21-09-2008, 08:20 AM
PJW Wrote:That's the lot!
Now read, mark, learn and inwardly digest........
PJW
PJW Wrote:That's the lot!
Now read, mark, learn and inwardly digest........
PJW
Dear PJW,
It is really useful, but I have several queries on the Notes:
1. Bite 6 Opposing Route locking (Point 8 & 9)
- I am not too used to using the bracket for the time released statement, can you explain more about the meaning of the bracket?
- For Point 9, why the T.C. to be enclosed withing a bracket is different for non-permissive opp. route & permissive opp. route?
- Can I omit the use of bracket like the old style C.T. samples?
2. Bite 6 Opposing route locking (Point 10)
- If there is really an opp. route infringing one side of the swinging O/L only, do I just igore it? or I just write it without a point condition (of the swinging O/L point?)
3. Bite 18 Points (Point 3 bullet 5)
- For a point lying in a swinging overlap (but not the swinging O/L point), I think the route locking requires a condition on the position of the swing O/L point. Is there other ways to express this if we do not add a point condition?
4. Bite 18 Points (Point 6 bullet 3)
- Can you explain more why the route lock only needs to maintain after berth TC clear, but not require us to write all T.C from start signal till the berth TC?
Actually for the Point Control Table, I plan to use an old style C.T. (I think back to British Railway times...) that have blanks provided for Swinging O/L, and unlike NR practice it will not separate 2 rows for N->R & R->N cases (N->R and R->N will only be mentioned only when required). In the examples that I have it does incorporate point conditions when the points concern swinging overlap cases. Do you think it is acceptable for the examiner?