Indeed there can certainly be the parallel moves which you describe; there would be no need for the signaller to have keyed any points as should 142 be routed into the Goods yard then the mere setting of 171 to 151 would have to call 228R and 225N since that would be the only available overlap.
Hence when considering 122C(S) as a potentially opposing route when producing the Control Table for 171 then the availability entry recording this locking would need to be qualified by "or 228 Normal or Free to go".
So certainly you seem t understand the issues- I hope my comments have assisted rather than confused.
Hence when considering 122C(S) as a potentially opposing route when producing the Control Table for 171 then the availability entry recording this locking would need to be qualified by "or 228 Normal or Free to go".
So certainly you seem t understand the issues- I hope my comments have assisted rather than confused.
(30-07-2014, 09:40 AM)StrongLifts5x5 Wrote: Probably best to explain some of my reasoning so its easy for you to correct it, when I had the first attempt at 171A(M) I resoned that if the signaller had keyed 225N and 228R the route would set up to 225B.
Therefore 122C(S) to 138 signal would conflict with the route, i reasoned it would therefore be appropriate to have 122C(S) normal and free of sectional locking or the train timed to a stand at CP tc, my reasoning is there could a movement into the goods yard from 142 at the same time the route is set from 171 and at the same time there is a shunting movement from 122 to 138.
PJW