Re: NRC <> Brisbane to Sydney safeworking.

["Richard Wardle" <ricdeb@netmedia.com.au>]

David Proctor wrote in message
<72ong6$9m$1@reader1.reader.news.ozemail.net>...
>Eben Levy wrote in message <364FDEB9.40B7E0C9@ozemail.com.au>...
>
>[...snip...]
>
>>What if the computer suffers a power out for a fraction of a second and
>resets.
>>it then boots up and issues an oerder for a train that is heading for the
>train
>>it issued an order to before it went down.
>
>
>And what if the current computer operating the Telarah-Casino CTC suffers a
>powere out for a fraction of a second and resets. It then boots up and
>allows a signal to be set to allow a train into a section that already has
a
>train in it?
>
>What I cannot understand is that all of the objections to train orders are
>based on the (alleged) unreliability of the technology, when all of that
>technology is currently in use. The only difference is that instead of a
>green light to enter a section, the driver has a piece of paper of an
>instruction on a computer screen. If he can stuff that up, then he can
stuff
>up a red light too.

A piece of paper is not the same as a signal to tell you that the section is
clear.  In C.T.C systems if there is a train in the section or there is a
broken rail or the rail circuit is broken in any way then the starting
signals will show a STOP indication.  Thats better than a piece of paper
anyday.
>
>David "The Doctor" Proctor
>daproc.spambait@umpires.com
>
>