"Cannot be relied upon..."

You are here: Home > Forum > Wishlist > Features wish list > "Cannot be relied upon..."

Page 1 of 1

"Cannot be relied upon..." 11/05/2015 at 08:31 #72073
kbarber
Avatar
1712 posts 		Certain 'trains' (usually engineers' machines) cannot be relied upon to operate track circuits and therefore have to be worked under special instructions. I don't know the detail (in truth I never worked one under track circuit block) but I think it involved the signalman holding a controlled signal at danger behind a machine and the machine driver phoning in from a specified signal to confirm it had arrived complete with tail lamp, at which point the block in rear could be released.

I imagine a new category of train would be needed for creating timetables, which would trigger (I imagine) a new bit of core code. Signals/locations to phone in from would have to be specified in the timetable. Wiki pages would need a bit of editing to specify what signals should be held at danger (which would normally, I guess, appear in the box Special Instructions).

It would all make the task of regulating most interesting, as it would need a margin finding for the machine to reach the signal where it phoned in before a following train reached the signal with the block.
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 11/05/2015 at 10:57 #72080
peterb
Avatar
451 posts
Online 		This is certainly the case on the Derby Sinfin branch I believe. AFAIK no DMUs are permitted on the branch.
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 11/05/2015 at 10:59 #72081
BarryM
Avatar
2158 posts 		If I recall, Kurt's 1955 Kings Cross timetable had engineer trains in it.

Barry
Barry, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Last edited: 11/05/2015 at 11:00 by BarryM
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 11/05/2015 at 11:08 #72082
jc92
Avatar
3630 posts 		" said:
This is certainly the case on the Derby Sinfin branch I believe. AFAIK no DMUs are permitted on the branch.
Sinfin Central used to have a DMU service worked by 101's then latterly by 150's and 156's.

as at 1993 which is the timetable I currently have on the go there is a single 156 working from derby to sinfin which then works to matlock.
"We don't stop camborne wednesdays"
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 11/05/2015 at 11:17 #72083
peterb
Avatar
451 posts
Online 		" said:
" said:
This is certainly the case on the Derby Sinfin branch I believe. AFAIK no DMUs are permitted on the branch.
Sinfin Central used to have a DMU service worked by 101's then latterly by 150's and 156's.

as at 1993 which is the timetable I currently have on the go there is a single 156 working from derby to sinfin which then works to matlock.
IIRC the last passenger train ran on 16 May 93, for the next ten years almost this service was replaced by a taxi. This was because the 'new' Sprinters aren't compatible with the low voltage TCs on the branch.
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 11/05/2015 at 17:28 #72091
Ron_J
Avatar
329 posts 		Very few - if any - OTMs in operation today cannot be relied upon to actuate track circuits. The last such machines were phased out ten or more years ago.
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 11/05/2015 at 23:06 #72098
ozrail
Avatar
197 posts 		When the Kings Cross Power Box was commissioned in 1978 they still had to deal with partly-fitted or unfitted trains. When train classes 7, 8 and 9 were signalled through some locations a yellow flashing light was provided on the panel to remind the signaller not to allow another train to follow it. The only signal mentioned in the article was signal 684 at Hitchin, but there were a least 6 others. I always liked this method of block-working a train through a section although I'm not really sure if it was linked to the train description. Reference Modern Railways April 1978.
Last edited: 11/05/2015 at 23:07 by ozrail
Reason: grammer
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 12/05/2015 at 05:02 #72099
Ron_J
Avatar
329 posts 		I believe Carlisle also had these controls, which were linked to the TD.
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 12/05/2015 at 08:56 #72100
RainbowNines
Avatar
272 posts 		Obviously this isn't replicated on the Carlisle sim - but since I enjoy masochism, how would I be expected to handle these trains to match the "real world"? Just hold the train behind?

Could you explain why these would be treated as such? Are unfitted trains more likely to part?
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 12/05/2015 at 09:13 #72101
ozrail
Avatar
197 posts 		Unfitted means that the train has no continuous air-brake throughout the train so if the train breaks apart the rear part will keep rolling with no brakes to stop them.
Last edited: 12/05/2015 at 09:15 by ozrail
Reason: grammer
Log in to reply
The following user said thank you: RainbowNines
"Cannot be relied upon..." 12/05/2015 at 18:16 #72119
kbarber
Avatar
1712 posts 		The existence of unfitted freights was the reason there were catch points dotted around the place, usually to catch vehicles running back (wrong direction). Favourite places were at the bottom of gradients and a short distance in advance of signals/signalboxes/stations, so the rear portion of a divided train would be derailed before hitting anything that was approaching behind it.

Breakaways were certainly not uncommon when there were only handbrakes on the wagons, the only way of controlling the train was the loco brake and a handbrake in the brake van, and the couplings were three links that left something like 9 inches (200 - 250 mm) between buffer faces when under tension.
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 13/05/2015 at 17:10 #72149
TylerE
Avatar
149 posts 		That's one of those funny historical quirks, ins't it?

American railways standardized on automatic Janney-style couplers starting in the early 1890's, and by 1905 link-and-pin or chain couplings were virtually extinct.

Of course, on the other hand we generally lagged quite a bit behind in signalling.
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 13/05/2015 at 18:02 #72150
kbarber
Avatar
1712 posts 		I believe one of the reasons - at least before 1948 - was the prevalence of private-owner wagons, many of them for the coal trade. The owners baulked at the cost of continuous brakes and Parliament was absolutely on their side against the wickedness of the railway companies wanting a degree of safety. So unfitted loose-coupled freight continued for many years after its sell-by.
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 13/05/2015 at 18:55 #72153
TylerE
Avatar
149 posts 		That makes sense. Over here congress sided with the unions who wanted improved safety.
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 14/05/2015 at 07:37 #72163
Sparky
Avatar
84 posts 		It is a bit of a coincidence that I see this topic on the forum this afternoon. I have just spent 2hrs in a briefing meeting for an upcoming (19-21/5) closedown for the Hunter Valley. In NSW most (95%)of track machines are required to be "blocked" worked. This requires a protection officer to obtain a Track Occupancy Authority TOA for the movement of the track machine from 1 location to another or to allow for the track machine to work on track.

There are a few track machines that have been granted approval to run as a train but this is a very small list.

I have attached screenshot from 1 of the phoenix control screens showing a TOA in place on the system. This is indicated by the blue coloured track. The purple coloured track is when a track circuit is occupied in a block. 5M72N is the track machines that are being transferred. They are given a train number/id when their moves are planned. You an see that the signals are cleared and this usually only occurs for transfers & not when they actually working.

Damien
Post has attachments. Log in to view them.
I intend to live forever. So far so good
Log in to reply
"Cannot be relied upon..." 14/05/2015 at 12:49 #72192
Frankley Junction
Avatar
37 posts 		Here is a fascinating report into a collision between an express and a track machine at Lapworth, on our very own Saltley South Bottom panel, from 1969, within weeks of Saltley opening.

http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=439

It goes to show that the rule book at the time is only as effective as the least scrupulous of those charged with operating under it, and also probably in reality the massive learning curve that staff transferring to PSBs from manual boxes faced.
Log in to reply
Back