Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2005 22:48:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Christopher J on Oct 24, 2005 22:57:17 GMT
WR24 is showing a danger aspect but the Trainstop is lowered...   |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2005 22:59:59 GMT
WR24 is showing a danger aspect but the Trainstop is lowered... Indeed. I wonder how long it has been doing that and whether or not BAET or aetearlscourt find it shocking that it is doing that... |
|
|
|
Post by russe on Oct 24, 2005 23:07:00 GMT
Looks like the other trainstop is lowered as well, but we don't know what aspect the other-way signal is showing.
Russ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2005 23:08:49 GMT
Both trainstops were indeed lowered.
|
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 25, 2005 0:42:23 GMT
Being as that is the eastbound test track and looks as it has not been used for about a week I suspect that water has got into the works or maybe different arrangements apply. Is that track wire up for ATO testing as well?
|
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Oct 25, 2005 1:08:05 GMT
WR24 is showing a danger aspect but the Trainstop is lowered... Indeed. I wonder how long it has been doing that and whether or not BAET or aetearlscourt find it shocking that it is doing that... Was there a train about to leave the platform and pass WR24? If not, then nothing whatsoever is shocking about it. A train approaching from the opposite direction will at least be able to berth in the platform without becoming rear-tripped. Did the trainstop raise after a train arrived in the platform? The simplest way to describe our signalling system is signal+trainstop. But there are many places which are fully protected but appear (on the surface) to work in non-standard ways. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2005 8:23:16 GMT
There were absolutely no trains at all on the eastbound line anywhere, so it wasn't an approach lowering mechanism at work.
|
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 25, 2005 9:51:45 GMT
No you misunderstand me TOK. If ATO mode has been set up for the test track I think that all the trainstops lower on their own for the duration of the tests. Assuming, that is, that ATO does indeed aplly to the track.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2005 10:57:25 GMT
No you misunderstand me TOK. If ATO mode has been set up for the test track I think that all the trainstops lower on their own for the duration of the tests. Assuming, that is, that ATO does indeed aplly to the track. So far as I know it doesn't. |
|
|
|
Post by russe on Oct 25, 2005 11:23:50 GMT
I came across a webpage last night with the signal codes (to area locations) given on them, but blowed if I can find it again! Edit: S'ok, guys, I've now found it again, lurking on tubeprune, from which I see WR24 is in the Northfields area. Russ |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196 
|
Post by Tom on Oct 25, 2005 13:06:58 GMT
WR24 is the WB starter from the EB platform at South Ealing. The Test Track doesn't have an ATO mode. The other trainstop would be down as it's an Auto.
Was there a train on the test track?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2005 13:32:29 GMT
WR24 is the WB starter from the EB platform at South Ealing. The Test Track doesn't have an ATO mode. The other trainstop would be down as it's an Auto. Was there a train on the test track? No. AFAICS the track was clear from the Northfields inner home all the way to the Acton converging intermediate home - unless something was lurking under the depot. This was on Saturday, BTW, whilst I was headed to the Museum Depot. |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Oct 26, 2005 17:35:03 GMT
Hmmm.... not sure then. Either there's a funny in the trainstop release circuit or a failure of some sort. I'd need to look at prints to decide which one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2005 18:42:31 GMT
Hmmm.... not sure then. Either there's a funny in the trainstop release circuit or a failure of some sort. I'd need to look at prints to decide which one. What sort of 'funnies' are we referring to here?  |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Oct 26, 2005 21:51:05 GMT
What sort of 'funnies' are we referring to here? Not the sort of funnies that any reporter would be interested in. The trainstop may be down, but the signal still shows the foundation aspect in signalling. The trainstop is after all the back-up safety feature and not the front line method of signalling. As there were also no trains about, this could also lead to the assumption that the observed matter had failed-safe and blocked the line. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2005 7:06:36 GMT
if it had failed to raise the head the replacing track circuit (nest track after trip) would also fail due to the way the local coil is wired around the trainstop it has to prove the trainstop has come to a fully ON (up) position.
Or its has been put in the OFF (down) position delibertley but this is not suppose to happen this is known as pegging
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2005 11:00:29 GMT
i thik its just the trainstop going on strike...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2005 20:49:49 GMT
if it had failed to raise the head the replacing track circuit (nest track after trip) would also fail due to the way the local coil is wired around the trainstop it has to prove the trainstop has come to a fully ON (up) position. So why is the auto behind WR24 (presumably the one attached to the berth track circuit in the test track platform) have a fully lowered trainstop? From what I understand, if the berth track circuit was failed due to the trainstop of WR24 failing down and locking the signal to red, surely the auto behind that (A453? A455?) would be red as well... Or its has been put in the OFF (down) position delibertley but this is not suppose to happen this is known as pegging How do you do that anyway? Is it as simple as taking the air off, locking the trainstop in place and force-feeding some of the detection circuits? |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Oct 29, 2005 20:54:50 GMT
if it had failed to raise the head the replacing track circuit (nest track after trip) would also fail due to the way the local coil is wired around the trainstop it has to prove the trainstop has come to a fully ON (up) position. So why is the auto behind WR24 (presumably the one attached to the berth track circuit in the test track platform) have a fully lowered trainstop? From what I understand, if the berth track circuit was failed due to the trainstop of WR24 failing down and locking the signal to red, surely the auto behind that (A453? A455?) would be red as well... WR24's trainstop is probably proved in a different way. If the trainstop on the auto had failed this is what would happen, but on 24's the trainstop is proved in the lever lock. Or its has been put in the OFF (down) position delibertley but this is not suppose to happen this is known as pegging How do you do that anyway? Is it as simple as taking the air off, locking the trainstop in place and force-feeding some of the detection circuits? Air off, push trainstop head down manually, insert what is called a 'pegging-off block', and loop out the appropriate trainstop proving contact. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2005 21:10:23 GMT
WR24's trainstop is probably proved in a different way. If the trainstop on the auto had failed this is what would happen, but on 24's the trainstop is proved in the lever lock. So a trainstop failed down would open/close contacts on the detection circuits that would output a Boolean false on one of the interlocks on lever 24 in WR IMR, right? Or is it more complicated than that? How do you do that anyway? Is it as simple as taking the air off, locking the trainstop in place and force-feeding some of the detection circuits? Air off, push trainstop head down manually, insert what is called a 'pegging-off block', and loop out the appropriate trainstop proving contact. Interesting - I thought the spring on a trainstop was pretty heavy-duty and not pushed down that easily... |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Oct 30, 2005 8:59:49 GMT
WR24's trainstop is probably proved in a different way. If the trainstop on the auto had failed this is what would happen, but on 24's the trainstop is proved in the lever lock. So a trainstop failed down would open/close contacts on the detection circuits that would output a Boolean false on one of the interlocks on lever 24 in WR IMR, right? Or is it more complicated than that? I suppose in a computer-science world that is effectively what happens. The trainstop staying off will cause 24GVCR to remain de-energised and a contact of 24 GVCR energised is used to energise 24's lever lock. Air off, push trainstop head down manually, insert what is called a 'pegging-off block', and loop out the appropriate trainstop proving contact. Interesting - I thought the spring on a trainstop was pretty heavy-duty and not pushed down that easily... They are but they can be pushed down - I normally push the head down with my hands though (the last time I tried to hold one off by standing on it I nearly flew half way across the signal school). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2005 18:22:29 GMT
you need to put some weight on then tom ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
you could easy break your wrist holding it down with your hand not recommended
|
|
