2014 Aspect Sequence

[PJW]

Here are my comments on an attempt received.

One of the routes from 107 was omitted; I understand that this had been quite a common oversight by candidates for the exam itself.

I have amended the depiction of the MAY-FA for signal 105 and also showing the fall-back MAR for that route.

I found the depiction of the approach release for 201 not as clear as should have been.

One of the stated assumptions does not seem to match the chart; not convinced that the other assumptions needed stating, but have noted some I think should have been added.

Overall though a reasonable attempt; it certainly tried to answer the full question, although I also made some comments on the written elements. 

PJW

[AdrianM]

Much appreciated for putting this attempt up on the forum PJW.
 
I've just attempted this question and come up with broadly the same answer, please see attached for reference. Any feedback is much appreciated (it's my first every attempt at an aspect sequence....and coming from LU background I don't have much dealing with this)
 
I did have a few questions:
 
1. Are you certain there is a route from 107 to 203? I don't see it on the diagram so didn't add this to my aspect sequence chart.
 
2. Junction Indicator numbering - Am I right in thinking: 
 
Pos 1: Top Left
Pos 2: Middle Left
Pos 3: Bottom left
Pos 4: Top Right
Pos 5: Middle Right
Pos 6: Bottom Right
 
3. For 201G would it have been OK to not include the junction indicator for the mainline route (leading to 109, Pos1)? Or is it standard practice to include this?
 
4. For 105G, have I correctly numbered the junction indicator for the Y+P4? I feel uncomfortably have X2 Y+P4....or is this OK.
 
 
Best Regards,
Adrian
 

 

Here are my comments on an attempt received.

One of the routes from 107 was omitted; I understand that this had been quite a common oversight by candidates for the exam itself.

I have amended the depiction of the MAY-FA for signal 105 and also showing the fall-back MAR for that route.

I found the depiction of the approach release for 201 not as clear as should have been.

One of the stated assumptions does not seem to match the chart; not convinced that the other assumptions needed stating, but have noted some I think should have been added.

Overall though a reasonable attempt; it certainly tried to answer the full question, although I also made some comments on the written elements. 

PJW

[TheRailwaySignaller]

Thanks Peter. Just realised this has been posted here (I'm the originator). Anyway a few points:

a) As Adrian is asking, are you sure that there is a route from 107 to 203? There doesn't seem to be any track to allow for it?

b) Apologies for the poor wording of my second solution. In essence I was trying to suggest that the turnout from the loop to the branch be signalled using Main Aspect Approach Control from Yellow. From my understanding this has to be combine with four-aspect signalling so that the double yellow can act as a 'speed checker'?

c) With regards to the flashing aspect, the idea was not to approach release it, but to implement a control I have seen in notes. This is, that it must be established that the flashing signal has been visible for some minimum period of time otherwise the junction must revert to MAR signalling. I guess I must have messed up somewhere!

d) By assumption 2 I was merely trying to state that I presumed the overlap symbol beyond 107 to be shared by both 107 and 201.

Once again, many thanks for all the hard work.

[MikeMurphy]

Hi,

I have had an attempt at the 2014 Aspect sequence question.

Any feed back would be appreciated. Especially in regards to the other mark questions separate to the sequence.

[Jerry1237]

Much appreciated for putting this attempt up on the forum PJW.
 
I've just attempted this question and come up with broadly the same answer, please see attached for reference. Any feedback is much appreciated (it's my first every attempt at an aspect sequence....and coming from LU background I don't have much dealing with this)
 
I did have a few questions:
 
1. Are you certain there is a route from 107 to 203? I don't see it on the diagram so didn't add this to my aspect sequence chart.
This appears to be an error. I cannot see 107-203. The only valid route seems to be 201+pos4 - 203.
 
2. Junction Indicator numbering - Am I right in thinking: (I believe so assuming you are referring to UK mainline standards).
 
Pos 1: Top Left
Pos 2: Middle Left
Pos 3: Bottom left
Pos 4: Top Right
Pos 5: Middle Right
Pos 6: Bottom Right
 
3. For 201G would it have been OK to not include the junction indicator for the mainline route (leading to 109, Pos1)? Or is it standard practice to include this?
You wouldn't expect a JI for the normal route. Presumption here is Aspect + Pos 4 for the branch, Aspect for the main. Also, why refer to G? JIs display for all non-stop aspects and would suggest with aspect sequences to refer to routes. So, 201A(M) doesn't need a JI, 201B(M) does.

 
4. For 105G, have I correctly numbered the junction indicator for the Y+P4? I feel uncomfortably have X2 Y+P4....or is this OK.

 
 
Best Regards,
Adrian
 

 

Here are my comments on an attempt received.

One of the routes from 107 was omitted; I understand that this had been quite a common oversight by candidates for the exam itself.

I have amended the depiction of the MAY-FA for signal 105 and also showing the fall-back MAR for that route.

I found the depiction of the approach release for 201 not as clear as should have been.

One of the stated assumptions does not seem to match the chart; not convinced that the other assumptions needed stating, but have noted some I think should have been added.

Overall though a reasonable attempt; it certainly tried to answer the full question, although I also made some comments on the written elements. 

PJW

[PJW]

Another last minute attempt that I may not have the time to comment upon