Posts: 36
Threads: 22
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation:
2
01-06-2008, 04:16 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-12-2017, 06:57 PM by PJW.
Edit Reason: replacing missing WORD by pdf
)
So last week the London study group met to consider the tackling of the stopping headway calculations for the 2000 layout. Note that our work assumed that we had already completed and were following on from the previous non-stopping calculation work (see previous thread).
At the session we basically worked through page 229 of the Module 2 Examination Resource Pack, issued 19/02/2008. Note that the relevant reading is on pages 225-230. I
Posts: 2,092
Threads: 373
Joined: Nov 2007
Reputation:
19
Job Role: Other
02-06-2008, 03:38 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-06-2010, 10:35 AM by PJW.)
In brief certainly must use the actual timetabled speed for headway, not the max permissible which is only relevant to braking.
Not readily in position to look at attachment and since this internet session costing more than a day's wages in this part of the world, I respond more fully next week! However I think it is quite probably that would achieve with 4 aspects reasonably widely spaced; certainly including approach released signals would do nothing to improve headway!
PJW
[quote=Douglas]
So last week the London study group met to consider the tackling of the stopping headway calculations for the 2000 layout. Note that our work assumed that we had already completed and were following on from the previous non-stopping calculation work (see previous thread).
At the session we basically worked through page 229 of the Module 2 Examination Resource Pack, issued 19/02/2008. Note that the relevant reading is on pages 225-230. I