Re: [melb] Holmsglen Accident - Speculation Only

["Tony Gatt" <baulko@tig.com.au>]

Dave Proctor <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
ADcg5.158943$t91.1309871@news4.giganews.com">news:ADcg5.158943$t91.1309871@news4.giganews.com...

*snip*

>
> > Given your knowledge of Victorian signalling (despite the fact that you
have
> been living in GOC - God's Own Countyr - for a while now) I think you can
> make a contribution to this.
>
> Dave

<pure speculation>

After viewing a signalling diagram, I have the following to contribute:

DG526 at the end of Jordanville Platform would have definately been showing
Stop (assuming that all signalling was in fact functioning correctly).

The ETY would have needed to trip past this signal requiring a recharge of
the braking system.
Also the driver would have been required to wait 3 Minutes as stated by a
former Signalling inspector. This would have put the ETY 3 minutes FURTHER
behind the Pass.

DG484 is 1250 metres past that signal in the up direction. The driver again
(assuming correct functioning of the signals) would have been required to
stop (3 minutes) and trip, and recharge again.. another 3 minutes minimum
added to the gap between himself and the Train in front.

Searchlight signals are not infallible, however they are pretty reliable in
their operation, if the signal DG484 failed on the wrong side, it would more
than likely remain on the wrong side, and the following hitachi would have
added to the accident. However there is evidence that DG484 was functioning
correctly after the incident.

In Melbourne, drivers are not required to contact control when an automatic
signal is at stop.
Which is fair, as control cannot see what is there, nor can they alter the
signal aspect, hence the term "automatic"

As previously stated, there were no signal fitters present after the
incident, indicating there was no fear of failure of the signalling
apparatii.

SO by the time the accident occured assuming correct time waited at the
auto's, the ETY would have been "6 mins +" behind the train.

</pure speculation>

Questions:

- Does the ETY movement overtake the Stopping train between Burnley and
Flinders Street?

- Would 6 + mins make it late before it was due to begin revenue service?

- Did the driver of the 14:11 contact Metrol to inform them of the delay to
his train due to malfunction or other reasons?

- If he did, did Metrol infrom the driver of the ETY cars?

- Disc Brakes were mentioned as being on the second train. Comeng have a
form of ABS IIRC, Would this stop the train from going into a brake lock in
full emergency? (Not that that would have helped in wet/misty conditions)

- Do Victorian rules still require the driver to "travel at a speed of which
he can stop short of any obstruction until the next fixed signal"?

 - What speed would one have been travelling to "move" a 6 car commeng train
a full carriage length while it has its brakes on?

--

Tony.