Replacing signals when a train is approaching

" said:

" said:

Yes, it was a track circuit failure on the section of plain line ahead of the signal. I still went past the red at 80 ...

Only 80? I once had to throw the boards back in front of an HST doing 120 in Chipping Sodbury Tunnel. It took him a while to stop and the driver was a bit shaken when he came on the phone.

Still sounds pretty nasty!

" said:

The other great one is the belief that the TRTS button is directly connected to the signal instead of a white light on our panel!

There is a widespread belief that Signal Post Telephones are directly connected to the signals as well. Use of the SPT at a red signal immediately causes it to clear.

As a driver, when I have a light pulled in my face, and the Signaller does not have a damn good reason for it. Watch out!

Many a Signaller and Train Controller has felt my wrath (particularly as I trained some of them so they do know better)... :angry:

Seriously though as a signaller, giving a change of aspect to a driver HAS to have a very good reason. Also, the level of aspect change needs to be considered with the incident occurring. If safety is likely to be compromised then obviously a change back to red is acceptable. A signaller making a mistake and wanting to fix it wouldn't warrant a change from green to double yellow. So if you want to simulate real world then do not give change of aspects.

" said:

Seriously though as a signaller, giving a change of aspect to a driver HAS to have a very good reason. Also, the level of aspect change needs to be considered with the incident occurring. If safety is likely to be compromised then obviously a change back to red is acceptable. A signaller making a mistake and wanting to fix it wouldn't warrant a change from green to double yellow. So if you want to simulate real world then do not give change of aspects.

Spot on. To bring this into a simulation context I can't think of any good enough reasons in SimSig why there would be a need to contact a driver and put back a signal. Emergency uses yes but ones which are not simulated. If a train is delayed then fair enough, the driver will contact the signaller and that's already being simulated. But if it's a case of regulating trains - the message is don't set a route for a train unless you're absolutely sure you've made the right choice. As Bitsy said, changing your mind regarding which one to send first, and causing an ACOA in the process (whether the trains are stationary or not) isn't acceptable. That's also why, in the case of a wrong routing it's better for everyone to wait until the train is at the signal complaining of a wrong route instead of complaining of an ACOA because you tried to fix your mistake.

" said:

" said:

The other great one is the belief that the TRTS button is directly connected to the signal instead of a white light on our panel!

There is a widespread belief that Signal Post Telephones are directly connected to the signals as well. Use of the SPT at a red signal immediately causes it to clear.

The SG button on the radio will often provoke the same response, not always as there maybe a valid reason for the Red!

" said:

" said:

" said:

The other great one is the belief that the TRTS button is directly connected to the signal instead of a white light on our panel!

There is a widespread belief that Signal Post Telephones are directly connected to the signals as well. Use of the SPT at a red signal immediately causes it to clear.

The SG button on the radio will often provoke the same response, not always as there maybe a valid reason for the Red!

LOL this is a sore point at times! Obviously we can be a little slow setting a route due to workload (25 trains on the panel and busy with dealing with things off the panel). Obviously we make errors too, so a prompt with the SG button on the radio is certainly welcomed! I want a 'why are you sitting at that red' button

However, it is quite funny just how often we clear the signal and a few seconds later the 'waiting at signal' appears on the CSR or GSM-R The delay between message sent and received is quite annoying - driver in the cab thinking they just woke us up, and us looking at a green on the panel :laugh:

I'll throw this in here it seems relevant

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owmq5q67u_s[/video]

Interesting anecdotes, thanks. I notice that in one of the comments on the YouTube page below the video the writer says that the official term has changed from SPAD (Signal Passed At Danger) to SPAR (Signal Passed At Red). True?

As a Signalman (before someone has a go, I'm legally and biologically defined as a man - not an ER!), I can replace a signal in front of a train in an emergency without the driver's prior knowledge. I'd also send an emergency stop on the CSR to enforce the action of replacing the signal. At the earliest opportunity, I would contact the driver apologising for doing so and then explaining why I had to do it.

I can also replace a signal at any time providing the driver of an approaching train doesn't see an adverse change of aspect OR if the driver of an approaching train will see an ACOA, I have to forewarn the driver that this is what I am going to do. I don't have to wait until the train is at a stand at the signal I wish to replace before doing so. Providing the driver is aware that I'm doing it, it's ok to do so. There is also a prevalence for some signalmen to ask the driver's "permission" to replace the signal. This is absolutely not the case. The Driver does not have that authority. In the hierarchy of Safety Critical Communications (for which these situations would be classified) the Signalman is only subordinate to the Electrical Controller. The Driver, and anyone else, is therefore subordinate to the Signalman.

On another point, after reading through the previous posts, one of my biggest annoyances is when a driver has a proceed aspect in front of him with a route across a junction, but doesn't move and doesn't tell me they've got a problem with their train. Furthermore, the driver is not in his cab, cannot hear the SPT and is generally un-contactable. This absolutely P***** me off! :angry: Drivers are all to quick to reprimand the Signalman at the slightest provocation but don't see the need to apologise when they stop the job for 20 minutes because they're on the phone to their control or their fleet maintenance engineer. Anyway, rant over.

On the subject of SPADs - the only SPAD now defined as such is when a driver passes a stop signal (also read shunt signal, stop board, possession limit board, moving in a platform after stopping [with the exception of splitting and joining], etc.) without authority - the old Category A SPAD. If a signal reverts to danger for any other reason and a train approaching it passes that signal after reverting to red, these instances are classified as "Operating Incidents". As such, there is less paperwork to fill in - or more specifically, different paperwork to complete. The real fun (and I use that word tongue-in-cheek) starts when the failure goes wrong side but that's a completely different ball game and lots of people get to fill in lots of paperwork! Not to mention all the extra work on our plate whilst the testing etc is carried out.

I can also replace a signal at any time providing the driver of an approaching train doesn't see an adverse change of aspect OR if the driver of an approaching train will see an ACOA, I have to forewarn the driver that this is what I am going to do. I don't have to wait until the train is at a stand at the signal I wish to replace before doing so. Providing the driver is aware that I'm doing it, it's ok to do so. There is also a prevalence for some signalmen to ask the driver's "permission" to replace the signal. This is absolutely not the case. The Driver does not have that authority. In the hierarchy of Safety Critical Communications (for which these situations would be classified) the Signalman is only subordinate to the Electrical Controller. The Driver, and anyone else, is therefore subordinate to the Signalman.

Lads,

As a signaller, i also received the same brief about SPADs, and operating incidents. But, speaking to a few drivers, some of which are friends of mine, they are now being told the following:

Any of the old CAT A SPADs are now the only thing to be classed as SPADs (as said before!)

But, any of the other types are now classed as SPAR (signal passed at red...), apparently as they are 'less serious/threatening', and as its not being specifically HELD at danger, there is no danger (or so that is how it was briefed to one of them..), but how a signal can be at red but not at danger is beyond me. To put it in perspective, seeing as the signal could be replaced to danger in course with the rules due to an obstruction, and the driver passes it.

Have any of you heard this internally in NR? I certainly have not