Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Sept 7, 2005 10:17:10 GMT
now all the old posts have gone I need a refresher (no NOT a sweetie)
Where NR and LU run together ,say on the Richmond branch, are things different now NR has TPWS? What combination of safety systems keeps the line safe? I assume tripcocks for LU (but not NLL) and TPWS for NLL, but cannot work out how this is totally fail-safe, especially when there are two different current returns and ?different track-circuit bonding?
I realise the answer is going to be quite technical, so hit me with it!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2005 10:26:55 GMT
I realise the answer is going to be quite technical, so hit me with it! Tripcocks for LUL and TPWS for NR. Between Queens Park & Harrow on the Bakerloo Line, there is a funny situation, as the cl313s that operate up there are fitted with tripcocks. So Not only do they have TPWS to stop them, they have the trainstops / tripcocks as well! Of course LUL only use tripcocks |
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Sept 7, 2005 13:12:14 GMT
cl.313s of course usually work (cl.150s permitting!) the Silverlink services to Richmond and as already stated have tripcocks fitted.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Sept 7, 2005 13:39:45 GMT
cl.313s of course usually work (cl.150s permitting!) the Silverlink services to Richmond and as already stated have tripcocks fitted. But do they have to- for example if Silverlink was short of tripcock fitted 313s would it be allowed to substitute a non-fitted one (assuming it had TPWS)? And is there a bond between running rails and neg rail to keep the posi at +630V? for the 313s? |
|
|
|
Post by russe on Sept 7, 2005 14:29:10 GMT
I understand, but would welcome clarification, that the Bakerloo north of Queen's Park is bonded that way. Or maybe the Bakerloo situation is as complicated as that being reported for the ELL?
Russ
|
|
|
|
Post by trainopd78 on Sept 7, 2005 14:36:18 GMT
IIRC they still haven't fitted TPWS on the Richmond road, so I can only assume that tripcocks on 313's are in use on the branch. AWS is of course fitted.
|
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Sept 7, 2005 14:44:04 GMT
The negative rail is most certainly bonded to the running rails south of Putney Bridge and west of Acton Lane over bridge on the Rmnd road.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2005 15:12:21 GMT
cl.313s of course usually work (cl.150s permitting!) the Silverlink services to Richmond and as already stated have tripcocks fitted. But do they have to- for example if Silverlink was short of tripcock fitted 313s would it be allowed to substitute a non-fitted one (assuming it had TPWS)? Yes I believe non fitted Tripcock trains would be allowed on Silverlink Richmond services as the line is Network Rail and comes under their rules. |
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Sept 7, 2005 15:19:43 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2005 17:14:29 GMT
The 64 thousand pound question though is if the SSL U stock will be equipped with AWS/TPWS for running onto NR-signalled metals, and if AWS/TPWS will be installed on the Met Main lines between Harrow North and Amersham...
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,100 
|
Post by Tom on Sept 7, 2005 21:15:38 GMT
The 64 thousand pound question though is if the SSL U stock will be equipped with AWS/TPWS for running onto NR-signalled metals, and if AWS/TPWS will be installed on the Met Main lines between Harrow North and Amersham... Answer one is possibly, number two is unlikely. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,311
|
Post by Colin on Sept 8, 2005 0:40:15 GMT
The 64 thousand pound question though is if the SSL U stock will be equipped with AWS/TPWS for running onto NR-signalled metals U stock??!! Why would underground stock need AWS/TPWS? Wherever we run on NR, trip arms and trip cocks are used - which has always been the best failsafe system. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2005 8:11:00 GMT
The 64 thousand pound question though is if the SSL U stock will be equipped with AWS/TPWS for running onto NR-signalled metals U stock??!! Universal Stock. Why would underground stock need AWS/TPWS? Wherever we run on NR, trip arms and trip cocks are used - which has always been the best failsafe system. Indeed - but after the SSL gets ATP and no longer has trainstops, are the U stock DMs likely to retain their tripcocks? |
|
|
|
Post by Dmitri on Sept 8, 2005 9:21:50 GMT
Between Queens Park & Harrow on the Bakerloo Line, there is a funny situation, as the cl313s that operate up there are fitted with tripcocks. So Not only do they have TPWS to stop them, they have the trainstops / tripcocks as well! You may find it interesting that a significant part of the Moscow Metro works that way: trainstops/tripcocks + ATS/ATP. BTW, this setup considered to be the most reliable. As an added benefit, it has no problems with trains where ATS has failed, or simply doesn't exist. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2005 22:01:38 GMT
Indeed - but after the SSL gets ATP and no longer has trainstops, are the U stock DMs likely to retain their tripcocks? As with what happened on the Central line, once ATP has been fully commisioned the tripcocks will be removed from the trains. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2005 22:10:32 GMT
Indeed - but after the SSL gets ATP and no longer has trainstops, are the U stock DMs likely to retain their tripcocks? As with what happened on the Central line, once ATP has been fully commisioned the tripcocks will be removed from the trains. So what will happen then on the Met Main? Will a subset of U stock DMs retain tripcocks until AWS and TPWS are installed, or will TfL and Metronet pay for the SSLATPification of Marylebone IECC and the Met Main? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2006 22:06:50 GMT
As with what happened on the Central line, once ATP has been fully commisioned the tripcocks will be removed from the trains. So, if ATP fails, what happens if the driver goes through a red signal?? (Blows dust off this thread) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2006 22:25:39 GMT
im not too sure on this but i believe the train will not carry on if the ATP code is not available in ATO mode and usually they suspend a section of the line to the problem is resolved but for stalled trains i think they proceed in restricted manual
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Jan 23, 2006 23:07:18 GMT
As with what happened on the Central line, once ATP has been fully commisioned the tripcocks will be removed from the trains. So, if ATP fails, what happens if the driver goes through a red signal?? (Blows dust off this thread) ATP fails safe so a train CANNOT go through a red signal (but can be stopped well before it gets there!). |
|
