ATP..... Not Fitted on FGW trains!!

[joeholmes]

News this morning, to my horror, stated that (and I quote) "ATP has not yet been introduced to the GWML were the paddington train crash happened"....

:? :? :?

Were do they get there sources from!

Joe

 

[Met Driver]

Were do they get there sources from!

Who is 'they' in this instance?

 

[joeholmes]

Capital FM

 

[Techniquest]

It wasn't? I was sure it was...

Don't believe everything you hear in the media. Or half the rumours spread by some people here (you know who you are ). Most of the time it's BS. 'Malverns HSTs going in this timetable period, up for a meet on it?', which I was, only to find the HSTs are still there, and always will be. Indeed, I did a HST on the route 2 weeks and a bit ago! Then the FW 37s ending in June came about, I ensured I went for them, again they're still running!

The moral of this story? Don't believe everything you hear. I ought to add that I was a firm believer that the HSTs and 37s would stay, I was even offering to wager a token sum on it! I still went, as both routes are not so much fun on your own.

 

[Mojo]

Nice to see the former GWR group management still spreading lies on once credible radio stations.

 

[Met Driver]

TPWS should stop almost all crashes caused by SPADs anyway.

Not where linespeeds are above 75...

 

[Met Driver]

Incorrect. TWPS is ineffective where the train passes the red signal protecting a junction at over 70mph – nothing to do with line speed – highly unusual and the throat at Paddington is now well below this. Most SPADs are the result of the driver reacting to double yellow and yellow signals and misjudging the braking approaching the red, with a few yards overun.

I realise that linespeed has no effect over the performance of TPWS. I meant that TPWS would prevent less crashes caused by SPADs where linespeeds were greater than 75, as trains may be travelling at speeds greater than 75.