Page 1 of 1
Signal 73 - Is this actually how it goes? 31/10/2021 at 06:24 #142124 | |
Newhampshires
![]() 101 posts |
Is Signal 73 on the 2016 layout properly programmed? I ask out of frustration. Please see the attached picture. There are no routes connecting inwards to Signal 73. When I go to cancel the route coming out of Signal 73, the signal locks approach for 4 minutes. This seems unusual considering there are no trains actively using the route from further east of South Ruislip and the train awaiting at Platform 3 (2U10) shouldn't cause that signal to lock up. Why does Signal 73 lock up when a route is cancelled through this signal, while no train is approaching it on the Down Main? ![]() Log in to reply |
Signal 73 - Is this actually how it goes? 31/10/2021 at 08:45 #142125 | |
JamesN
![]() 1591 posts ![]() |
Comprehensive approach locking - IE where the interlocking will “look back” to check whether a train is approaching is complex (and expensive) to provide; so in many schemes it is just omitted. ME73 has a high approach speed and low speed pointwork just beyond. It’s also normally controlled by ARS so theoretically wouldn’t be setting the “wrong” route in normal operation; only when the signaller was running thing manually and made a mistake / something happened. So yes, 240s non-comprehensive approach locking seems entirely sensible here. Log in to reply The following users said thank you: TUT, Newhampshires |
Signal 73 - Is this actually how it goes? 31/10/2021 at 09:47 #142127 | |
wellgroomed
![]() 110 posts |
More of a problem for us if there's a train failure at Northolt Park and the one waiting in the platform at South Ruislip, that otherwise can't get the road!
Log in to reply |
Signal 73 - Is this actually how it goes? 31/10/2021 at 14:54 #142131 | |
Newhampshires
![]() 101 posts |
Thank you for your knowledge! Next time I become frustrated with myself, I will remember this post and assure myself that everything is going to be ok. JamesN in post 142125 said: Comprehensive approach locking - IE where the interlocking will “look back” to check whether a train is approaching is complex (and expensive) to provide; so in many schemes it is just omitted. Last edited: 31/10/2021 at 14:55 by Newhampshires Reason: None given Log in to reply |
Signal 73 - Is this actually how it goes? 31/10/2021 at 15:08 #142133 | |
Newhampshires
![]() 101 posts |
JamesN in post 142125 said:Comprehensive approach locking - IE where the interlocking will “look back” to check whether a train is approaching is complex (and expensive) to provide; so in many schemes it is just omitted.Also, to follow up, the issues came about during an ARS test. It would appear that the trains stopping at South Ruislip did not have a proper setdown period written, so the ARS would set the route accordingly based on the schedule. This would then cause interference between a stopped train at South Ruislip and an express passing thru South Ruislip. The same occurs over at West Ruislip on the Up Main. Train will pull into P4 to allow an express train to pass, however, if that stopping train does not have a proper setdown period programmed, the ARS seemingly plots a route immediately infront of the express train. This is what I've observed. Log in to reply |
Signal 73 - Is this actually how it goes? 31/10/2021 at 16:25 #142135 | |
wellgroomed
![]() 110 posts |
I believe the ARS issue at the Ruislips in already in Mantis. Somebody with the relevant authority will be able to confirm I'm sure. The Ruislips aren't the only place where that happens tho, so watch out elsewhere!
Log in to reply |
Signal 73 - Is this actually how it goes? 31/10/2021 at 17:13 #142136 | |
GeoffM
![]() 6344 posts |
Newhampshires in post 142133 said:Also, to follow up, the issues came about during an ARS test. It would appear that the trains stopping at South Ruislip did not have a proper setdown period written, so the ARS would set the route accordingly based on the schedule. This would then cause interference between a stopped train at South Ruislip and an express passing thru South Ruislip.ARS is based on mathematics and predictions so the more information you give it, the better it can regulate. If you leave out an arrival time for a train that dwells for a few minutes then yes, the calculations are likely to be adversely affected. SimSig Boss Log in to reply |
Signal 73 - Is this actually how it goes? 31/10/2021 at 17:20 #142138 | |
Newhampshires
![]() 101 posts |
GeoffM in post 142136 said:Newhampshires in post 142133 said:Always nice to have a reply from the man himself - Mr. Geoff.Also, to follow up, the issues came about during an ARS test. It would appear that the trains stopping at South Ruislip did not have a proper setdown period written, so the ARS would set the route accordingly based on the schedule. This would then cause interference between a stopped train at South Ruislip and an express passing thru South Ruislip.ARS is based on mathematics and predictions so the more information you give it, the better it can regulate. If you leave out an arrival time for a train that dwells for a few minutes then yes, the calculations are likely to be adversely affected. Thank you - Yes, that seems quite straight-forward indeed. Hoping that a setdown AND thru-line stop ticked will be enough. We shall see. If you have any further suggestions on what I should do, please let me know. Thank you! Log in to reply The following user said thank you: GeoffM |