Page 2 of 2
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 30/05/2017 at 10:03 #95471 | |
Peter Bennet
5360 posts |
jc92 in post 95470 said:CTD Sig in post 95469 said:Indeed it is, I'm a NRT Feedback Panel and am supposed to be visiting at some point.No, the TTs are done on a regional basis. The Peterborough Sector covers ECML Stevenage to Newark, XC Line to Melton, the XC line to Ely, the Lincon line and even a small part of the GEML.Timetabling is all done centrally in Milton Keynes. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 30/05/2017 at 10:58 #95472 | |
JamesN
1575 posts |
CTD Sig in post 95467 said:TPWS' other name is ATPS.Never heard of that name for it within the industry. Log in to reply |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 30/05/2017 at 11:28 #95475 | |
Steamer
3922 posts |
JamesN in post 95472 said:CTD Sig in post 95467 said:No record of that following a Google search, or in a report on train protection systems published in the wake of Ladbroke Grove.TPWS' other name is ATPS.Never heard of that name for it within the industry. ATP is another subject entirely, of course, but this has only ever been fitted to the Paddington- Bristol TM/Parkway lines and part of the Chiltern route. CTD Sig: Either you've misunderstood your friend, or you're making this up as you go along. In any case, most of what you've posted does not match published documents, or the experience of a number of railway signallers and staff- one of whom is local to the area. You're more than welcome to ask questions and get clarification. "Don't stress/ relax/ let life roll off your backs./ Except for death and paying taxes/ everything in life.../ is only for now." (Avenue Q) Last edited: 30/05/2017 at 11:29 by Steamer Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 30/05/2017 at 12:23 #95480 | |
|
Late Turn
696 posts |
CTD Sig in post 95469 said:No, the TTs are done on a regional basis. The Peterborough Sector covers ECML Stevenage to Newark, XC Line to Melton, the XC line to Ely, the Lincon line and even a small part of the GEML. No it doesn't. There's a regional element to some parts of the timetabling process, yes. What *exactly* that involves, I don't know, but it's very limited nowadays. The "XC line to Melton" is most definitely *not* part of the "Peterborough Sector" (I'm sure the remaining 'regional' LNE train planners will all be based in York anyway) - anything west of Uffington (inclusive) comes under Derby. I don't buy for one second the suggestion that this mysterious train planner in Peterborough covers part of the GEML either. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Stephen Fulcher |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 30/05/2017 at 12:55 #95481 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2026 posts 
|
TPWS was installed as a cheaper version of ATP, which is present on the GW Main Line and Chiltern Line (although slightly different systems), where it was installed for trial purposes in the latter days of British Rail and remains to this day. Both versions of ATP are far superior to TPWS in the protection they provide but are also substantially more expensive to fit to both the infrastructure and trains. There is no form of comparison between the two at all, they are vastly different systems. TPWS only does one thing that ATP can do, namely stops a train that is going to fast approaching a red signal or permanent speed restriction. ATP "sends" the exact aspect of each signal to the train and the driver has to drive accordingly. ATP is fitted at every signal, whereas TPWS is only provided under a given set of circumstances, meaning most automatics don't have it, and a lot of controlled signals don't need it either. The two lines fitted with ATP are also fitted with TPWS as every train on the national network has to be fitted with TPWS, but very few have the correct ATP. Not only that, if you sent a Chiltern unit onto the GWML, or a GW HST on the Chiltern Line, the ATP wouldn't be compatible either. Back to the Little Bytham question, the signals there will definitely not have ATP, and may not have TPWS either as there is no conflict to protect against ahead of the signals concerned. Either way, neither system is capable of feeding anything back to the interlocking other than the fact it is operating correctly, and will not hold a signal at danger just to keep several sections apart between trains. Log in to reply The following users said thank you: jc92, Meld, BarryM |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 31/05/2017 at 12:47 #95513 | |
|
clive
2738 posts |
Stephen Fulcher in post 95481 said:Starting at milepost 86, the only signals with TPWS are 546, 548, 613, and 615. The latter two have two overspeed sensors. Note in particular that the controlled signals at Greatford LC do not have TPWS. The Down Slow has "leaf fall" treadles on every track circuit, sometimes two or three. As far as I know these are just treadles that break the track circuit feed when depressed, allowing a train to be detected even if the TC isn't shunting properly. I wonder if that's what CTD is referring to. Log in to reply |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 31/05/2017 at 14:47 #95520 | |
|
CTD Sig
29 posts |
Everyone says different things about my info. Now, I may not cover all the points and I'm very sorry if that's happened. I would ask anyone who wants to know a particular point to please give me a private message. I just wanted to say the information was picked up through various random chats. Of course, some information may be slightly inaccurate. Now, I am not making up as I go along as some suggest. I have double checked her operation remit. It is including the line to Norwich from PETERBOROUGH, not as I thought the GEML. Sorry about that. About Melton, it is a shared operation line. She is effectively in charge up to Melton and the Derby manager in charge from there. ATPS stands for ADVANCED Train Protection System not ATS: Automatic Train Protection. On the TT front, I never said she didn't visit York. She has been there a fair few times. I will re-explain what's happened to everyone involved. One day, I was browsing the forums and reading this and that. I saw this article and opened it. Having remembered a conversation a few weeks ago with my friend, I set about conveying this information to the public. If anyone is unhappy, just please don't read it. I have had plenty of questions and queries put to me about my friend. If there are any sensible questions (e.g. 'I've never heard of something' or 'what is it?'  I will endeavour to answer it. Even better, write me a private message. I can answer these in a way more specific to your question.Also, around a third of those involved are interested calling me a liar instead of dealing with 'Red aspect at Little Bytham' Please set up a new thread in the right section of the forum.' I will just as happily answer your questions on a new forum. Hope you enjoy! P.S. Please DO read the above posts before asking a question, most of the posts are ones I've already heard. Secondly, please condense your posts into one, covering all the subjects you wanted to raise. I am not a full-time forum poster! Log in to reply |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 31/05/2017 at 15:04 #95521 | |
Ltbuckler
9 posts |
Signals P577, P579, P578 & P576 all used to protect the fast-slow crossovers, emergency ground frame and engineers siding at little Bytham. All have since been removed. For whatever reason the route setting functionality seems to have been retained, possibly to limit the amount of interlocking alterations, as little Bytham relay interlocking is still in use. Please see attached drawings.    Post has attachments. Log in to view them. Log in to reply The following users said thank you: jc92, JamesN |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 31/05/2017 at 15:59 #95522 | |
jc92
3629 posts |
CTD Sig in post 95520 said:Everyone says different things about my info.Noones calling you a liar, however in the interest of it being a public forum theres a duty of sorts to ensure misinformation isnt spread whether intentional or accidental with the best of intentions. "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Last edited: 31/05/2017 at 16:00 by jc92 Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 31/05/2017 at 16:52 #95523 | |
GeoffM
6282 posts |
CTD Sig in post 95520 said:One day, I was browsing the forums and reading this and that. I saw this article and opened it. Having remembered a conversation a few weeks ago with my friend, I set about conveying this information to the public. If anyone is unhappy, just please don't read it. I have had plenty of questions and queries put to me about my friend. If there are any sensible questions (e.g. 'I've never heard of something' or 'what is it?'Many of the people who have queried your posts are actually railway experts - whether S&T, signalling design engineers, drivers, signallers - you name it, we have at least somebody covering that specialty. You'd do well to learn from these people. SimSig Boss Log in to reply The following users said thank you: postal, DriverCurran, andyb0607, headshot119, Dick, Steamer, JamesN, Late Turn, Stephen Fulcher, BarryM |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 31/05/2017 at 19:13 #95529 | |
|
Late Turn
696 posts |
CTD Sig in post 95520 said:I have double checked her operation remit. It is including the line to Norwich from PETERBOROUGH, not as I thought the GEML. Sorry about that. About Melton, it is a shared operation line. She is effectively in charge up to Melton and the Derby manager in charge from there. No. The Derby planners (not necessarily managers) are responsible for everything west of Uffington (inclusive). As a relief signalman along the whole line, I regularly liaised with timetable planners when there were conflicts or issues with individual schedules. Every time, it was dealt with through Derby (and most of the problems that I raised related to Langham, Oakham, Manton or Ketton, so south/east of Melton). None of this changes the straightforward fact that the vast majority of timetabling work is undertaken centrally at Milton Keynes. CTD Sig in post 95520 said: ATPS stands for ADVANCED Train Protection System not ATS: Automatic Train Protection. Never heard of it when I was a signalman, and I haven't heard of it since I crossed to the 'dark side' either. My depot has plenty of work over the line in question too, so I'd imagine that at least someone would have heard of it... CTD Sig in post 95520 said: On the TT front, I never said she didn't visit York. She has been there a fair few times. I suggested that, if such a role existed, it'd be a regional role covering the whole of LNE and therefore based in York. CTD Sig in post 95520 said: Also, around a third of those involved are interested calling me a liar instead of dealing with 'Red aspect at Little Bytham' Please set up a new thread in the right section of the forum.' No-one has called you a liar. There are a great many inconsistencies in the information that you've provided though, whether that's second-hand information or otherwise, and that needs to be addressed, and I think it needs to be addressed in this thread lest anyone should stumble upon it in the future. Log in to reply |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 01/06/2017 at 13:05 #95548 | |
|
CTD Sig
29 posts |
Sorry, perhaps my language was too strong. I'm really sorry if anyone is offended. I was just a bit hurried at the time.
Log in to reply |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 01/06/2017 at 15:52 #95553 | |
|
clive
2738 posts |
CTD Sig in post 95449 said:ATSC-DA: Automatic Tailback Signal Check-Delays AvoidanceI made an FoI request to RAIB. They state that they hold no information. I've also made a request to Network Rail, though don't hold your breath. Log in to reply The following users said thank you: Stephen Fulcher, Late Turn, Edgemaster |
| Red aspects at Little Bytham?? 01/06/2017 at 20:02 #95558 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5360 posts |
clive in post 95553 said:CTD Sig in post 95449 said:Good Grief an FOI asked, acknowledged and answered in one day, is that a record?ATSC-DA: Automatic Tailback Signal Check-Delays AvoidanceI made an FoI request to RAIB. They state that they hold no information. I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |