|
|
Post by programmes1 on Oct 30, 2007 18:22:41 GMT
Can someone help
1. Is this interlocking controlled by Baker St or Neasden?
2. Is it an IMR or SER?
|
|
|
|
Post by programmes1 on Oct 30, 2007 18:27:47 GMT
I'm hoping Citysig or Harsig come on.
|
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,970
|
Post by towerman on Oct 30, 2007 18:43:05 GMT
The IMR isn't actually at Green Pk station,it's in either Black or Blue Bull Lane(I can't remember which) which is off Piccadilly.
|
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Oct 30, 2007 18:46:24 GMT
Blue Ball Yard ;D
A fair trek it is too!
|
|
|
|
Post by Harsig on Oct 31, 2007 9:37:38 GMT
Can someone help 1. Is this interlocking controlled by Baker St or Neasden? 2. Is it an IMR or SER? The answer to your first question is yes. The answer to the second question is SER. (Blue Ball Yard) I should perhaps explain the answer to the first question. The current design arrangement is that the interlocking is controlled from Baker St via the Charing Cross site computer. When in this mode train routing is achieved in exactly the same way as the rest of the line i.e. trains are routed according to the timetable data held in the computer system. There is also the facility to transfer control of the interlocking to Neasden in an emergency. When Neasden is in control there is no facility for automatic routing according to the timetable and routes have to be set manually. There is however an automatic working facility that allows the same routes to clear repeatedly. Some while ago there was a long term problem with the site computer at Charing Cross which meant it was particularly unreliable. This prompted the Infraco to insist that as a matter of course Green Park be controlled from Neasden and this is still the case today, even though the problems with the Charing Cross Computer have long since been resolved. Naturally this means that the signals are set to automatically clear for routes to and from the extension with maunal intervention required every time a train is sent to Charing Cross. |
|
