Re-Opening the Fawley Branch to passenger traffic.

[4069]

On 02/08/2020 at 09:19, PaulRhB said:

Because when the un-interlocked wheel was replaced with a button they just replaced the mechanism with a motor and didn’t spend money on new interlocking because it had operated safely like it for years.

 

Gate wheels are interlocked with the signalling, and when gates are replaced by barriers they are also interlocked with the protecting signals. At Moreton-on-Lugg the signaller replaced the signal to danger immediately in front of the approaching train, and then raised the barriers. The missing element was any form of approach locking which would have prevented the barriers being raised with a train closely approaching.  It wasn't WR practice to provide this at the time the crossing was converted to barriers in 1975, and it was never included in any subsequent upgrading works.

[PaulRhB]

18 minutes ago, 4069 said:

The missing element was any form of approach locking

That’s really what I meant, there wasn’t full interlocking on either to cater for the unusual distraction. After working with a more modern approach locking for so long now I consider it all as one. 
Similarly the gate lever lock would be possible to normalise at Marchwood but having to walk down to reopen the gates gives that bit more time to realise the error. 
I’ve had people on crossings tell me the train passed a minute ago and thanks to knowing the patch on the ground you go, there’s no way the second one has it’s got to them yet, and then you hear it go by them on the phone! The human concept of time elapsed can lead you astray too. 

On the map front there were two people handing out leaflets on the day at Marchwood, my mate who was there overseeing the safety as the barriers on the lower half were on manual due to a long time unused, was given both and the one shown is realistic while the other was rather mind bending in its cost implications we thought!  

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by PaulRhB