Page 1 of 1
| 2005: a TORR oddity 29/05/2020 at 23:04 #127222 | |
belly buster
368 posts |
In 2005 era (and also 2009), with TORR off, some routes near St Pancras exhibit TORR. It's a bit hit and miss, but for example all the routes at the station throat release, as does the down fast, but not the other lines. Couldn't see anything about this in the manual. Expected behaviour or an oddity? Log in to reply |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 30/05/2020 at 17:52 #127254 | |
GeoffM
6376 posts |
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do, and have checked that St. Pancras' resignalling included TORR in the station area while the rest of the panel remained without TORR.
SimSig Boss Log in to reply The following user said thank you: belly buster |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 31/05/2020 at 11:20 #127289 | |
jc92
3685 posts |
I can see the issue here. the entire area of Panel 1 is a VDU workstation and all signals have TORR. Strictly speaking 6, 206, 428, 223 and 429 SHOULD have TORR but don't. The issue being they appear in all era's including where Panel 1 is still an NX panel (without TORR) the signals that do have it are era specific to the new workstation. Unless TORR can be made era specific for a signal appearing in multiple era's there isn't really a fix for this. "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 31/05/2020 at 15:47 #127292 | |
Stephen Fulcher
2078 posts 
|
Why should they have TORR? The control system (VDU or Panel) is largely irrelevant it’s down to the interlocking. Chances are if they didn’t move and nothing changed they’re still on the old interlocking and non-TORR Log in to reply |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 31/05/2020 at 17:05 #127294 | |
|
jc92
3685 posts |
I'm not aware of any VDU's that don't have TORR although I'd be interested to find some. Sheffield gained TORR for instance when it went to York despite still utilising the existing interlockings. My original point stands however, even if they're meant to have it, the era issue makes it difficult to implement, until Geoff comes back to explain I'm wrong 
"We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 31/05/2020 at 20:31 #127301 | |
Tempest Malice
122 posts
|
jc92 in post 127294 said:Sheffield gained TORR for instance when it went to York despite still utilising the existing interlockings.Sheffield gained TORR as it was implemented within the control systems (which is relatively common on more recent re-controls of relay interlockings, but was still relatively novel at the time Sheffield was done) Generally speaking there is no requirement for a VDU controlled area to be equipped with TORR. But BR and successors have always required ARS equipped areas to have TORR; meaning that if any non-TORR VDU systems exist they will also be ones without ARS which should help narrow down the list to check through. Whilst I don't know for certain off the top of my head, I'd be tempted to suggest that Manchester East Westcad being an earlier recontrol of relay interlockings might possibly be one. Last edited: 31/05/2020 at 20:36 by Tempest Malice Reason: spelling fixes mostly Log in to reply |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 01/06/2020 at 09:17 #127308 | |
Andrew G
552 posts |
jc92 in post 127294 said:I'm not aware of any VDU's that don't have TORR although I'd be interested to find some.There are definitely some - Bowesfield WS in the Sheffield Sub ROC is one example. The areas migrated directly from NX panel at Kings Cross into the ECML South Sub ROC don't currently have TORR (I think these will be Hitchin, Langley and Wood Green). Log in to reply The following user said thank you: jc92 |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 01/06/2020 at 09:17 #127309 | |
|
Andrew G
552 posts |
Tempest Malice in post 127301 said:jc92 in post 127294 said:Manchester East does have TORR.Sheffield gained TORR for instance when it went to York despite still utilising the existing interlockings.Sheffield gained TORR as it was implemented within the control systems (which is relatively common on more recent re-controls of relay interlockings, but was still relatively novel at the time Sheffield was done) Log in to reply |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 01/06/2020 at 10:57 #127311 | |
|
Tempest Malice
122 posts
|
Andrew G in post 127309 said:Manchester East does have TORR.Thanks for the correction. Andrew G in post 127308 said: There are definitely some - Bowesfield WS in the Sheffield Sub ROC is one example.I thought Bowesfield controlled a westlock (so should have TORR), but once again thanks for helping correct my memory so that I now know that it does also control some relay interlockings, (so now I'm starting to wonder if the westlock data ommited TORR for consistency perhaps or is it perhaps a nice operator confusing half TORR half not setup?) Andrew G in post 127308 said: The areas migrated directly from NX panel at Kings Cross into the ECML South Sub ROC don't currently have TORR (I think these will be Hitchin, Langley and Wood Green).I'm relatively certain Hitchin SSI's have TORR (except for the exits in the middle of hitchin up yard), and I'd imagine without checking that the Smartlocks for the Hertford loop will have TORR too, but yes the relay interlockings were direct recontrols without the extra data added, so each of those three workstations are mostly non-TORR (Wood Green is probably completely TORR free if I've remembered where the Hertford loop smartlock boundaries are correctly), and I believe once Finsbury park area joins the others in York it will also be mostly non-TORR (Finsbury park SSI's bizarrely have just one TORR equipped signal between them (that being K384) but some of the workstation will be on the new westlocks for the Holloway area and should get TORR)). Log in to reply |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 01/06/2020 at 21:33 #127333 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2078 posts
|
When some of the older E10k interlockings from Reading Panel were reconteolled to TVSC they gained TORR to work with the IECC which of course has ARS. However it was an oddity in that the “office” end of the interlockings were completely replaced with solid state equipment instead of the old PO3000 relays and new TDMs fitted to link the new equipment to the original “field” end interlockings. I’m not sure how many if any still exist as E10& interlocking is not AC immune so cannot be used under the wires. JamesN may be able to answer that one? Log in to reply |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 01/06/2020 at 21:52 #127334 | |
|
GeoffM
6376 posts |
Yes, being a workstation doesn't determine whether TORR is fitted or not, as that's an interlocking function. Where TORR has been added to a non-TORR interlocking, strictly speaking yes it's not in the interlocking, but (usually) part of the relay->computer interface (variously called RII, RIIU, one or two other acronyms). Berks & Hants E10k interlockings were altered slightly to fit switches so they could test the IECC interface overnight and switch it back to the Reading PSB link during the day, without the hassle of full wiring alteration procedures every time they switched back and forth, more just a handover. When St. Pancras was resignalled, the Westpac IVA interlocking got replaced with SSI and thus (though didn't have to by any means) gain TORR. I know in the past when areas have been altered and didn't previously have TORR, they opted to stay without TORR for the entire area. Yet other areas have a patchwork of TORR in some places and not others. Horses for courses, I guess. SimSig Boss Log in to reply The following user said thank you: jc92 |
| 2005: a TORR oddity 01/06/2020 at 22:17 #127335 | |
|
jc92
3685 posts |
Thanks for the information. You learn something new everyday!
"We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |