2009 CTs on IRSE 2012 tables

[dorothy.pipet]

I attempted these timed, but really didn't get far enough, so continued. Work in blue was after the time had expired.
From reading the exam review for 2009, Mod3, this was a common problem, but how badly would I have failed?

[PJW]

Rather pushed for time this week, so not sure when I'll have time to review in detail; perhaps someone else might?

I think you have got your initial notes sheet pretty much spot on, assuming that you really did capture all the $ notes you ended up using.

Definitely seemed to be a tough year; just looking at the volume it does suggest that the examiners had been over ambitious and they would realise this. Having not been on the exam committee I don't know why they don't attempt to answer the paper themselves before finalising it, but it does appears they don't. Quite probably it is because they are human, have paid employment, want some life outside railway signalling, need to achieve various deadlines. Therefore if it can wait a bit then they put it off and may well only do sit own to produce their own answers in the period between the exam being sat by candidates and them getting the papers to mark. Such is life.

Since however it looks like you'd covered over half of the content, and judging by your previous attempts which are generally well done, it certainly implies you'd have got over 50 and that is a definite pass, even without the examiners feeling they need to make allowances. One advantage of them having only recently attempted themselves is that it is freash in their memory and so they are still very much aware of the strain and there can be true sympathy (= suffering with) the candidate, so may be suitably lenient, particularly if faced with a selection of answers that imply that everyone in the ability spectrum struggled.

As you realise in that year there was 60mins total but some 12-15mins of this would have been drawing the blanks (and you didn't actually state whether you reduced the time accordingly).

As for any other question in the paper, BEFORE you select it, you should always look at not only whether you have the knowledge and experience to answer, but also would feel able to be able to get enough of the marks in the time available. The questions "are what they are"; if you feel that what is being asked for the CTs is excessive, then the solution is in your hands- don't do it and select other questions instead. The examiners do not need to make one question "fair" in comparison with another- the paper is the same for everybody.

I think that for amany years there has been a growing feeling amongst the examiners that far too many candidates seem to go into the exam planning to do CTs, Aspect Sequence and one other "make weight" and thuse deliberately not studying to be able to address a large percentage of the syllabus.
In fact this may be exactly what THEY did as candidates, and now that "the poachers are turned game-keepers", they know the tricks and loopholes and it is their job to plug them.
In retrospect, perhaps 2009 can be seen as a deliberate attempt to catch out those who they were feeling were going for a shortcut means of passing the exam module. Note that shortly after this came the change to the exam:
the restriction of the CT question to just one standards question,
the end of the aspect sequence chart "banker" and
the ending of Part A / Part B to emphasise all quetions equal and it is a free choice.
If a candidate enters the exam only prepared to do a small sub-set of the possible quetions, then that is a high risk strategy.

Your methodical approach of attempting past papers and now moving on to doing timed attempts will be very beneficial in preparing you for the exam; those who are looking at your efforts and trying to pick up bits and pieces from them are analogous to "armchair sportsfans"- they may become more knowledgeable, they may enjoy it but they aren't really gettiing themselves fitter!

So don't worry, carry on your preparation as you are and I am sure you will get an exam result that reflects your efforts.

I attempted these timed, but really didn't get far enough, so continued. Work in blue was after the time had expired.
From reading the exam review for 2009, Mod3, this was a common problem, but how badly would I have failed?

[reuben]

Hi Dorothy

I've had a look at your answers - it's very difficult from a small laptop screen in India, compared to spreading the paper out. However, I've cheated and found a model answer I created a year or two ago, which you can compare with. It uses the PJW control table template rather than IRSE style, but the content is very similar. There are undoubtedly some errors in my answer which you will find! - also I notice I included point detection in the overlap at the time.

I'm struggling to make a detailed comparison, but It does appear that you have captured a good amount of the required controls, so doing well technically.

There will always be a challenge on time - you have tackled a good proportion in the time, and ensured that you did at least one point table before running out. Given the format at the time, you would may be have done better to tackle other routes from different signals instead of doing more classes of route from the same signal - these could have been saved for injury time at the end. However, you're less likely to get this situation in future years.

Also, good set of assumptions, showing you're up to date.

Overall, I think this would do well in the exam, no worries about a failure here.

[asrisaku]

Hi Dorothy

Thanks for your control table. I am studying the control table template IRSE from your attempt and I used your control table as a sample and created my own control table. I found that not all of things I would agree with you but I am not sure also I am correct or not. Anyway it would be really good if someone or you can give the comments from my attempt.

Best wishes, arnut

[dorothy.pipet]

I will have a look when I can.
At first glance you do not say which railway's practice you are following. I'm going to look from the point of view of UK mainline as that is my experience. Ideally you should be using your own railway and that may show up differences.

I followed PJW's suggestion of doing a separate sheet of notes, and I recommend that.

[dorothy.pipet]

I've looked at the Routes only so far - whenever I sit down the baby suddenly needs feeding so it can be a slow process.
Generally it looks good but there are a few inconsistencies

You've used $32 but not defined it;
You've not used a $ note for points conditions under "Tracks" - you should show the examiner you know whether the points are set/detected/set and detected/etc.

416B M/C
Opposing locking of 371B is in the (M) route table but not the ©, inconsistent
Opposing Locking of 353B(S) omits the overlap tracks whereas 373A(S) includes them, inconsistent
Flank calls on the overlap: for me 249N is alright, but nothing is gained by calling 246N

365A(M/W/C)
You need to think about how you show complex swinging overlaps in the "points called, locked and detected" and "Tracks" columns. What you have written doesn't reflect what you think so (245R, 242N) or (AN clr, AN clr) is not correct.
I think calling 235R as flank protection is unnecessarily restrictive because it prevents a parallel move on the up main.
The flank protection of your 2nd/3rd overlaps seems inconsistent to me.
Again the Opposing Route locking is inconsistent (w.r.t. 414 and 371A(S))
Also I'm not sure why you've put tracks AC, AD, AE, BX, BV in?
You could do with a note about Warner step-up to main (usually provided in UK mainline signalling)

371D(S)
382A(S) is not an opposing route, do you see why?
Needs a note "Preset by..."
Tracks clear, while not necessarily incorrect, I would have assumed this shunt rout might be permissive because there are call-on routes to the same destination, and thus omitted ED.

[dorothy.pipet]

Points:
you have omitted the foul tracks from "Train Detection Clear" in both cases. Suggest you have a look at Reuben's Model Answer above and see if you understand why they are included.
On both points tables you've got (416B(M) with 237N) but omitted (416B(M) with 237R) which also affects the points. Similarly with 412, 414, 418. As the control appears on your route table for 416B(M) it should appear on the points table.
For 236 points, you have [418C(S) with 238R] overlap, however, I don't believe there is a swinging overlap at 382 over the points reverse.

[asrisaku]

Dear Dorothy

Thanks a lot for your help. I'll try to understand your valuable comments. Sorry for taking a long time to respond. I'll learn it this weekend days.

Best regards
Arnut

[asrisaku]

Dear Dorothy

Yes I saw the inconsistent shunt routes with overlap and no overlap. I didn't understand well enough. I have studied your attempt other years also which are helpful and I saw PVW's comments to stick with permissive shunt(no overlap)

416B M/C
371B will be added in the main route.
Shunt routes need to be permissive.

365(M/W/C)
Swinging overlaps will be changed to reflect "points" and "tracks" column.
235R is unneccessary. Agree
AC, AD, AE, BX, BV I thought about track flank when a train overruns. Should I delete them?
Warner route will be put a note to step up to main.

371D(S)
382A(S) not the opposing route because of 238N. Am I right?
I don't understand a note "Preset by..." Can u explain more?

Appreciate your comments. Wishing you and your kid all the best

Arnut

[dorothy.pipet]

365(M/W/C)
AC, AD, AE, BX, BV I thought about track flank when a train overruns. Should I delete them?
Warner route will be put a note to step up to main.

Overun detection and protection:
There are a number of ways this might be tackled, and indeed adding appropriate tracks clear is one of them. I must admit that I decided not to include any SPAD protection at all in the exam owing to time pressure. [The very latest standard is for there to be no SPAD protection in the Interlocking but include it in the IECC instead, although that is not yet provided for in IECC.]. What I would use at work (current resignalling schemes) is a bit more complex so if you do include something, what you have done is a good option. I would suggest using a format such as [AC, AD, AE, BX, BV]#1 with #1 for overrun protection. You need to consider trains going the other direction, e.g. a train on BV heading towards 348 on the up branch.

371D(S)
382A(S) not the opposing route because of 238N. Am I right?

A train on R382A calls P234N; then R371D requires P234R.

I don't understand a note "Preset by..." Can u explain more?

Preset Signals:
Typically the control tables I've worked with cross reference so R365A(M/W/C) notes "Presets 371A" and R371A notes "Preset by R365A(M/W/C)" and so on.