish.
My tactic with the 2006 layout was to signal the UP first. I just about completed this in time, although I didn't name the tracks.

With the exam a month away, I would appreciate some advice.
Thanks
K Ball
Reply
#15
1. Don't try to do too good a job. Don't waste time agonizing over what is best, just do something reasonable and move on. It is not like doing the job for real. Quick and dirty.

2. Mark grab. Putting in traps and interrupters, numbering points, selecting the lies of points are easy to get quickly. Make sure you do the easy half of everything; do not omit any of the mark categories.

3. Yes do one area in detail, but do make sure that you do cover the whole geographical area to some extent at least indicting position and profile of signals. Also every plan will have at least one distinctly different area 9a single line remote branch, freight terminal etc) so do that as well to show ability to select appropriate style of signalling.

4. Do as much of your thinking in your reading time as you can; hit the ground running. I prefer to start with the points and feel it is efficient to be placing the 80% of block joint positions around them as part of the same activity. Ditto when I draw in signals I tend to put the associated block joints and overlap joints whilst I am thre and thinking of it.

5. Get more practice.

6. Don't panic; remember that to pass you only need to get 50% of the marks so actually there is no need to do 100% of the layout. However according to the examiners there is actually quite good correlation between quality and quantity- those that actually have time to substantially complete in general make a good job of what they have done and those who struggle to get much done often don't do that very well.

PJW



(04-09-2012, 08:43 PM)kball Wrote: Hello,
Having attempted the 2006 layout myself, I am pleased to see that my layout is very similar this one.
However, it took me almost 3 hours. Others I have done were slightly less, but nether the less I am worried about the time allowed in the exam.
Does anyone have any exam advice? Perhaps trying to signal around the main junctions first to demonstrate to the examiner that you at least understand what you are doing, even if you haven't tim to finish.
My tactic with the 2006 layout was to signal the UP first. I just about completed this in time, although I didn't name the tracks.

With the exam a month away, I would appreciate some advice.
Thanks
K Ball
PJW
Reply
#16
FYI


Attached Files
.pdf   2006Module2Exam_paper.pdf (Size: 64.65 KB / Downloads: 14)
.pdf   IRSE (Main Line) Layout 1 Year 2006 (Unsignalled) Version 1.pdf (Size: 1.42 MB / Downloads: 26)
.pdf   IRSE (Main Line) Layout 1 Year 2006 paged.pdf (Size: 1.97 MB / Downloads: 32)
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)