Jump to content

Edwin_m

Members
  • Content Count

    5,724
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Edwin_m

  1. For the last decade or so ramps have been actively discouraged as the risk of people getting onto the track is considered to outweigh the benefits. So if you're in contemporary era (and your station has been re-built recently) you should just have a short fence across the end, with some deterrent surface in the gap between the fence and the platform edge.
  2. Parts of the TBM can be returned to the manufacturer for re-use. The cutting head itself often ends up buried or cut up, as it is bigger than the lining segments behind it so can only escape if there is a portal or big enough shaft in front of it.
  3. What's the current rating of the command station? Have you done the "coin test" on all track sections?
  4. Not sure if it's an extension of the existing one or a replacement with something more suited to longer distances.
  5. If I have this right, it's a view nobody will ever see except in the very rare event of all 20 or so Crossrail sidings being empty.
  6. To be clear, is this a control operated by the signaler (which are reasonably common) or is there also one for the train crew to operate as at Bradford (possibly more unusual)?
  7. As an aside, "distant" has come back into favour for colour lights and is now preferred over the older term "repeater" for a signal with no red aspect. Such signals now display a black plate with a white triangle and don't have phones. If the distance from the R/G signal to the Y/G signal is similar to that from the Y/G to the next R/G then indeed there seems little reason just to make them all three-aspects. However with a two-aspect scheme the distance from the R/G to the Y/G is unlimited, but from a Y/G to a R/G is limited to (from memory) the maximum braking distance for the line speed and gradient plus 50%. This is to reduce the risk of a driver passing a yellow, not needing to brake immediately and forgetting they have done so until they see the red. So in low density areas this form of signaling is still appropriate. The "modular signaling" schemes done in recent years have concentrated signaling in "islands" which generally replicate the old semaphore boxes. Each of which has a Y/G distant unless close enough to the previous one to make it a three-aspect.
  8. Not to mention congestion, noise (mostly from tyres except when speeds are very low) and accidents.
  9. Digikeijs very usefully pointed out that programming still works when the track power is switched off via the red button. That's likely to be good enough for me.
  10. Thanks for that. Most of my decoders are Zimos but I'll certainly look into the AutoSwitch.
  11. Newer ones may be more robust but it still seems to me to be an issue. I've had similar problems to those mentioned, even with locos out of the box. I'm toying with the idea of a circuit to isolate the programming track when it's fed with DCC, but if it was tolerant enough to let the programming pulses through then it would probably let the DCC through long enough to fry the decoder in the event of a fault. Either way they limit enough to prevent damage from a wiring fault. I very much doubt the programming track is current limited when fed with DCC, it would just be a case of the command station closing a contact to connect it to the main DCC output.
  12. Thanks for that. I'm beginning to think current command stations do this and the classic switchable programming track is no longer required. But the relay only clicks when I try to read a CV, so doing that will expose the train to full DCC voltage when I thought you were supposed to test a new install on the programming track before doing that... Even then there still seem to be DCC volts on the programming track during the CV read.
  13. I'm also having problems programming on the DR5000. If I believe my cheap AC voltmeter there is DCC voltage on the programming track as well as on the main track. This is so even if I disconnect the programming terminals on the back of the DR5000, so it can't be any inadvertent connection on the layout. I thought the programming track was supposed to be dead when not in use. Is this correct?
  14. I gave up on it after a few minutes, as it just seemed to be two people putting opposite points of view with neither providing any supporting evidence.
  15. I was just looking at the top-level map at https://mapapps2.bgs.ac.uk/coalauthority/home.html. The entire Selby diversion is part of the mining reporting area but not shown as a high risk area. Certainly there weren't any collieries that far north in recent times. I recall soon after the Diversion opened there was a proposal to open a colliery near Snaith, which was just south of where it left the main line and might have needed another Diversion, but the miners strike was only a few years later and I don't think anyone was interested in developing new collieries after that.
  16. This is only north of Church Fenton, although that is in the mining risk area according to the Coal Authority (Selby coalfield I presume?)
  17. As I understand it the scheme is a major route modernization (admittedly of only a short section) including new signaling and possibly track remodeling. £300m might make more sense if it covers all that.
  18. Isn't an Atcost farm shed from the 1960s entirely in keeping with the local area?
  19. And in relation to @david.hill64's comment on Taiwan, if the Japanese approach of smaller tunnels and pointy trains wasn't the best overall solution, the Japanese engineers and salespeople were hardly going to say that to a potential client! Had they gone for small tunnels then the Japanese would have had a competitive advantage in selling trains to the Taiwan route until the end of time, as they could sell a standard product and the European suppliers would have had to re-design theirs.
  20. I plan to stick with TC for the time being, but not buy any upgrades, because it's already paid for and still does what it says on the tin and I don't particularly want to spend several weeks of evenings configuring something else instead. But if I was starting a new layout I'd definitely be looking at an alternative, because I wouldn't want to have to spend those weeks if TC became unuseable. I wouldn't be considering parallel development - seems to me to be twice as much work and some extra spending for no real benefit.
  21. And most importantly of all, a higher speed benefits the fastest trains and therefore makes them relatively faster than the slow ones. This really hits capacity. A time saving of five minutes or so probably eats the capacity created by the current works at Werrington. Indeed. Not that the laws of aerodynamics are different but because the Japanese started with smaller tunnels. When they tried to increase the speed they found that the train was pushing a pressure wave in front of it, which caused a sort of sonic boom when it got to the portal. So they made the noses longer so the air can more easily flow round the side of the train rather than building up in front. Everyone else just built larger tunnels.
  22. If high fares are charged then many people will just stay on the existing routes and the capacity of HS2 will be wasted. The business cases assume fares are set at existing levels (allowing for inflation), although personally I'd like to see less discount for seasons and lower peak time fares to encourage one-off business journeys rather than commuting. The government isn't intending to make a financial return on HS2, as that return takes the form of the benefits to the economy in general identified in the business case.
  23. There are probably numerous places on the WCML where a non-tilting train could do more than 110mph. It's just that to date nobody has wanted to do it badly enough to work out where they are and do all the paperwork to justify that and make the changes. There were some HSTs on the route in the past, but I suspect if they'd been allowed to run faster they would just have caught up with the electric in front.
  24. Depends how many signals you have and of what type. As a starting point (there are quite a few exceptions) you would normally find AWS 200yd on the approach to either a semaphore distant signal or a colour light of any type.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.