True - but the original query was about Wynyard, and you didn't drift, you
took an almighty leap when you went to discuss Victorian methods.
>I did not infer that the speed proving speed was not fixed. (its a good
idea to
>read and understand someones post before shooting your mouth off)
Hmmmm - i (and about 5 other people I showed a print out of your posting to)
all inferred the same as David did - we must ALL be stupid (although there
are 5 university degrees amongst that lot, and one is an English teacher, so
I don't think so) or your posting was not as clear as you thought it was.
>Braking rates are VERY relevant. If the speed proving is set so that our
"worst
>braking" train will get tripped doing 10kph (or whatever speed) it follows
that
>a better braking train could be doing 20 kph, easily able to stop at the
>signal, but still get tripped.
ALL low-speed signals in Sydney are set for the same speed - so it doesn't
matter if the train has the best braking in the world - if the regulations
say that the train must not exceed a certain speed when approaching a signal
displaying a certain aspect, then it doesn't matter if it has braking that
will allow it to travel faster than this in safety.
>You mentioned that: "This way, the driver
>knows if he is doing a certain speed, he will not be tripped." Great, lets
say
>there are a couple of hundred speed proving trips installed, all set at
varying
>speeds, you expect a driver to remember each and every one?
In Sydney, they are all set for the same speed.
>If you ever qualify as a driver what I just posted will make a lot more
sense
>to you!
I showed this posting to two drivers - one is an ETR driver (Sydney
suburban), the other interurban - they don't have the faintest idea what you
are on about.
Regards
David "The Doctor" Proctor
daproc@bigfoot.com