|
Bozza posted:Pretty much, it's designed to allow the signaller a bit of breathing room if a SPAD occurs as it auto protects the potential conflicts at the moment of detection whilst leaving all other signals alone. It's less crude than a Signal Group Replacement Control which puts all the signals in an area back which is what the signaller should hit of a SPAD alarm sounds. From the quick read I've done if you lock the flank protection you're going to put every route outside the POPG at the cost of less availability to the signallers; are you allowed in the UK to lock flank protection once a train has passed "x" point where "x" is within braking distance of the signal (thereby only activating the lock when it becomes critical in the event of a SPAD)? What system are you designing this for? Pinball Jizzard fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Nov 23, 2015 |
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 07:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
Time of operation locking? Yeah it can be provided if required but not often. Worth noting that modern UK standards say you don't detect facing points in the overlap, finally catching up with what the Western Region has done since forever. It's going in a Siemens Westlock.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 11:57
|
|
|
Bacon Terrorist posted:People always ask why a single is nearly the same price as a return, I was always told a return is a discounted ticket as it encourages people to buy returns instead of fare dodging. the real answer is "because they can" generally return trips have much more demand and supply so theres more competition to create discount fare classes one-ways are fairly rarely demanded so travel companies can ream you
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 12:10
|
|
|
Malcolm XML posted:the real answer is "because they can" True but I see enough people trying to game the system win open returns that I would expect the price of a single ticket being half that of a return ticket resulting in everyone buying singles and chancing their arm they don't get checked on the way home.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 12:20
|
|
|
Bozza posted:Time of operation locking? Yeah it can be provided if required but not often. If you did detect and not Time of Operation locking, you'd be looking at effectively tie overlap points locking in with the approach locking. It would provide stronger flank protection, meet the primary overlap protection group standard and only slightly inhibit signalling availability as a cost. The idea being that as soon as a train is within the lookback of the end of route and points in the overlap would be locked thereby only having SPAD protection for that route on directly opposing routes. It does mean going away from the standards of the Great Western (and now the national standard) but would make the design and principles testing a lot less involved. This way you're not going to have lots of conditional requirements depending on points being moved in the overlap changing which routes are affected in the POPG. I do get the feeling I'm reading this wrong though because that seems too simple. For those reading that might be interested. Time of operation locking applies to points within the overlap which can "swing" after the route is set. These points are free to move all the way up to the point where moving may potentially allow a train to cross them whilst moving. It's simply worked out by using the linespeed to work out the distance a train travels per second and then taking into account the worst case operation time of the points (per standard). For instance; at a linespeed of 36km/h a train travels 600m per minute or 10m per second; if the operation time of the points is within 15 seconds then the points need to be locked when a train is at closest 150m away. *edit* I could potentially have thought about it and work out the circuitry required. Iirc Westlock is written in ladder logic? I remember Westrace I and II are. But i could certainly produce something in boolean for it. Pinball Jizzard fucked around with this message at 13:49 on Nov 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 13:38
|
|
|
Works for opposing routes but if you've got a converging set of routes through trailing points in the overlap it'd not catch those, which are the ones POP groups are mostly designed to catch (the two projects I'm dealing with are at Rutherglen and Motherwell in Scotland so fairly major junction areas at the top of the West Coast Main Line). The don't detect points in the overlap is for good reason, as it's more likely to cause disruption / unsafe conditions by holding the signal at red and having to talk past compared to the likelihood of a crash occurring as a train has a SPAD at the exact moment the points (which are commanded but not required detected) have failed to move to a defined position. Westlock is ladder logic but the data prep is done in yer bog standard SSI data constructs with a few specials.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Malcolm XML posted:the real answer is "because they can" I thought there was a specific regulation limiting returns to price of the single plus a pound, or something, at privatisation?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I thought there was a specific regulation limiting returns to price of the single plus a pound, or something, at privatisation? Idk I just know airline fares is a Byzantine world of classing and the same is usually true with deregulated transport
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
Anybody got any idea what's happening to the North entrance for Leeds station? I'm assuming it's works to bring in natural light, but there seems to be little communication on what's happening on that end while they finish up the new South entrance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
Bozza posted:Westlock is ladder logic but the data prep is done in yer bog standard SSI data constructs with a few specials. I'll have a think about the rest when I get some free time however this bit here is confusing me. Are you designing the ladder logic by writing it as SSI data constructs? Or are you writing this stuff for a SSI and a Westlock is going to sit above it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
I'll be doing no such thing, don't dirty my hands with data prep as I'm a schemes designer (GRIP0-4 if you know that process) I think I may have confused Smartlock (the SSL/Alstom product) which talks pure SSI with the Westlock which doesn't. No idea about how the data constructs work as that's contracted out but think it's ladder logic. I'll ask my mate if I see him at 5 a side this week 
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
Bozza posted:I'll be doing no such thing, don't dirty my hands with data prep as I'm a schemes designer (GRIP0-4 if you know that process) That would make more sense. I had my head in my hands at the thought of ladder logic being designed first in SSI data! And such a narrow field. The UK is far too easy nowadays giving the luxuries of a single role! I am unaware of the GRIP0-4 process having not been in a UK design house since 2001 or so.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
Having worked with both Smartlock and Westlock interfaces before, Smartlock is SSI and Westlock is ladder logic (but there are tools to convert SSI data).
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
Which is the thing that gets me. Why would you want to convert SSI data to ladder logic when in basic terms SSI data is a derivative language of ladder logic? It's like translating English to French and then back to English. Pinball Jizzard fucked around with this message at 04:39 on Nov 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
My guess is that either you're ripping out an SSI and replacing it with a Westlock/Westrace and you don't want to manually redo the data or you have a system that takes one as an input and you have data for the other.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 07:26
|
|
|
Yeah, we're doing first gen SSI to CBI upgrades at the moment and the Siemens guys mod the data in the SSI code then convert I think rather than write it in pure ladder. It needs some mods as the Westlock doesn't have the virtual internal interlockings like the Smartlock does, which is why you can just copy/paste old SSI code into it and it'll pretty much work immediately. GRIP 0-4 is pre-feasibility to the end of scheme design, so scheme plan and supporting risk assessments + signal sighting approved by the Major Schemes Review Panel, so don't really delve much further than signal positioning/ops type stuff though I can do detailed wiring design on BR Western E10k, know a bit of SW65 and current trying to pick up Scottish Region geographic which is just 
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 09:43
|
|
|
https://www.rmt.org.uk/about/health-and-safety/health-and-safety-circulars/martin-zee--guard-merseyrail121115/ Not quite sure why there's a prosecution here but it opens up a can of worms On the plus side this has resulted in ASLEF making a firm declaration they are opposed to DOO (DOC as it is described in the invitation to tender for our franchise), if only in the interest of their own members rather than those of fraternity 
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
I understand why the tools were developed and in many ways it'd save a whole lot of design time. Transferring ASCON (for instance) data into the individual circuits would be easy enough but it's the fringes that would be dangerous. SSI data has many struggles with regards to timing issues and swinging overlaps (to name two of the glaring ones I've experienced), how you'd translate that well without enormous amounts of checking or redesign after principles tests I'm not comfortable with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
Are you guys based in Australia? Lot of signalling designers heading down that way a few years ago but seems to have quieted down recently.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 11:11
|
|
|
I am, but I'm a tester and not a designer. 2009 I left the UK to come over and see something different. I do a bit of design (and everything else) whenever I'm needed to. There's not the jobs here at the moment which has seen the reverse happening and a lot of people are now heading to the UK. The mining industry downturn has seriously harmed the industry to the point where we're losing people all over.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 13:13
|
|
|
Today I saw an EMT Meridian blow through my station where it was supposed to stop, having to park itself a bit down the line and back up to the station. Anyone seen this and can comment on how huge a pain in the dick it is when it happens? I imagine that driver was not in anyone's good books today.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Today I saw an EMT Meridian blow through my station where it was supposed to stop, having to park itself a bit down the line and back up to the station. Anyone seen this and can comment on how huge a pain in the dick it is when it happens? I imagine that driver was not in anyone's good books today. I'm not sure if that counts as a 'failure to call' or 'station overrun' but essentially the driver is in the poo poo, will be subject to a management investigation including the downloading of his mobile phone to ensure it wasn't on at the time and will have the incident permanently in his file. Incidents like that and SPADs usually kill any chance of moving companies or getting promoted. One of my colleagues did that, partially overrunning a station so the train wasn't properly platformed before propelling the train backwards without changing ends. He was suspended and when he came back he was stripped of his instructor position (rightly of course). It will have caused a headache for the signaller and the driver's line manager for sure.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
So train people, why is the speaker/announcments so loving loud in the quiet coach? Also why is it every 5 bloody minutes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
http://www.citymetric.com/transport/britains-south-west-trains-using-its-adverts-troll-rival-train-company-1641 one TOC wastes money on a rebrand & repaint instead of improving quality of service. another TOC spends ad money on mocking them for this (but at least promoting their own service improvement at the same time so not a total waste).
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
quote:When British Rail ran everything, there wasn't much in the way of pressure to improve the quality of its stations/trains/sandwiches. Replacing it with a system of rival, privately-owned rail franchises was meant to give everything a kick up the proverbial.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
Northern goes to Arriva, TPE stays with First. But most importantly: DEATH TO PACERS.  The much-hated "no growth" clause in the Northern franchise contract is also gone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
So the trains through St. Helens will be green instead of purple soon? I suppose that's something. No Pacers is genuinely good news, though. Edit. Gov.uk has some more details here. biscuits and crazy fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
I hope that doesn't mean no services that used to run pacers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
NORTHERN POWERHOUSE
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 10:15
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I hope that doesn't mean no services that used to run pacers. ahaha that's absolutely what it means
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
Welll I guess Northern will be able to make a bit of money ripping up the entire rail line between middlesbrough and saltburn because they only run one service on that line and I'm pretty sure it's pacers only. At this rate Boro station is going to end up closing because it won't connect to anywhere any more. I miss when EC had the franchise, it's been shite since they sold it off again. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Dec 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Look on the bright side! There's eight whole Class 172s that are going to come free when the Gospel Oak to Barking Line is electrified!
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
From what I can tell from reading between the lines, TPE will be getting new AT300-based rolling stock, the TPE 170/185s and GWR 165s will be used on Northern Connect services, and the Sprinters replace the Pacers. There are too many marginals to close the Pacer-run lines. 
TinTower fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Dec 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
If anyone fancies a chance at having a go on the ScotRail train driving simulator, chuck £5 in this Just Giving for a chance to win! http://www.justgiving.com/Simulator
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 11:42
|
|
|
How good are the ragdoll physics for when you inevitably go full speed into Central with a maniacal grin on your face?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
Southern conductors and Caledonian Sleeper staff both voted in favour of striking (72% and 91% respectively).http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/dec/15/southern-railway-conductors-vote-to-strike-over-staff-shortages posted:Passengers on one of the biggest commuter routes into London could experience further disruption after conductors on Southern Railway voted to strike.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
Semprini posted:How good are the ragdoll physics for when you inevitably go full speed into Central with a maniacal grin on your face? You'd be caught by the TPWS and thud into the buffers at 2mph sadly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 12:11
|
|
|
Bozza posted:You'd be caught by the TPWS and thud into the buffers at 2mph sadly. Still good enough to kill 2 people in a Class 415 though!
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 12:27
|
|
|
onoflalks posted:Southern conductors and Caledonian Sleeper staff both voted in favour of striking (72% and 91% respectively). That's the sleepers on 22nd & 23rd cancelled for people getting home to Xmas dinner. lol Cerv fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 13:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
No TPWS in them days and no slam door stock. This was the accident that finally brought in D&A testing so gently caress you people that died, I like a pint on a weeknight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:09
|
|