passenger moves and shunt singals

[Chris M]

I know that shunt or other moves that are controlled by a disc signal rather than coloured light signals are not allowed to be done with passengers on board.
Are the technical or safety reasons for this or is it just a procedural matter?

Chris

[Phil]

For passenger movements a higher standard of 'proof' of line safety, such as Facing Points Locks, stretcher bars etc (in general, not necessarily in this case) is required and as such is much more complex (Expensive) to install and maintain.

[russe]

rbruce1314 said:

For passenger movements a higher standard of 'proof' of line safety, such as Facing Points Locks, stretcher bars etc (in general, not necessarily in this case) is required and as such is much more complex (Expensive) to install and maintain.

Sprung turnouts excepted, most trailing crossovers seem to be fitted with locking mechanisms.

Russ

[Tom]

Stretchers and FPL's are mandatory on any set of facing points, shunt move or not. There are two main things on shunt moves that are different. Firstly the points may not be fitted with a ground lock to hold the points if the air supply fails (remember that the air supply is on the points continuously to keep them in position, should the air supply fail without a ground lock the FPL could disengage by vibration or road movement).

The second feature is more to do with the route than the points, and this is related to the route holding arrangements. On a passenger move, the front of the train must be proved a train's length and 40 feet from the last set of facing points, before the route can be normalised. This is to protect against a track circuit momentarily picking up under the train and causing the route to go back. On a shunt move, as there are no passengers involved the route holding requirements can be relaxed slightly, and they only require all the backlocking tracks (ones over the points) to be energised for 4.5 seconds before the route can be normalised; the assumption being that for a track to pick up under a train for more than that period is highly unlikely.

[Phil]

nice one Tom. Thanks for the details.

[Deleted]

Is LU alone in this choice to restrict certification of sidings and points? I think I've seen posts from Igelkotten where he relates stories of trains merrily going into sidings with passengers on and coming back out without anyone batting an eyelid...

I am curious though as to whether or not the ATO/ATP system due to be used on the SSL would make it easier to certify a siding for passenger moves, if such a thing was ever deemed necessary - IMHO, it's not ever going to happen, but considering the pain experienced during detraining at certain points, it could be useful.

[Deleted]

rbruce1314 said:

nice one Tom. Thanks for the details.

Yeah, thanks indeed Tom.

In the 30ish years that I've been driving trains, no one has ever explained to me properly why a 'short' train often has to be driven right up to the stopping mark (for a standard-length train on that line) before it can be reversed, or worked into a depot.

I've had several 'heated discussions' with signalmen over this in the past... and now wish to apologise publicly to all of them! ;D

[igelkotten]

theonekea said:

Is LU alone in this choice to restrict certification of sidings and points? I think I've seen posts from Igelkotten where he relates stories of trains merrily going into sidings with passengers on and coming back out without anyone batting an eyelid...

Well, you aren't supposed to carry passengers into sidings, but if it happens, it is not the end of the world. It is only when you are about to take a train out of service for an extended period of time that you really have to walk through the train and check that it is completely empty.

Indeed, some sidings that are open in both ends are sometimes used as stretches of three-track railway, allowing trains to overtake each other and other operational niceties.

Likewise, while you are not permitted to stable in a depot with passengers on board, you can pass through a depot track with passengers aboard, as long as you don't stop. This has been used a few times to get trains around track failures etc. (OK, this required a bit of rubber paragraphing, but still.)

We do differ between mainline and depot tracks -depot tracks are not fitted with ATP circuitry, not signalled, you can run trains in the depot with ATP cut out and so on, but sidings along the line are considered part of the mainline, and have the same signalling standards applied to them. We have no special shunt signals or similar things, except for a few oddball installations in certain areas, for special purpose.

[Admin Team]

theonekea said:

I am curious though as to whether or not the ATO/ATP system due to be used on the SSL would make it easier to certify a siding for passenger moves, if such a thing was ever deemed necessary - IMHO, it's not ever going to happen, but considering the pain experienced during detraining at certain points, it could be useful.

I think it relevant to read Tom's comments about the need for the 'route holding' arrangements as an example for remotely operated routes. I suppose if perhaps it was considered a useful 'get out' for the event of a failure maybe one route through a depot might be so modified - however, whether or not the cost would justify such a 'just in case' scenario I don't know - my gut feeling is that it wouldn't.

If one considers Ealing Common depot, once inside the depot almost all the points are handworked, so the first step would be for a conversion to a remotely operated system.

I heard a story once of service trains being run through Neasden depot because of a failure. All the points involved had to be manually secured by scotch and clip. The problem was, that there weren't enough scotch and clip sets to secure the whole route, so every train was being hand signalled and once clear of part of the route involved, the scothes and clips behind the train were removed, carried in advance of the train, and then the remainder of the route secured. I believe this process was repeated quite a few times, much to the chagrin of the operating official who was having to do it!

[q8]

Once had some sort of juice failure between Upney and Barking in the middle of the morning peak which shut down the westbound. I had to open the section switches on the westbound by the sidings.

However a highly unofficial solution was put in. The 'Big Hat' on site asked every driver if he would go through the sidings (which remained live) WITH PASSENGERS on his responsiblity WITHOUT the route being clipped and scotched.

As he was a very popular big hat, 9 out of 10 drivers agreed. As a result me gets 4 hours overtime for assisting by lowering the trainstop as instructed by the AET (the stick and relay solution) to stop drivers getting their hands dirty. (Except the ones who wanted to do things by the book) Saved the service that morning

[Colin]

igelkotten said:

Well, you aren't supposed to carry passengers into sidings, but if it happens, it is not the end of the world. It is only when you are about to take a train out of service for an extended period of time that you really have to walk through the train and check that it is completely empty.

Are you refering to LUL or your own railway?
As I mention in the related thread on the Picc board, LUL has been instructed by the HMRI to ensure trains do not 'over carry' passengers. Therefore if it does happen, we have broken the law and can be prosecuted.

[Colin]

admin said:

If one considers Ealing Common depot, once inside the depot almost all the points are handworked, so the first step would be for a conversion to a remotely operated system.

I heard a story once of service trains being run through Neasden depot because of a failure. All the points involved had to be manually secured by scotch and clip. The problem was, that there weren't enough scotch and clip sets to secure the whole route, so every train was being hand signalled and once clear of part of the route involved, the scothes and clips behind the train were removed, carried in advance of the train, and then the remainder of the route secured. I believe this process was repeated quite a few times, much to the chagrin of the operating official who was having to do it!

Just to add to that, if i'm not wrong (which probably means I am!), we can only do moves such as those through Neasden Depot when full track circuiting is present.

[igelkotten]

colin said:

Are you refering to LUL or your own railway?
As I mention in the related thread on the Picc board, LUL has been instructed by the HMRI to ensure trains do not 'over carry' passengers. Therefore if it does happen, we have broken the law and can be prosecuted.

Since I was quoting IKEA, who wrote something about having read in previous posts of mine that passengers into sidings wasn't such a big affair here in Stockholm, I thought it was clear from the context that I was indeed referring to Stockholm.

I am fully aware that operational procedures differ between Stockholm and LU -that was indeed the very point of my post.

[Colin]

Apologies Igelkotten , having woken up and re read it, I see what you mean.