Network Rail Access Point Signs

[Deepgreen]

I saw this at Redhill today. It is an information sign at a Network Rail gated access point and shows the three tracks beyond the gate and their direction of travel and speed limits. The top line is shown as down direction only, whereas the other two as reversible. However, the top line is also reversible, as trains can, and sometimes do, leave platform 3 at Redhill northbound (i.e. reverse) and cross over. This is a fully-signalled passenger-carrying routeing option. My question is; who provides the information for signs like this and, assuming it is there to tell staff which way they should be looking for trains, is this a significant safety issue or are these signs simply ignored by those entering the railway anyway?

 

[ComUtoR]

After checking the Sectional Appendix and Google Maps; I would say the sign is pretty accurate and represents where they are located.

 

[Deepgreen]

So

After checking the Sectional Appendix and Google Maps; I would say the sign is pretty accurate and represents where they are located.

So the fact that trains can be signalled in service NB from p3 (i.e. making that line reversible) is not relevant whereas the same feature of the other two lines is?

 

[zwk500]

So

So the fact that trains can be signalled in service NB from p3 (i.e. making that line reversible) is not relevant whereas the same feature of the other two lines is?

Arguably the crossover should be shown in the diagram, but fundamentally the Down Line is not reversible at that location, as any route from the north end of P3 reads directly to the Up Main, whereas the Up Lines are reversible because a train signalled from the Down Main to Platforms 0 or 2 will first be routed to the signal on the Up Main before being routed into the platform. Critically, there is a lack of main aspect signals on the Down Line for trains in the Up Direction, and therefore it's not considered reversible any more than any other junction.

 

[Wandering Pom]

So the fact that trains can be signalled in service NB from p3 (i.e. making that line reversible) is not relevant whereas the same feature of the other two lines is?

I think it's more a question of whether the access point is north or south of the trailing crossover between the up and down Redhill lines at the north end of Redhill station. If the access point is north of that crossover, a northbound train from platform 3 will already have crossed over to the up Redhill before it reaches the access point. If the access point is south of the crossover, then such a northbound train will still be on the down Redhill, in which case I think the diagram should show the down line as reversible too.

 

[ComUtoR]

If the access point is south of the crossover, then such a northbound train will still be on the down Redhill, in which case I think the diagram should show the down line as reversible too.

To add to the excellent reply from @zwk500. The sign is also referring specifically to the line name. This is an important reference point when giving your location to the Signaller.

It's also a case of having the sign there as a quick reference, not as a route and signalling diagram. It conveys the location clearly and concisely. If you were using that access point, you would most likely have some form of local knowledge, a briefing plan of some sort, PTS, and already be in contact with the Signaller.

As we are playing the 'What if' game. 'What if' a train was making a wrong direction move ? The sign isn't there to highlight every scenario or be any kind of detailed map. It gives quick important information for that location.

 

[zwk500]

I think it's more a question of whether the access point is north or south of the trailing crossover between the up and down Redhill lines at the north end of Redhill station. If the access point is north of that crossover, a northbound train from platform 3 will already have crossed over to the up Redhill before it reaches the access point. If the access point is south of the crossover, then such a northbound train will still be on the down Redhill, in which case I think the diagram should show the down line as reversible too.

It depends what the purpose of the signs are. A train cannot continue to Merstham on the Down Main, but trains can continue to Redhill on both Up Lines. The access point from Google Maps appears to be immediately south of the trailing crossover.

 

[Deepgreen]

It depends what the purpose of the signs are. A train cannot continue to Merstham on the Down Main, but trains can continue to Redhill on both Up Lines. The access point from Google Maps appears to be immediately south of the trailing crossover.

I understand your points, but mine was simply that all three lines at that specific location are signalled for passenger-carrying moves in both directions (rather than an emergency or unsignalled reversal, for example). I agree that there will not be fast trains on line 1. Perhaps I am being too picky, but it seems to me that any line which has full passenger-carrying signalling in both directions should be shown as such, notwithstanding the speed of movement. Yes BTW, 'Wandering Pom', the crossover from line 1 to 2 is to the north (left) of this sign. Yes, too, the sign adequately displays its location, which is its prime function.

 

[zwk500]

I understand your points, but mine was simply that all three lines at that specific location are signalled for passenger-carrying moves in both directions (rather than an emergency or unsignalled reversal, for example). I agree that there will not be fast trains on line 1. Perhaps I am being too picky, but it seems to me that any line which has full passenger-carrying signalling in both directions should be shown as such, notwithstanding the speed of movement.

The point is that the 'line' at this location isn't signalled to full passenger-carrying standard in both directions. The wrong-direction move is only possible as part of a conflicting move that happens to use the down line as part of it's crossing movement. Hence it isn't shown as reversible. I agree that showing the crossover would help clarify the point, but it is important the line isn't shown as reversible to prevent somebody thinking trains might or could run wrong-road all the way to Merstham and beyond.

 

[Deepgreen]

The point is that the 'line' at this location isn't signalled to full passenger-carrying standard in both directions. The wrong-direction move is only possible as part of a conflicting move that happens to use the down line as part of it's crossing movement. Hence it isn't shown as reversible. I agree that showing the crossover would help clarify the point, but it is important the line isn't shown as reversible to prevent somebody thinking trains might or could run wrong-road all the way to Merstham and beyond.

However, it is passenger-signalled - trains can leave p3 at Redhill northbound in service (and I have done it). That was my point from the start. It doesn't matter for what distance trains on line 1 run NB, they can do so (with a 30mph crossover PSR) at the location of the sign.

 

[ComUtoR]

but it seems to me that any line which has full passenger-carrying signalling in both directions should be shown as such

I understand your concern but the sign's intention isn't to show 'signalled moves' Just an quick reminder of the layout.

Yes, too, the sign adequately displays its location, which is its prime function.

Ultimately, its doing its job correctly.

However, it is passenger-signalled - trains can leave p3 at Redhill northbound in service (and I have done it). That was my point from the start. It doesn't matter for what distance trains on line 1 run NB, they can do so (with a 30mph crossover PSR) at the location of the sign.

It still doesn't make the line 'reversible' and it's only 'reversible' for a few feet. Trains aren't really going on that line. They are going across it. Not forgetting my point about the technical name for the line. This is important and if the sign said it was 'reversible' then there may be a risk of incorrect communication and safety critical comms. Even if it was pictured as 'Reversible' You could then argue that it should show that only a small portion is reversible which adds to the confusion.

Anyone officially going on the track through that gate is gonna have PTS. That alone is part of the safety protections in place and we all understand that trains can, and will go in any direction at any time. If anything, I would be more worried about unsignalled moves and ECS working than booked passenger services. Add in protection from lookouts, line blocks, Driver sounding the horn etc and I'd consider it safe to go on the track at that location and the sign is more than sufficient.

The concern is highly appreciated.

 

[zwk500]

However, it is passenger-signalled - trains can leave p3 at Redhill northbound in service (and I have done it). That was my point from the start. It doesn't matter for what distance trains on line 1 run NB, they can do so (with a 30mph crossover PSR) at the location of the sign.

Having a signalled move at that specific point is not the same as the Running Line itself being reversibly signalled. The move from Platform 3 to the Up Main is no different to any junction that uses a ladder arrangement. I agree with part of what you are saying in that the sign should show the Crossover as it would help explain what moves may be being made clearly.

 

[156gricer]

My question is; who provides the information for signs like this

The NR Project Team (Project Manager) will give the information for the signs to be made, at the project hand back stage, as per AMP process. There is no rigorous checking process that the information is right!

Surprisingly the British Legion are the market leader for the signs. They used to cost £150 each when I was in the role. Check it out https://britainsbravestmanufacturing.org.uk/signs/rail-signs/

 

[ComUtoR]

I agree with part of what you are saying in that the sign should show the Crossover as it would help explain what moves may be being made clearly

Not really. The absence of signalling would make the crossover even more confusing and unnecessary. The crossover would show an off map move from the Down Passenger Loop to the Up Redhill and the other crossover from the Down Redhill to the Up Passenger Loop 2 (also off map). It also doesn't show if there is a limit of shunt signal for any other movements. Again, this imports risk and showing both crossovers (why have 1 but not the other) could imply that the movements are only between the Up and Down Redhill.

 

[zwk500]

Not really. The absence of signalling would make the crossover even more confusing and unnecessary. The crossover would show an off map move from the Down Passenger Loop to the Up Redhill and the other crossover from the Down Redhill to the Up Passenger Loop 2 (also off map). It also doesn't show if there is a limit of shunt signal for any other movements. Again, this imports risk and showing both crossovers (why have 1 but not the other) could imply that the movements are only between the Up and Down Redhill.

Fair point. I have seen signs on a google image search that have the whole local junction layout, although the new style does seem to be as above with only the running lines.

 

[Sunset route]

We have signalled routes northbound out of platform 3 and the Down Through Road back along the Down Redhill Line in the up direction towards Merstham to a limit of shunt beyond 1909 crossover points (which are the facing points for down trains to gain access to platform 0). Also this limit of shunt is also used for moves out of platforms 2 and 0 via 1909 points reverse.

 

[bramling]

I saw this at Redhill today. It is an information sign at a Network Rail gated access point and shows the three tracks beyond the gate and their direction of travel and speed limits. The top line is shown as down direction only, whereas the other two as reversible. However, the top line is also reversible, as trains can, and sometimes do, leave platform 3 at Redhill northbound (i.e. reverse) and cross over. This is a fully-signalled passenger-carrying routeing option. My question is; who provides the information for signs like this and, assuming it is there to tell staff which way they should be looking for trains, is this a significant safety issue or are these signs simply ignored by those entering the railway anyway?
View attachment 156909

The correct answer is really that staff shouldn’t be relying on signs like this for anything that’s safety-critical.

There is no visible audit trail to assure that the information is correct, and whether it has been kept up to date reflecting any changes that may have occurred since the sign was installed.

In that sense I’m not entirely sure what the point of these signs actually is, as if one cannot be assured of their accuracy then there isn’t a lot of point in them being there.

Those people making safety-critical decisions will be working from other sources of information where there is an audit trail to ensure accuracy.

 

[Elecman]

Tgd one purpose they serve is to correctly identify the actual access point as that should match the SSoWP that the costs holds. ( not the first time that staff have accessed the railway at the wrong location and then been involved in a safety issue) . Also a good reminder of which is the Up and the Down direction