Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2005 19:28:09 GMT
I was at Piccadilly Circus today and noticed that the W/B starter retained its illuminated 'A', back from the days when BP frame could hold Piccadilly services late at night.
Are these 'A's proved in any way - i.e. if the 'A' bulb fails, the stick drops to red?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2005 21:21:44 GMT
nope its just a visual to let the driver know that the site is in auto through working dont know wot procedures it would involve if there was a SPAD on one of them
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Team on Mar 20, 2005 21:38:32 GMT
The procedure from a drivers point of view (whether in the case of a SPAD or a failure) is as follows:
If the 'A' is illuminated, the procedure is that for an automatic signal - i.e. the Controller can instruct the driver to follow the 'appropriate procedure'. He can do that with an Auto, and with the 'A' illuminated, that's what it is.
But if the 'A's not lit (either by failure of the illumination or because it's been taken out of 'Auto' mode) the authority would have to come from the signaller or an 'Operating Official'.
I would NOT take authority from the Controller if he were to tell me it was a failed bulb! Supposing he was wrong? Irrespective of whether you'd SPADed the signal or it had failed, you'd then be facing an 'aggravated SPAD' discussion - which could well result in a Disciplinary Board and the sack!
If a driver is ever in any doubt about the identification of a signal - auto or controlled - he should follow the procedure for an Semi (controlled), even if it ddelays the service a few minutes. The worst he can be criticised for is being too cautious.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2005 22:03:49 GMT
The procedure from a drivers point of view (whether in the case of a SPAD or a failure) is as follows: If the 'A' is illuminated, the procedure is that for an automatic signal - i.e. the Controller can instruct the driver to follow the 'appropriate procedure'. He can do that with an Auto, and with the 'A' illuminated, that's what it is. But if the 'A's not lit (either by failure of the illumination or because it's been taken out of 'Auto' mode) the authority would have to come from the signaller or an 'Operating Official'. I would NOT take authority from the Controller if he were to tell me it was a failed bulb! Supposing he was wrong? Irrespective of whether you'd SPADed the signal or it had failed, you'd then be facing an 'aggravated SPAD' discussion - which could well result in a Disciplinary Board and the sack! If a driver is ever in any doubt about the identification of a signal - auto or controlled - he should follow the procedure for an Semi (controlled), even if it ddelays the service a few minutes. The worst he can be criticised for is being too cautious. Thanks for the info Dave. This is why I wanted to know if the 'A's were proved in any way - i.e. if the bobby either knew from a telltale on the diagram, or from word passed from the Line Controller, that an 'A' on one of his signals had failed, it would save the drivers a lot of hassle and would get things moving to get it relamped/relensed/rewired/etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Team on Mar 21, 2005 9:12:39 GMT
Thanks for the info Dave. This is why I wanted to know if the 'A's were proved in any way - i.e. if the bobby either knew from a telltale on the diagram, or from word passed from the Line Controller, that an 'A' on one of his signals had failed, it would save the drivers a lot of hassle and would get things moving to get it relamped/relensed/rewired/etc. You *might* know that we've a couple of areas where there are illminated 'A's - between Sloane Sq and South Ken w/b and between Westminster and Embankment e/b. The signal diagrams don't even show that there are illuminated 'A's attached to the signals in question, and the rule is if they're not lit, then they're semi's and act appropriately. Whether a driver would notice the lack of illumination and report it or not I don't know - you're really only interested in the aspect of it, and it would only be in the event of a SPAD or failure that the question of illumination becomes relevant! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2005 10:48:51 GMT
You *might* know that we've a couple of areas where there are illminated 'A's - between Sloane Sq and South Ken w/b and between Westminster and Embankment e/b. I knew of the As nea South Ken due to the floodgate, but why the ones between Westminster and Embankment? Is there another OOU floodgate over there? The signal diagrams don't even show that there are illuminated 'A's attached to the signals in question, and the rule is if they're not lit, then they're semi's and act appropriately. Whether a driver would notice the lack of illumination and report it or not I don't know - you're really only interested in the aspect of it, and it would only be in the event of a SPAD or failure that the question of illumination becomes relevant! True, but just the same I would have thought that getting an A fixed would have been important. |
|
|
|
Post by trainopd78 on Mar 21, 2005 11:07:54 GMT
I knew of the As nea South Ken due to the floodgate, but why the ones between Westminster and Embankment? Is there another OOU floodgate over there? . There are 2 floodgates, one each end of Embankment Station. The FDX signal with the illuminated A is on the eastbound between Westminster and Embankment. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2005 17:42:51 GMT
the FDX signal on the eastbound is the station starter at westminister im not 100% but the signal with the A on it aint it EHX **** . Embankment was my old maintenance area and im sure theres no A sign on a signal on the westbound but as i said im not 100% on that one
|
|
solidbond
Staff Emeritus
'Give me 118 reasons for an Audible Warning on a C Stock'
Posts: 1,215
|
Post by solidbond on Mar 22, 2005 17:53:13 GMT
the FDX signal on the eastbound is the station starter at westminister im not 100% but the signal with the A on it aint it EHX **** . Embankment was my old maintenance area and im sure theres no A sign on a signal on the westbound but as i said im not 100% on that one You are correct about there being no floodgate 'X' signal on the W/B. However you are partly correct about the E/B. There are in fact 2 Floodgate 'X' signals on the E/B. FDX 805, the outer home for Embankment, which has the illuminated 'A'. The other one is the starter at Westminster E/B, which is FDX801, but no longer has an illuminated 'A'. It was removed during the engineering works for the Jubilee extension, and never replaced. I believe that this was because the rules had changed by then that you couldn't pass a station starter at danger without authority anyway, so the 'A' became a little bit redundant  |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Team on Mar 22, 2005 17:57:47 GMT
the FDX signal on the eastbound is the station starter at westminister im not 100% but the signal with the A on it aint it EHX **** . Embankment was my old maintenance area and im sure theres no A sign on a signal on the westbound but as i said im not 100% on that one Nope, definitely not. The only one w/b is between Sloane Square and South Ken on FDX766 and the one e/b is on FDX805 between Westminster and Embankment. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2005 18:37:47 GMT
as i said couldnt be 100% i was only going through there on sunday after a circle (212) decided to get rear tripped into embankment
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2005 21:15:55 GMT
as i said couldnt be 100% i was only going through there on sunday after a circle (212) decided to get rear tripped into embankment Ah clealy an every day occurance! lol |
|
