Page 1 of 2
| Possibly naive question about expediting ... 13/12/2011 at 01:47 #25051 | |
MikeW
65 posts |
When I was interested in flight simulation and air traffic control I learnt about the 'Expedite' command - used when a controller really needs a pilot to pull out all the stops. Is there anything comparable in real world signalling - or is it achieved by more colloquial and Anglosaxon means!! (This subject came to me while waiting for a coal train to crawl out of Daw Mills on Saltley - watching paint dry is light speed by comparison!!) Mike Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 13/12/2011 at 01:53 #25052 | |
|
Nutter
83 posts |
Not officially, you have to make sure you route the trains in the right order so the first one is cleared through the signal section first (great fun with landor street) What I have done in the past is go into 'F2', find the train, edit timetable and then select the current location as "passing time". This tricks the driver into thinking he doesnt need to stop there.... ....but if the train is changing direction or waiting for a loco to attach then your stuck with it until its departure time comes up. Its all about careful regulation 
Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 13/12/2011 at 03:34 #25054 | |
|
Danny252
1461 posts |
" said:more colloquial and Anglosaxon means!!Ha, that's one way of putting it. In most cases, the signalman and the driver don't have any direct communication, unlike ATC (cab radio is severely discouraged when drivers are on the move, I believe). There's also little that a train driver can do under normal running to "expedite" - he can only go as fast as the speed limit (well, officially...), whereas planes have freedom to change speed/turn rate/climb rate (within limits). When the box and the driver are close enough to talk (or they're on the phone), then yes, you could tell him to get off his arse - though Sod's law states that the time it takes to get him to explain why he's being so slow is inversely proportional to the time he'd have taken to move if you left him alone... Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 13/12/2011 at 06:10 #25059 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
Quote:What I have done in the past is go into 'F2', find the train, edit timetable and then select the current location as "passing time". This tricks the driver into thinking he doesnt need to stop there...Wouldn't this result in an official complaint from the passengers? Last edited: 13/12/2011 at 06:11 by maxand Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 13/12/2011 at 07:15 #25061 | |
|
Forest Pines
525 posts |
" said:I find this very useful if a freight train is booked to be looped, but doesn't need to be looped - for example, if it's already running late, but there's nothing behind it. Whether it does need to be done in this situation depends on how the timetable writer has written the timetable - sometimes it will already be like this, which has the downside that when the train is running to normal time, the driver will phone up when he's meant to be waiting time. Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 13/12/2011 at 09:14 #25065 | |
ozrail
197 posts |
In real life I've crossed a train to the wrong line then crossed it back at the next station. So I asked the driver "not to muck around" he must have known what I meant because the train didn’t loose any time. If I'm talking to the driver while the train is moving I know there is no chance of a SPAD, because I’m controlling the signals so I can make sure they're green before I call or wait until the train has stopped.
Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 13/12/2011 at 16:45 #25165 | |
|
MikeW
65 posts |
Thanks to all - yes, I'd expected it to be a matter of asking him 'to get off his arse' when appropriate!
Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 13/12/2011 at 18:32 #25179 | |
|
Quizman
276 posts |
To quote from the official publications i.e. WTT 'When trains are running late, drivers must endeavour to make up time, with due regard to speed restrictions and the classifcation of the train.' Open to interpretation me thinks! Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 13/12/2011 at 20:06 #25199 | |
Steamer
3984 posts |
" said:There's also little that a train driver can do under normal running to "expedite" - he can only go as fast as the speed limit (well, officially...)He could ignore eco driving techniques and the like, and brake later and harder if he really needed to get a shift on. "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) Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 14/12/2011 at 10:30 #25445 | |
|
kbarber
1742 posts |
" said:" said:There's also little that a train driver can do under normal running to "expedite" - he can only go as fast as the speed limit (well, officially...)He could ignore eco driving techniques and the like, and brake later and harder if he really needed to get a shift on. Reasons for really needing to: On a finishing turn On a finishing turn where the shift is short & the depot is short-staffed (overtime £££££) Booked PNB on arrival He enjoys a good fast run He enjoys a good fast run and he's on a late start He's D**** I*****, K***** D***** or someone of that ilk and simply doesn't know the meaning of speed restrictions etc etc  Otherwise the poor signalman just has to sit & await his pleasure. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Steamer |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 14/12/2011 at 11:05 #25449 | |
GeoffM
6376 posts |
I've sat behind signallers where, with an early running freight, the signaller has used words to the effect of "if you get your rear end in gear, I can let you go early". This is only where the signaller has some expectation that, even without the hint, the train could make it to the next regulation opportunity without affecting whatever was coming up behind. I thought the ATC expedite command was more for an "oh fiddlesticks" moment (PG-13 version) where not doing something quickly could result in bent metal. A bit more difficult to achieve on a railway. SimSig Boss Last edited: 14/12/2011 at 11:07 by GeoffM Reason: ATC Log in to reply The following user said thank you: MikeW |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 15/12/2011 at 01:29 #25576 | |
|
UKTrainMan
1803 posts |
" said:"D**** I*****, K***** D*****"?!! Doubt I'll take any offense to it, but could someone explain that to me? Ta. 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. Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 15/12/2011 at 08:11 #25587 | |
|
Jsun
212 posts |
Can't speak for ICAO country, but in my training we use the word IMMEDIATELY when consequences are dire. Expedite is more for 'hey hurry up we have things to do' i.e cross the runway quickly and I can squeeze you over to the terminal. As opposed to 'exit the runway immediately traffic short final!' (of course the priority transmission would be to tell the other aircraft to go around immediately).
Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 15/12/2011 at 10:01 #25589 | |
|
kbarber
1742 posts |
" said:" said:"D**** I*****, K***** D*****"?!! Doubt I'll take any offense to it, but could someone explain that to me? Ta. Sorry, they were certain well-known characters of the past; although I'm pretty certain both have now retired, I don't want to go naming names (though I don't think either would object to me repeating that they were quite incapable of driving at 100mph... 110 was their minimum). Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 15/12/2011 at 10:16 #25591 | |
Peter Bennet
5402 posts |
Was a bit concerned rule 7 was being violated but I think we are OK on that. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 15/12/2011 at 14:14 #25598 | |
|
Firefly
521 posts |
Quote:I thought the ATC expedite command was more for an "oh fiddlesticks" moment (PG-13 version) where not doing something quickly could result in bent metal. A bit more difficult to achieve on a railway. The expedite request is often used during climbs and descents. Imagine you’re climbing out of Gatwick and heading East towards Dover when you actually want to be heading North to Glasgow. There’s Heathrow inbound traffic at FL150 (15000ft) off to your left which is stopping ATC from turning you to the North. They may say “Climb to FL250, expedite through FL160” Once you’ve climbed through the conflicting level ATC can turn you to the North. We even have an Expedite button on the Airbus although it’s rarely ever used. I bet they don’t have one of those in the cab of a class 66 (Or maybe it’s just called Notch 5)!  The expedite command is also used on the ground, for example “Expedite to vacate via Alpha, landing traffic at 2 miles” The oh fiddlesticks command would be something like “AVOIDING ACTION, left turn 40 degrees acknowledge” On the railway of course, prior to cab secure radio you’d have to stop the train and get the driver on the phone in order to tell him that you need him to hurry up. (It would be an interesting conversation, “Driver, I’ve just stopped you because I needed to get you across in that gap…… that’s now gone ………….!”) I think generally drivers get moving as quick as they can so when the signaller has a tight margin he’ll set the route and keep his fingers crossed that it doesn’t check the conflicting move. If it does, you can guarantee control would be on the phone within minutes and the signaller will be explaining the delay. (now that’s something that could be added to SimSig, although I’d never be off the phone to control if that happened!) FF Post has attachments. Log in to view them. Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 15/12/2011 at 20:45 #25615 | |
|
Ron_J
331 posts |
Full power on a 66 is notch 8.. Although stopping a train in order to tell a driver to hurry up would be silly, you can often tell a driver not to hang about if you need to speak to him for another reason. A good example of this is when a driver comes on the phone to ask if he can run early. Generally if I can run him to the next regulating point without delaying anything then I will, but if the margin is tight I always tell him so and ask if he thinks he can make it. There's nothing quite like watching a row of red lights streaking across the panel after you've heard the words "Pull off for me sir and I won't let you down!". Not too many drivers around like that these days though, sadly. Of course I understand that they may have their hands tied because of the advent of on train data recorders. I also suspect that the authorities would take a dim view if an incident happened which could be traced back to the signaller trying to induce a driver to hurry up. Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 15/12/2011 at 22:08 #25619 | |
|
Puro
18 posts |
But before the AVOIDING ACTION, and assuming it is another aircraft, you'd have TCAS shouting at you an RA, in which case you'd simply ignore the ATC!
Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 15/12/2011 at 22:12 #25620 | |
|
Puro
18 posts |
" said:Full power on a 66 is notch 8.. The Portuguese cab secure radio has some pre formated messages (or massages as crabtree would put it!)... the signalman can send us a message to run faster. However we can't send him the message, so the way to do it withou bothering him is to send a message "train stopped at signal" even though it isn't the time to leave.... if he is in a good mood he clears the signal, otherwise we get a message understood message! Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 16/12/2011 at 10:12 #25648 | |
|
Firefly
521 posts |
Quote:But before the AVOIDING ACTION, and assuming it is another aircraft, you'd have TCAS shouting at you an RA, in which case you'd simply ignore the ATC!TCAS is the very last line of defence. The controller is not going to set their with his arms folded and say, ah it's ok TCAS will take care of it. They will issue avoiding instructions and usually prior to any TCAS TA or RA Controllers will issue avoiding action by instructing you to turn. TCAS will issue avoiding action by telling you to climb or descend therefore there should never be a conflict between the two instructions. FF Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 16/12/2011 at 22:01 #25671 | |
|
Puro
18 posts |
I wasn't saying that! I saying the context of an "avoiding action" order because if the controler is giving it if you don't have RA you're at least pretty close to having one! Anyway ATC systems this days can predict conflicts wayyyyyyyy ahead of the controlers Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 17/12/2011 at 07:56 #25709 | |
|
ralphjwchadkirk
275 posts |
" said:I wasn't saying that! I saying the context of an "avoiding action" order because if the controler is giving it if you don't have RA you're at least pretty close to having one! Rubbish. Quote:
And more rubbish. Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 17/12/2011 at 09:24 #25711 | |
|
Jsun
212 posts |
I'm not sure what system that is. The system predicts congestion, as far as predicting conflict perhaps it does but only because all planes within 10nm and 2500ft vertical are in conflict on the FAA systems :whistle:
Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 17/12/2011 at 14:46 #25718 | |
|
Firefly
521 posts |
Quote:I wasn't saying that! I saying the context of an "avoiding action" order because if the controler is giving it if you don't have RA you're at least pretty close to having one!Let's just say I've heard controllers use the avoiding action phrase on a number of occasions in the last 5 years, yet I've never received a TCAS RA outside of the simulator. Controllers have to adhere to different separation requirements in different airspace. It may be that they issue an avoiding action command in order to avoid busting minimum separation limits, however the aircraft systems don't associated the conflicting traffic as a risk. Quote: Anyway ATC systems this days can predict conflicts wayyyyyyyy ahead of the controlersThat statement is wayyyyyyy off the mark. Having sat in with London TMA controllers on more than one occasion I can tell you that the controller is way ahead of the automated systems. As an example on one visit the controller pointed out 2 aircraft that were over 70 miles away from each other. 1 was heading West and the other was heading South East. He said that he would need to do something to gain the 7 miles separation that he required when they passed each other. (I couldn't honestly see it) He turned the SE aircraft left by 5 degrees and it ended up passing exactly 7 miles behind the westbound aircraft. I was very impressed. The controller even declared that he would be able to control aircraft using his mental picture of the situation and therefore without the radar display. Truly awesome skills. Quote: I'm not sure what system that is. There is a system that highlights aircraft on the display when it believes that they may be losing separation, it just brings it to the controllers attention. Obviously it doesn't know what action the controller has already taken and it can't issue any instructions so it's just an aid to the controller. I saw it highlight a number of aircraft but it was just being over cautious and the controller was already on the case. Log in to reply |
| Re: Possibly naive question about expediting ... 17/12/2011 at 15:01 #25719 | |
|
Danny252
1461 posts |
" said:The controller even declared that he would be able to control aircraft using his mental picture of the situation and therefore without the radar display.Something they'd have to do if the radar decided not to play along, of course - railways have the advantage of still being safe if your panel goes offline! Log in to reply |