Page 1 of 1
| Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 10/12/2011 at 02:07 #24812 | |
maxand
1637 posts |
In SimSig it seems these words are used interchangeably, particularly Train Describer and Headcode. However, on reading around I get the impression that in real life, headcode, which used to be the standard term, is now only a colloquialism for Train Reporting Number (a bureaucratic mouthful, as usual), whereas Train Describer is not a headcode but a computerized system for transferring Train Descriptions to berths. What's common usage in real life? Train reporting number Westinghouse Standard Train Describer Last edited: 10/12/2011 at 02:16 by maxand Log in to reply |
| Re: Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 10/12/2011 at 05:11 #24813 | |
|
Firefly
521 posts |
Quote:What's common usage in real life?Just the word description. What's the description of that train? That's the wrong description You forgot to describe that train to me Some folk will use the term head code I'm the same way that some call signaller Bobbies and Signals Boards or Sticks but generally I feel most would just call it a description. Quote: Train Describer is not a headcode but a computerized system for transferring Train Descriptions to berths There are other types of train describers which just sent the next signaller along the line a description of the approaching train. Also Bournemouth to Branksome used to describe trains using a block bell. (It was fully track circuited) Last edited: 10/12/2011 at 05:12 by Firefly Log in to reply The following user said thank you: maxand |
| Re: Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 10/12/2011 at 11:00 #24820 | |
|
mfcooper
707 posts |
Wording also depends on where you are. At Victoria ASC, when talking between your colleagues, we use the word "Digit". eg: "You've forgotten to change the digit of X to Y" (NB: usually at Sutton for the FCC services) But we also use the words "Headcode" and "Description". Network Rail, officially, are trying to get rid of slang throughout the railway, and I believe "Headcode" is treated as slang (whereas Train Description is the 'correct' term). However, they also encourage people to come to "a clear understanding" between each other, and *everyone* knows the word "Headcode", so it is still in use. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: maxand |
| Re: Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 10/12/2011 at 16:24 #24829 | |
guyh
54 posts |
Just about everyone I know (at work at least) refers to these 4-character codes as "Headcodes". I much prefer the term "Train ID". I used to be the head of train planning in my company, and I would insist we called them "Train ID"s - that's what the field in the schedule data says they are called. Admittedly this was a losing battle, but a fun one because nobody had the slightest clue what I was being awkward about. The field called "Headcode" was for other stuff: the 2-number route codes mainly on Southern region services, but nowadays the field is used for four digits of the Retail Sales ID (RSID) that forms a unique identifier for trains in reservation systems - can be left blank in which case the number will be automatically applied by the reservation system from unused values (the rest of the digits are always automatically applied and differentiate TOCs etc). As others have said, the terms are generally all used for the same thing. When Matt mentioned the "digit" terminology in Derby a few weeks ago that was the first time I'd heard it. I suppose it comes from routes where a train will use the same "destination/route" letter (ie 2nd character) in both directions and therefore it will just be the "digits" at the end that change. I just had a peek at Sutton and indeed 2O81 is about to form 2O82 and the opposite way round the loop, 2V79 is about to form 2V80; classic example. Guy. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: maxand |
| Re: Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 10/12/2011 at 19:11 #24833 | |
|
kbarber
1712 posts |
Another minefield I'm afraid, largely down to history. I can't find the post I put together a while ago about the development of train describers; apologies for that, please bear with me. The earliest varieties of box-to-box train describer used a clockwork mechanism and electric pulses on the line wire to send (usually) some kind of route or destination description, usually on a circular instrument with descriptions painted around the face. Mostly they were used in conjunction with Absolute Block instruments and usually only in very complex areas. The ILC codes usually referred to classes of train; trains carried a headcode made up of lamps (sometimes discs - usually white) in various positions, denoting the class (and more rarely the route of the train - usual places to find that were Liverpool Street or the Southern companies). When (what we now call) Track Circuit Block arrived on the scene, it was a no-brainer to use description by block bell (same codes as the "Is Line Clear?" of AB) where things were reasonably simple or the familiar clock-face describers where complex routing was necessary. By this time the Southern Railway had electric trains that carried a 2-character headcode consisting of letters &/or numbers to denote route (and Southern ILC codes always focused on route not class in any case); many of these early train describer installations were on the SR (Blackfriars/Holborn Viaduct, Charing X/Cannon St - London Bridge & Lewisham). From the 1930s the "magazine" type was introduced, that showed 1st 2nd & 3rd trains approaching (and could hold further descriptions in blind storage if necessary); these invariably combined route & class information and descriptions had to be transmitted manually (by pressing a single button) as each train passed. By the late '30s automatic train describers were appearing; the LNER made great use of them and they gave both class and route details, the latter using local codes for each installation. Headcodes were still mainly by positioning lamps on the front of the loco. Starting with the diesels of the 1955 Modernisation Plan, British Rail introduced the familiar 4-character train descriptions. The new diesels had headcode boxes fitted and the description of the train was displayed by manually-operated roller blinds. Hence the use of "headcode" for train descriptions. The describers fitted in signalboxes were officially termed "4-character" describers but railwaymen sometimes fell in to calling them "4-digit" describers. When the Bournemouth Line was electrified in 1967, fully-automatic 4-digit describers were provided in the new panel box at Surbiton, the 1930s L-frame at Woking and on to Eastleigh. London side of Surbiton, the old magazine-type describers were retained. When the 1936 L-frame at Waterloo was replaced by an NX panel (early 1980s) new magazine-type describers were provided! The signalmen believe ever after that "the Digits" should have been extended all the way up to Waterloo - the persistence of manual description often led to errors being transmitted and Waterloo had a set of binoculars in the box so that, at times of disruption, the signalmen could read the headcodes of trains as they came in sight; at such times the signals would be left at danger until the approaching train was identified! But for the most part, as Max speculates, "Describer" is the apparatus that transmits and displays "(Train) Descriptions". Log in to reply The following users said thank you: maxand, alan_s, BarryM |
| Re: Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 11/12/2011 at 01:50 #24845 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
Thank you all for your interesting comments. To achieve consistency from now on, particularly in the Wiki, I'll choose to use "TD" to signify "Train Description", not "Train Describer" and avoid "headcode" although referring to it as slang for TD.
Log in to reply |
| Re: Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 11/12/2011 at 15:27 #24881 | |
|
Phil-jmw
674 posts |
" said:Just about everyone I know (at work at least) refers to these 4-character codes as "Headcodes". I much prefer the term "Train ID"Guy, Casting my mind back to the late 1980's when I became a TOPS Clerk, I was taught on my Basic TOPS course that there is a very distinct difference between the terms 'Train Reporting Number'(Headcode) and 'Train ID'. The reporting number, as stated in earlier posts, is the 4-character alpha-numeric, but Train ID is the 10-character number unique to each train, made up of the first two digits of the origin 'Stanox', the 4-character train reporting number, the single-character 'T-Speed', an eighth character (either alpha, numeric or a skip ';' ) the name of which escapes me(it was a long time ago!) and finally the 2-character origin date-of-departure, eg 596C31C;28. 59 (from origin stanox 59011) 6C31 (rep.no) C (T-Speed) ; (this field name escapes me) 28 (date of departure from origin). T-Speeds 'C' and 'M' refer to 'Conditional' (WTT) freight trains or 'Mandatory' (WTT) passenger trains. The example shown above refers to 6C31 WTT service from Mountsorrel to Radlett, booked to depart on the 28th of the month. Phil. Last edited: 11/12/2011 at 15:28 by Phil-jmw Log in to reply |
| Re: Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 11/12/2011 at 17:49 #24890 | |
Steamer
3922 posts 
|
" said:eighth character (either alpha, numeric or a skip ';' ) the name of which escapes me(it was a long time ago!)This refers to the time slot the train leaves it's originating station. The characters mean: 0: 00:00 to 00:59. 1: 01:00 to 01:59 etc. until: 6: 06:00 to 06:59 at which point, the character becomes a letter: A: 07:00 to 07:29 B: 07:30 to 07:59 etc. until: X: 18:30 to 18:59 Y: 19:00 to 19:59 Z: 20:00 to 20:59 7: 21:00 to 21:59 8: 22:00 to 22:59 9: 23:00 to 23:59 Note that I got this a while ago from another forum (which I now can't find), so it may have changed. "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: 11/12/2011 at 17:49 by Steamer Log in to reply |
| Re: Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 11/12/2011 at 19:28 #24901 | |
|
UKTrainMan
1803 posts |
Asked a random train driver yesterday (random as in I didn't know him, he was simply the driver of my train) and he said it's headcode. When I asked him about "Train Description" he said nope, they (drivers) never refer to it as that. On the other hand, a certain generally well known person I speak to on messenger (they are registered here, have logged in a few months ago, but haven't ever posted) really dislikes me calling them headcodes. Personally, I call them headcodes - never had a problem with this, staff and others know what I mean.
Any views and / or opinions expressed by myself are from me personally and do not represent those of any company I either work for or am a consultant for. Last edited: 11/12/2011 at 19:31 by UKTrainMan Log in to reply |
| Re: Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 11/12/2011 at 19:35 #24902 | |
|
derbybest
274 posts |
To me (and i used to be a guard) it has always been headcode Chris Log in to reply |
| Re: Train Describers, Train Descriptions and Headcodes 11/12/2011 at 19:46 #24906 | |
|
ralphjwchadkirk
275 posts |
To be honest, I call them headcodes as well. However the correct term is train description/train reporting number.
Log in to reply |