Re: Today (Sat) on 22 plat. Central

["Tezza" <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au>]

<signal_spotter@my-deja.com> wrote in message
8rgnan$2qa$1@nnrp1.deja.com">news:8rgnan$2qa$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> > I don't think they're necessary. The only way you could hit the train
> in front after tripping on the intermediate or following trip
> > is on purpose - which intermediate trips won't prevent.
>
> You've just given the answer to the reason for ITS's. They are designed
> to prevent you from hitting a train, on purpose or accidently, when you
> have a reduced overlap because of a train ahead. And the only way you
> could hit that train would be to pass the ITS at the correct speed then
> accelerate and then trip the trainstop at the signal at a higher speed.
> This would mean that you're stopping distance would be longer. Now if
> you want to drive with a death wish then let me know what trains you
> drive so I never travel on them :-)
> >
> > This is the real reason they're put in, to bunch trains up.
>
> Exactly. So are you saying that they're still unnecessary. Do you think
> that trains shouldn't be bunched up. Is that what you're implying by
> saying that the aforementioned examples of intermediates are unecessary?

I'm *still* saying I think they're unnecessary.