The distance to the point of conflict with the Up Main was much greater than the distance to the Down Relief would've been though, so a collision would be potentially more severe but also much less likely to occur in the first place. On that basis it seems to have been a reasonably sound decision. I guess that it would've made the interlocking arrangements much more complicated too, as the points would be too far apart to work as a co-acting pair without being an operational pain in the posterior.Design of the Paddington scheme seems to have been done by the interns. Quite why the default lie of the points beyond a red SN109 for Down trains being stopped there was head-on straight into the Up Fast, instead of flank protection, as used for the previous 150 years, into the Down Relief, was never satisfactorily explained at the enquiry.
The Rule Book (S7 1.6) still covers the possibility of a colour light signal that can't display a yellow aspect reading onto another stop signal - I can't think of a single current example, but presumably it was acceptance at some point in history.Although it sounds pedantic it is a major distinction in signalling design. As a "semaphore" for example a starter signal it can show a green aspect if the advanced starter was red. A Day Colour Light Signal would have to be three aspect and show yellow.
If you have stopped or nearly stopped at either of the following types of signal at danger and that signal changes to a proceed aspect or indication, you must be prepared to stop at the next stop signal worked by the same signalbox.
• A colour light signal that cannot display a yellow aspect.
• A semaphore signal.
This does not apply to the signal controlling the entrance to an intermediate block section.