Re: Today (Sat) on 22 plat. Central

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

<signal_spotter@my-deja.com
>   "Tezza"
> > <signal_spotter@my-deja.com> wrote in message

> > > > 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.
> >
> >
> But you haven't given a reason why you think they're unnecessary.

Gee, what's that up in the first paragraph.


> You've just come out with a opinionated statement. I'm interested in
> hearing why you think they're unnecessary.

Please read the first paragraph again and you'll find out why. BTW, when were
opinionated statements outlawed?