|
Northern line signals
Just wondering why all the signals are bagged on the northern. I realise
its now running ATO but why not just disconnect the old signals entirely so they're off? -- Spud |
Northern line signals
On 16/09/2015 09:23, y wrote:
Just wondering why all the signals are bagged on the northern. I realise its now running ATO but why not just disconnect the old signals entirely so they're off? -- Spud Its the same on the Jubilee. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Northern line signals
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:50:40 +0100
Mike Bristow wrote: In article , y wrote: Just wondering why all the signals are bagged on the northern. I realise its now running ATO but why not just disconnect the old signals entirely so they're off? I expect that is because a signal that is bagged is clearly decommisioned (or not yet commisioned), but a signal that is unlit is required to be treated as a red signal - becuase that's the safe thing to do if the bulb blows. Sure - if signals are still being used. But they're not and all the drivers know it. Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. -- Spud |
Northern line signals
On 16.09.15 10:34, y wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:50:40 +0100 Mike Bristow wrote: In article , y wrote: Just wondering why all the signals are bagged on the northern. I realise its now running ATO but why not just disconnect the old signals entirely so they're off? I expect that is because a signal that is bagged is clearly decommisioned (or not yet commisioned), but a signal that is unlit is required to be treated as a red signal - becuase that's the safe thing to do if the bulb blows. Sure - if signals are still being used. But they're not and all the drivers know it. Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. -- Spud Perhaps they think that there are too many variables and that it is just better to play it safe in any event? |
Northern line signals
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:22:09 +0100
" wrote: On 16.09.15 10:34, y wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:50:40 +0100 Mike Bristow wrote: In article , y wrote: Just wondering why all the signals are bagged on the northern. I realise its now running ATO but why not just disconnect the old signals entirely so they're off? I expect that is because a signal that is bagged is clearly decommisioned (or not yet commisioned), but a signal that is unlit is required to be treated as a red signal - becuase that's the safe thing to do if the bulb blows. Sure - if signals are still being used. But they're not and all the drivers know it. Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. -- Spud Perhaps they think that there are too many variables and that it is just better to play it safe in any event? Could be I suppose. Seems a lot of effort tho since they'll switch off the signals eventually so why not do it immediately. Unless its for a fallback system case the ATO throws a massive wobbly that can't be fixed quickly. -- Spud |
Northern line signals
|
Northern line signals
On 16.09.15 22:44, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In message , y wrote: Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. On LU, if a train passes a red signal on ATO the driver is required to put the train into an emergency stop. Signals intended only to be passed by trains on ATO show white. That's on the Central and Victoria, however, is it not? |
Northern line signals
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:44:59 +0100
"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote: In message , y wrote: Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. On LU, if a train passes a red signal on ATO the driver is required to put the train into an emergency stop. Signals intended only to be passed by trains on ATO show white. Yes. Except if they were off they wouldn't be showing any aspect anyway would they. -- Spud |
Northern line signals
On 17.09.15 9:35, y wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:44:59 +0100 "Clive D. W. Feather" wrote: In message , y wrote: Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. On LU, if a train passes a red signal on ATO the driver is required to put the train into an emergency stop. Signals intended only to be passed by trains on ATO show white. Yes. Except if they were off they wouldn't be showing any aspect anyway would they. -- Spud And any driver worth his salt would would stop the train, call up his control centre and ask WTF, ATO or not, in the case of a dark signal It could be that there may have been some changes to the route or some temporary changes that either the driver missed or that LUL failed to properly communicate to train crews. It's not impossible. |
Northern line signals
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:29:28 +0100
" wrote: On 17.09.15 9:35, y wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:44:59 +0100 "Clive D. W. Feather" wrote: In message , y wrote: Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. On LU, if a train passes a red signal on ATO the driver is required to put the train into an emergency stop. Signals intended only to be passed by trains on ATO show white. Yes. Except if they were off they wouldn't be showing any aspect anyway would they. -- Spud And any driver worth his salt would would stop the train, call up his control centre and ask WTF, ATO or not, in the case of a dark signal So a driver that had been told "Right lads, we're running on ATO now, all the signals are switched off, you follow the computer in the cab" will stop as soon as he sees an off signal? Exactly how much booze has this guy drunk? -- Spud |
Northern line signals
On 17.09.15 13:35, y wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:29:28 +0100 " wrote: On 17.09.15 9:35, y wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:44:59 +0100 "Clive D. W. Feather" wrote: In message , y wrote: Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. On LU, if a train passes a red signal on ATO the driver is required to put the train into an emergency stop. Signals intended only to be passed by trains on ATO show white. Yes. Except if they were off they wouldn't be showing any aspect anyway would they. -- Spud And any driver worth his salt would would stop the train, call up his control centre and ask WTF, ATO or not, in the case of a dark signal So a driver that had been told "Right lads, we're running on ATO now, all the signals are switched off, you follow the computer in the cab" will stop as soon as he sees an off signal? Yep. Exactly how much booze has this guy drunk? None. |
Northern line signals
On 17.09.15 13:35, y wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:29:28 +0100 " wrote: On 17.09.15 9:35, y wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:44:59 +0100 "Clive D. W. Feather" wrote: In message , y wrote: Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. On LU, if a train passes a red signal on ATO the driver is required to put the train into an emergency stop. Signals intended only to be passed by trains on ATO show white. Yes. Except if they were off they wouldn't be showing any aspect anyway would they. -- Spud And any driver worth his salt would would stop the train, call up his control centre and ask WTF, ATO or not, in the case of a dark signal So a driver that had been told "Right lads, we're running on ATO now, all the signals are switched off, you follow the computer in the cab" will stop as soon as he sees an off signal? I assume that you are referring to any dark signal? The term "Off" refers to a signal with any aspect other than danger. |
Northern line signals
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:51:42 +0100
" wrote: On 17.09.15 13:35, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:29:28 +0100 " wrote: On 17.09.15 9:35, y wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:44:59 +0100 "Clive D. W. Feather" wrote: In message , y wrote: Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. On LU, if a train passes a red signal on ATO the driver is required to put the train into an emergency stop. Signals intended only to be passed by trains on ATO show white. Yes. Except if they were off they wouldn't be showing any aspect anyway would they. -- Spud And any driver worth his salt would would stop the train, call up his control centre and ask WTF, ATO or not, in the case of a dark signal So a driver that had been told "Right lads, we're running on ATO now, all the signals are switched off, you follow the computer in the cab" will stop as soon as he sees an off signal? Yep. So basically he ignores what he's been told to do and just slams on the emergency brake regardless. Got it. And how long exactly does he sit then? A minute? An hour? A week? Because that signal won't be coming back on again anytime soon. Exactly how much booze has this guy drunk? None. Drugs then. -- Spud |
Northern line signals
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 14:47:04 +0100
" wrote: On 17.09.15 13:35, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:29:28 +0100 " wrote: On 17.09.15 9:35, y wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:44:59 +0100 "Clive D. W. Feather" wrote: In message , y wrote: Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. On LU, if a train passes a red signal on ATO the driver is required to put the train into an emergency stop. Signals intended only to be passed by trains on ATO show white. Yes. Except if they were off they wouldn't be showing any aspect anyway would they. -- Spud And any driver worth his salt would would stop the train, call up his control centre and ask WTF, ATO or not, in the case of a dark signal So a driver that had been told "Right lads, we're running on ATO now, all the signals are switched off, you follow the computer in the cab" will stop as soon as he sees an off signal? I assume that you are referring to any dark signal? The term "Off" refers to a signal with any aspect other than danger. "Off" as in the standard english term for something electric that has no power supply. Anyway, your whole argument is drivel so I don't really care how you interpret what I say. -- Spud |
Northern line signals
On 2015\09\17 16:14, y wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:51:42 +0100 " wrote: On 17.09.15 13:35, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:29:28 +0100 " wrote: On 17.09.15 9:35, y wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:44:59 +0100 "Clive D. W. Feather" wrote: In message , y wrote: Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. On LU, if a train passes a red signal on ATO the driver is required to put the train into an emergency stop. Signals intended only to be passed by trains on ATO show white. Yes. Except if they were off they wouldn't be showing any aspect anyway would they. -- Spud And any driver worth his salt would would stop the train, call up his control centre and ask WTF, ATO or not, in the case of a dark signal So a driver that had been told "Right lads, we're running on ATO now, all the signals are switched off, you follow the computer in the cab" will stop as soon as he sees an off signal? Yep. So basically he ignores what he's been told to do and just slams on the emergency brake regardless. Got it. And how long exactly does he sit then? A minute? An hour? A week? Because that signal won't be coming back on again anytime soon. Exactly how much booze has this guy drunk? None. Drugs then. You know damn well that he does whatever his rulebook says, and that no verbal instruction can overrule his rulebook unless his rulebook specifically says that a verbal instruction can overrule it, and that most or all rules in the rulebook have arisen from specific incidents that killed people and are an attempt to prevent repetition of those deaths. You also know that Britain has the safest railway in the world. It's this determination to endlessly criticise transport staff for no good reason that has made you the laughing stock of the group. |
Northern line signals
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 17:01:06 +0100
Basil Jet wrote: You know damn well that he does whatever his rulebook says, and that no verbal instruction can overrule his rulebook unless his rulebook specifically says that a verbal instruction can overrule it, and that most or all rules in the rulebook have arisen from specific incidents that killed people and are an attempt to prevent repetition of those deaths. You also know that Britain has the safest railway in the world. It's this determination to endlessly criticise transport staff for no good reason that has made you the laughing stock of the group. Heh, yeah ok :) So Mr Rulebook. A driver who knows the line is running on ATO, been trained on the ATO with presumably an updated rulebook for the line will hit the emergency stop button at the first unpowered signal he sees even though he's been told they've all be switched off and to ignore them? Really? Are the drivers such stupid pavlovian automatons thats why the signals have to be bagged? Actually you know what , it wouldn't surprise me if they were. -- Spud |
Northern line signals
|
Northern line signals
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 20:36:59 +0100
Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\09\17 17:08, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 17:01:06 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: You know damn well that he does whatever his rulebook says, and that no verbal instruction can overrule his rulebook unless his rulebook specifically says that a verbal instruction can overrule it, and that most or all rules in the rulebook have arisen from specific incidents that killed people and are an attempt to prevent repetition of those deaths. You also know that Britain has the safest railway in the world. It's this determination to endlessly criticise transport staff for no good reason that has made you the laughing stock of the group. Heh, yeah ok :) So Mr Rulebook. A driver who knows the line is running on ATO, been trained on the ATO with presumably an updated rulebook for the line will hit the emergency stop button at the first unpowered signal he sees even though he's been told they've all be switched off and to ignore them? Really? Are the drivers such stupid pavlovian automatons thats why the signals have to be bagged? Actually you know what , it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Transport staff are an asset to this group. You are a liability to this group because you go out of your way to drive transport staff away. Blah blah blah. How about you answer the questions I posed Mr Transport Export who didn't know it was 3rd rail south of the Thames a few weeks back. -- Spud |
Northern line signals
On 2015\09\18 09:16, y wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 20:36:59 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\09\17 17:08, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 17:01:06 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: You know damn well that he does whatever his rulebook says, and that no verbal instruction can overrule his rulebook unless his rulebook specifically says that a verbal instruction can overrule it, and that most or all rules in the rulebook have arisen from specific incidents that killed people and are an attempt to prevent repetition of those deaths. You also know that Britain has the safest railway in the world. It's this determination to endlessly criticise transport staff for no good reason that has made you the laughing stock of the group. Heh, yeah ok :) So Mr Rulebook. A driver who knows the line is running on ATO, been trained on the ATO with presumably an updated rulebook for the line will hit the emergency stop button at the first unpowered signal he sees even though he's been told they've all be switched off and to ignore them? Really? Are the drivers such stupid pavlovian automatons thats why the signals have to be bagged? Actually you know what , it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Transport staff are an asset to this group. You are a liability to this group because you go out of your way to drive transport staff away. Blah blah blah. How about you answer the questions I posed Mr Transport Export who didn't know it was 3rd rail south of the Thames a few weeks back. Now you're just plain lying. |
Northern line signals
On 2015\09\18 09:26, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2015\09\18 09:16, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 20:36:59 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\09\17 17:08, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 17:01:06 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: You know damn well that he does whatever his rulebook says, and that no verbal instruction can overrule his rulebook unless his rulebook specifically says that a verbal instruction can overrule it, and that most or all rules in the rulebook have arisen from specific incidents that killed people and are an attempt to prevent repetition of those deaths. You also know that Britain has the safest railway in the world. It's this determination to endlessly criticise transport staff for no good reason that has made you the laughing stock of the group. Heh, yeah ok :) So Mr Rulebook. A driver who knows the line is running on ATO, been trained on the ATO with presumably an updated rulebook for the line will hit the emergency stop button at the first unpowered signal he sees even though he's been told they've all be switched off and to ignore them? Really? Are the drivers such stupid pavlovian automatons thats why the signals have to be bagged? Actually you know what , it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Transport staff are an asset to this group. You are a liability to this group because you go out of your way to drive transport staff away. Blah blah blah. How about you answer the questions I posed Mr Transport Export who didn't know it was 3rd rail south of the Thames a few weeks back. Now you're just plain lying. Ah, you're lying about this thread... http://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london...oolwich-2.html I should stop making fun of you. I think you genuinely must have suffered a head injury. |
Northern line signals
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:26:51 +0100
Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\09\18 09:16, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 20:36:59 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\09\17 17:08, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 17:01:06 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: You know damn well that he does whatever his rulebook says, and that no verbal instruction can overrule his rulebook unless his rulebook specifically says that a verbal instruction can overrule it, and that most or all rules in the rulebook have arisen from specific incidents that killed people and are an attempt to prevent repetition of those deaths. You also know that Britain has the safest railway in the world. It's this determination to endlessly criticise transport staff for no good reason that has made you the laughing stock of the group. Heh, yeah ok :) So Mr Rulebook. A driver who knows the line is running on ATO, been trained on the ATO with presumably an updated rulebook for the line will hit the emergency stop button at the first unpowered signal he sees even though he's been told they've all be switched off and to ignore them? Really? Are the drivers such stupid pavlovian automatons thats why the signals have to be bagged? Actually you know what , it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Transport staff are an asset to this group. You are a liability to this group because you go out of your way to drive transport staff away. Blah blah blah. How about you answer the questions I posed Mr Transport Export who didn't know it was 3rd rail south of the Thames a few weeks back. Now you're just plain lying. Oh really? You've already forgotten about your plan for the DLR to have pantographs installed to run into south london have you? How convenient. -- Spud |
Northern line signals
On 2015\09\18 10:10, y wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:26:51 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\09\18 09:16, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 20:36:59 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\09\17 17:08, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 17:01:06 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: You know damn well that he does whatever his rulebook says, and that no verbal instruction can overrule his rulebook unless his rulebook specifically says that a verbal instruction can overrule it, and that most or all rules in the rulebook have arisen from specific incidents that killed people and are an attempt to prevent repetition of those deaths. You also know that Britain has the safest railway in the world. It's this determination to endlessly criticise transport staff for no good reason that has made you the laughing stock of the group. Heh, yeah ok :) So Mr Rulebook. A driver who knows the line is running on ATO, been trained on the ATO with presumably an updated rulebook for the line will hit the emergency stop button at the first unpowered signal he sees even though he's been told they've all be switched off and to ignore them? Really? Are the drivers such stupid pavlovian automatons thats why the signals have to be bagged? Actually you know what , it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Transport staff are an asset to this group. You are a liability to this group because you go out of your way to drive transport staff away. Blah blah blah. How about you answer the questions I posed Mr Transport Export who didn't know it was 3rd rail south of the Thames a few weeks back. Now you're just plain lying. Oh really? You've already forgotten about your plan for the DLR to have pantographs installed to run into south london have you? How convenient. You made that accusation at the time and were told you were wrong. |
Northern line signals
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 10:34:31 +0100
Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\09\18 10:10, y wrote: On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:26:51 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\09\18 09:16, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 20:36:59 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\09\17 17:08, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 17:01:06 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: You know damn well that he does whatever his rulebook says, and that no verbal instruction can overrule his rulebook unless his rulebook specifically says that a verbal instruction can overrule it, and that most or all rules in the rulebook have arisen from specific incidents that killed people and are an attempt to prevent repetition of those deaths. You also know that Britain has the safest railway in the world. It's this determination to endlessly criticise transport staff for no good reason that has made you the laughing stock of the group. Heh, yeah ok :) So Mr Rulebook. A driver who knows the line is running on ATO, been trained on the ATO with presumably an updated rulebook for the line will hit the emergency stop button at the first unpowered signal he sees even though he's been told they've all be switched off and to ignore them? Really? Are the drivers such stupid pavlovian automatons thats why the signals have to be bagged? Actually you know what , it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Transport staff are an asset to this group. You are a liability to this group because you go out of your way to drive transport staff away. Blah blah blah. How about you answer the questions I posed Mr Transport Export who didn't know it was 3rd rail south of the Thames a few weeks back. Now you're just plain lying. Oh really? You've already forgotten about your plan for the DLR to have pantographs installed to run into south london have you? How convenient. You made that accusation at the time and were told you were wrong. Uh huh. Keep up that backpedalling, you could give Chris Froome a run for his money. -- Spud |
Northern line signals
|
Northern line signals
On 17/09/2015 17:01, Basil Jet wrote: [...] You know damn well that he does whatever his rulebook says, and that no verbal instruction can overrule his rulebook unless his rulebook specifically says that a verbal instruction can overrule it, and that most or all rules in the rulebook have arisen from specific incidents that killed people and are an attempt to prevent repetition of those deaths. You also know that Britain has the safest railway in the world. It's this determination to endlessly criticise transport staff for no good reason that has made you the laughing stock of the group. Well said. In Spuddy's world, it seems everyone would just do their own thing, and the multiple crashes, accidents and incidents would just be swept under the rug. Thankfully we don't have to live in his world, though he has to suffer inhabiting it. |
Northern line signals
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:32:24 +0100
Mizter T wrote: On 18/09/2015 11:12, y wrote: [...] Uh huh. Keep up that backpedalling, you could give Chris Froome a run for his money. No-one's going to give you the time of day on this one, Potato Head. Apparently you just did. This is a transport discussion forum, not a place for you to attempt to treat your hypertension by kicking off at all and sundry the whole time. I don't kick off, I merely make a point. Its not my problem if you lot all start frothing at the mouth about it. -- Spud |
Northern line signals
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 15:15:59 +0000 (UTC), y wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 14:47:04 +0100 " wrote: On 17.09.15 13:35, y wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:29:28 +0100 " wrote: On 17.09.15 9:35, y wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:44:59 +0100 "Clive D. W. Feather" wrote: In message , y wrote: Besides which if the train is on ATO what the driver thinks is irrelevant because the train will just sail past anyway. On LU, if a train passes a red signal on ATO the driver is required to put the train into an emergency stop. Signals intended only to be passed by trains on ATO show white. Yes. Except if they were off they wouldn't be showing any aspect anyway would they. And any driver worth his salt would would stop the train, call up his control centre and ask WTF, ATO or not, in the case of a dark signal So a driver that had been told "Right lads, we're running on ATO now, all the signals are switched off, you follow the computer in the cab" will stop as soon as he sees an off signal? I assume that you are referring to any dark signal? The term "Off" refers to a signal with any aspect other than danger. "Off" as in the standard english term for something electric that has no power supply. It might be a strange term, no doubt something to do with pulling levers. I rather like the French (and HS1 I think) "closed" for a signal at danger and "open" for anything else. I think misunderstanding while only *talking* about the subject underlines the need for rules in the real thing. Richard. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk