>
>Perhaps the speed proving in Sydney is different to the way speed proving works
>in Melbourne and the UK. In Melbourne you might have 3 train stops between
>signals. If the speed proving thinks you are going too fast to stop at the
>signal the trip will stay up, they do not enforce speeds past an actual signal.
>Thus, they trip at different speeds.
>
>Perhaps the drivers that didn't "get it" haven't worked with speed proving for
>very long. Is it a new thing in Sydney? Melbourne has had speed proving for
>quite a long time at various locations.
Speed proving has been existence in Sydney since the Underground was
built in the 1920's.
Let's just state some facts:
1. Speeds for the clearing of the trips on low speed (and where relevant)
caution indications are prescribed in the rules, although the extent to which the
theoretical timings coincide with the actual timings may vary.
2. Intermediate timed trips exist in various locations, but they are only in short
sections between successive signals (e.g. along platforms in the
underground, or on the approach to the platforms in various locations) and
their intended speeds are obvious enough. Drivers do not have problems
complying with them except if the timers are defective.
This whole thing is, with due respect to Mark, a beat-up. There is not a problem.
Let's not invent problems which don't exist. There are enough ones which do.
Eddie