If a train leaves a track circuit occupied over points (a train heading along the branch so the points become locked for the branch and you therefore can't run along the mainline) and the next train to arrive is a main line train, what would the step by step actions of the signaller be? Would you work out first whether it's just an indication failure? If so, how would you do this?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
TC remains occupied after train passed
- Thread starter SIGRT
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Supercoss
Member
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2016
- Messages
- 304
Phone route control
anything On adjacent line that can have a look across ?
mobile manager requested , points operated manually to route required
S&T techs / fault team to site after interrogating data logger and intelligent infrastructure if fitted
obstruction in open switch removed / Kit Kat / muller rice lid foil wrapper removed from bridging block joint - delete as necessary - piece of ballast kicked up
Correct detection obtained , fill in occurrence book
anything On adjacent line that can have a look across ?
mobile manager requested , points operated manually to route required
S&T techs / fault team to site after interrogating data logger and intelligent infrastructure if fitted
obstruction in open switch removed / Kit Kat / muller rice lid foil wrapper removed from bridging block joint - delete as necessary - piece of ballast kicked up
Correct detection obtained , fill in occurrence book
MadMac
Member
Many years ago, I used to stand in for the fellow who processed the fault reports looking for any “trends/repeated issues”, and got one to the effect of “Signalman reported no Normal on XXX points. Removed deceased cat, tested and correct. Officer Dibble informed”.
Thank you. So would you not do anything to confirm it's not just an indication failure?
There's a few different options here depending on your location and exact nature of the failure too.
TS11 is quite explicit on when you can confirm the failures indications only and how you can run trains.
Also it's rare but I've known of a release of signalling controls form to be filled in by S&T to allow the track to clear to allow the points to be moved.
Similarly a sealed release might be provided for this purpose.
TS11 is quite explicit on when you can confirm the failures indications only and how you can run trains.
Also it's rare but I've known of a release of signalling controls form to be filled in by S&T to allow the track to clear to allow the points to be moved.
Similarly a sealed release might be provided for this purpose.
Thank you.
If the RT3186 was used and S&T clear the track to allow the points to be moved, would you try and clear the signal for the main line train? Or would S&T be able to tell that it's not just an indication failure and therefore this would be unnecessary?
The form would usually be completed to allow you to move the points and then cancelled, so the track would still be showing in its failed state once you had the points in the correct position.
A TC indication only failure for a TC which is occupied is pretty rare though and it's be hard to discern from an actual wrong side failure if the signal did in fact clear.
In fact I think you'd probably need S&T to confirm it's indication only and that you didn't have a wrong side failure.
A TC indication only failure for a TC which is occupied is pretty rare though and it's be hard to discern from an actual wrong side failure if the signal did in fact clear.
In fact I think you'd probably need S&T to confirm it's indication only and that you didn't have a wrong side failure.
Supercoss
Member
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2016
- Messages
- 304
Without getting too technical in competences framework
S&T can operate points for maintenance fault finding but can not operate points to set a route unless they have points operator competence which is different to signal maintenance handbook functions.
S&T can operate points for maintenance fault finding but can not operate points to set a route unless they have points operator competence which is different to signal maintenance handbook functions.
Thanks everyone.
So I think I would:
1. Ask S&T/MOM if they can crank points
2. If answer to 1. is no, ask for a release
3. Once points in correct position, cancel release
4. s5 up main train and ask driver to examine line
5. Continue to caution until fixed
So I think I would:
1. Ask S&T/MOM if they can crank points
2. If answer to 1. is no, ask for a release
3. Once points in correct position, cancel release
4. s5 up main train and ask driver to examine line
5. Continue to caution until fixed
The Puddock
Member
When you asked this question on the Simsig forum the other day, you were advised to ask your IST trainer. That is very good advice which you should really heed.
alxndr
Established Member
- Joined
- 3 Apr 2015
- Messages
- 1,493
I wouldn't fixate on release of controls too much as a possibility. There are very strict conditions around the circumstances that it can be performed in and I've only ever heard of it actually being done once in 10 years of being on the S&T. More likely that they'll try all other avenues and actually fix the fault before going for the release option.
Ask your instructor. That's what they're paid for. You've no way of knowing what you're being told on railway enthusiast forums is correct, even though it may well be.
endofthetunnel
Member
It is an incredibly rare occurrence for a signaller to ask for a release. Bypassing the interlocking is a last resort, and is usually something that comes from above your pay grade when all other options have failed.
As has been suggested, asking these detailed questions on forums is the wrong attitude and has indeed got you the wrong answer. For example why is a train examining the line after you’ve determined you need a release? What if they find a car on the track, this makes all your previous work entirely irrelevant.
Ask your trainer or other qualified signallers directly, and take everything on here with a pinch of salt.
You would be welcome to PM me.
TSG
Member
I'm surprised by a couple of things there. I remember there being a bit of a debate about this when the Points Operator/RSA competency first appeared. I thought it had been resolved that someone who is competent to do the full set of points tests, make disconnections, or give a release of controls, ought to be more than competent to wind, clip and scotch a set of points in a given position. TS11 explicitly states that the signaller can ask the signalling technician to do this.
I'm also curious to know what you mean by 'operate points to set a route'. In the given scenario, a track circuit failure, regardless of who moved the points or how, you wouldn't be setting a route anyway. Not through a failed track, and certainly not during a release. Suppose the track wasn't failed though. Under what circumstances would a signaller attempt to set a route over points placed by a PO/RSA, but not over points placed by a technician?
I'd be interested to know if there is an apparent conflict between the competence standards and the rule book (wouldn't be the first time things across different standards don't add up)
Annetts key
Established Member
@TSG - Depends on if it's a simple junction or a complex one. If complex (multiple points need moving or checking) then a route setting agent (normally a MOM) is needed.
As pointed out above, S&T NEVER arrange for a track circuit to show clear when performing a release to enable a signal to show a proceed aspect over a failed track circuit. A release is only normally considered after all other fault investigations and options have been considered. It may take less time to fix the TC fault than to give a release (which is far from quick).
The normal arrangements are that the S&T are called, the MOM is called and/or a point operator is called.
The points will be switched to manual and operated manually. As the interlocking will not be able to detect the points in the opposite position to the last valid call, they must be clipped.
There is also the problem that if the TC failed during the passage of a train, the TC will hold the route locking. This may keep other points electrically locked. You may then need multiple point operators and a route setting agent.
The S&T should be allowed to concentrate on fixing the TC fault.
As pointed out above, S&T NEVER arrange for a track circuit to show clear when performing a release to enable a signal to show a proceed aspect over a failed track circuit. A release is only normally considered after all other fault investigations and options have been considered. It may take less time to fix the TC fault than to give a release (which is far from quick).
The normal arrangements are that the S&T are called, the MOM is called and/or a point operator is called.
The points will be switched to manual and operated manually. As the interlocking will not be able to detect the points in the opposite position to the last valid call, they must be clipped.
There is also the problem that if the TC failed during the passage of a train, the TC will hold the route locking. This may keep other points electrically locked. You may then need multiple point operators and a route setting agent.
The S&T should be allowed to concentrate on fixing the TC fault.
Chris Hamilton
Member
This may be a local instruction for my neck of the woods, but we can move a single end of points, once, for the running of trains. I've argued with control over this fact on several occasions.
"You can have them normal or reverse, but once they are in position, they wont be moved again, so go away and think about what is best for you to move trains".
I've had control try to get me to move three ends, their argument being that it was a "single set" (switch diamond) and there was "no MOM available". I stood my ground, and they ran the train wrong line instead.
In answer to the original question, from an S&T perspective (its my job to rectify the fault, not run trains), I would first set out to determine whether the fault was indication only or not (Check the state of the TR. Did the Remote Condition Monitoring equipment observe it? If the TR is up (track clear), I will then chase a TPR fault down the cables. If the TR is down (track occupied), I would observe the physical track, make sure there is nothing shorting it, then check the feed voltage. If the feed voltage is high, I likely have an open circuit (most likely a failed track tail cable or bond), if it is low and (not taught but good knowledge) there is a hefty spark when the fuse is removed, I have a short circuit, and its probably something bridging an insulation (stretcher bar, tie bar, tin can, failed IBJ, swarf from a failing wheel or in some point machines - an incorrect setup). An open circuit voltage will often vanish almost completely past the point of occurrence, so you can just go along with the meter, checking as you go. A short circuit is a little harder to find with just a meter as voltage will often continue past a short, but we have a nifty piece of kit that can find shorts.
I then tell control and the signaller what my plan of action is, and they decide how to recover the service. That sometimes involves giving a firm timescale for repair, always a risky gamble.
- Status