Page 1 of 1
| Manual Block Working 22/04/2023 at 16:21 #151383 | |
Jan
889 posts |
The manual mentions that some trains are to be worked under Manual Block Working procedures due to them not reliably operating track circuits (speaking of which, what is it about Australian track circuits that a light engine or even two or three of them together (!) will not operate them reliably?) and anybody interested in further details should have a look at Network Rule 'NSY 512'. Having done that, a question poses itself: According to that document, basic block working applies between a controlled signal and another controlled signal (or a nominated location). That makes sense, because you need to prevent a following train from entering that block section before you've confirmed it clear by alternative means. However in that case how is e.g. the included 2011 timetable supposed to work out? D423 (light engine annotated as "Operate under Manual Block Working procedures"  is timetabled to pass Hawkesbury River at 01:13 and Gosford at 01:40, while following 294M is only five minutes behind, being timetabled at Hawkesbury River at 01:18 and Gosford at 01:45. There are no controlled signals between Hawkesbury River and Gosford, so those timings can't work if Manual Block Working is really supposed to apply across that whole section.
Two million people attempt to use Birmingham's magnificent rail network every year, with just over a million of them managing to get further than Smethwick. Log in to reply |
| Manual Block Working 22/04/2023 at 21:09 #151391 | |
flabberdacks
580 posts |
That's interesting, I'm not sure why D423 has that comment applied. You definitely don't have to block work a pair of 81s unless they traverse the areas highlighted in this image, taken from the Train Operating Conditions manual. I'll ask the timetable writer if there's a reason.
Last edited: 22/04/2023 at 21:13 by flabberdacks Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Manual Block Working 22/04/2023 at 21:35 #151393 | |
|
flabberdacks
580 posts |
Mantis 38519 - description is incorrect, definitely a non block working movement. Thanks for that
Log in to reply |
