27-10-2016, 11:49 PM
Yes by necessity I was having to be brief and intended to go back to expand, but Dorothy beat me too it.
It does however depend on what you actuallly mean by "lamp proving"- whether it means "proved in the signal in rear" or merely indicated to the soignaller / alarmed to the technician.
I read the question specifically as applying to a GPL with no moves up to it, which rather rules out LOS or a GPL limiting moves on a running line not signalled further in that direction (which are the cases which are particularly worthy for proving). I do find it rather ironic that current standards do require much more lamp proving than was done historically, given that the chances of an LED GPL being out are very small compared to the one ON lamp failing in a traditional GPL (used to be a very regular occurrence) and that there are nowadays typically far fewer shunting moves than used to be made on a layout.
It does however depend on what you actuallly mean by "lamp proving"- whether it means "proved in the signal in rear" or merely indicated to the soignaller / alarmed to the technician.
I read the question specifically as applying to a GPL with no moves up to it, which rather rules out LOS or a GPL limiting moves on a running line not signalled further in that direction (which are the cases which are particularly worthy for proving). I do find it rather ironic that current standards do require much more lamp proving than was done historically, given that the chances of an LED GPL being out are very small compared to the one ON lamp failing in a traditional GPL (used to be a very regular occurrence) and that there are nowadays typically far fewer shunting moves than used to be made on a layout.
PJW