2008 Aspect Sequence Chart

[Peter]

I have attempted aspect sequence chart for 2008 layout, expecting your valuable reply.

-Sugavanam

I think that you have done well on this. There are a couple of general comments and a few specific items below, but there is nothing particularly substatial.

1. I was not quite sure from the question what they actually wanted. It says "[...] down direction including to and from East Junction in the down direction". Given the nature of the triangle, at what point are they considering "downness" starts. For instance, you included 161 as it is fairly clearly in the down direction in respect to the main line, but what about 149 on the North curve. If that reads up to a down signal, should that be included. Then the slippery slope starts, does that mean that we should include 124. Although it is on the Up East Branch, the B route reads away from East Junction towards down direction signals.
I'm not saying what you did was wrong, but perhaps a note explaining what you have taken the question to mean might help them give you the benefit of the doubt in the case where they think you have missed something they wanted where you have taken a deliberate decision that it is not in the scope of the question.

2. You took good care to make it clear the direction of travel when lines converge (eg where 157 and 161 read up to 165). However, where you have chosen to show 131, the angles you put on the lines implies that 131 reads up to 135 and not 123. The junctions are in the right place, just the angles pointing the wrong way.

3. Very well done for reading the route boxes on 152. The symbol only shows a pos 4 JI on the signal (for the B route) but the route box shows that the A route has a pos 1 JI which you showed on the chart. The paper clearly has an error on it. I personally think the error is in the route box as wherever they have shown JIs, they have taken care to show the type of junction control and in this case, it is omitted.

4. Another area where you have followed what the route box says is for 109B. They clearly say that this will show YY. However, given that the junction is 50km/h, as is the line beyond giving full BD from 109 to 135 and there is full BD 135 to 123, showing YY on 109 when 123 is Red gives you 1310m braking where, for 50km/h, the table notes 445m is needed, well over 150%!

5. For the divergance on 109, you have shown Y+J4 twice. I think what you are trying to convey is that whatever is ahead, you will get Y+J4 and then when #1 is satisfied, it will show what it can, depending on the aspects ahead, including staying on Y+J4 if 135 is red. You normally only ever show each aspect once (the notable exception which you had just above is with a warner class route). So omitting your top Y+J4 and moving the #1 down to the line between the Y+J4 and YY+J4 would give you the right conditions without repeating the aspect and the extra lines to 135's Y and G.
One other point on that one, you showed the conditional parts for non flashing and the warner route with dotted lines (the way I was taught to show it), but you used solid lines for the conditions for stepping up the Y+J4 to anything else. I would have used dotted there too. For the Y on 107 to the onward junction sequence, you put the #1 below the junction of the first horizontal branch. I would try to keep the note of the condition near the point at which it leaves the "main" line - on this case the line between 107Y and 109R, just so that it is clear that the whole dotted branch is dependent on that condition.

6. Your layout is quite clear and (depending on how quickly you were doing this) quite neat. One tip I was given was to get in the habit of putting a box round each signal to make it clear what the aspects belong to. The case here is 109 where there are three distinct parts with some separating lines between. In this case, there is little to get confused with but sometimes, a box can help make it clear what goes with what.

I hope that helps and well done on what I think is a pretty good shot at it. If you have any queries, please feel free to ask.

Peter