Re: Head on in the Western district

["Jeff Schmidt" <jschmidt@tpgi.com.au>]

>
> >>>> Don't you realize that drivers will always have to have route
specific
> >>>> knowledge!  It's called by those that do it 'ROADS AND SIGNALS'!
Just
> >>>> to drive a train on a track a driver has to be schooled on the route
> >>>> (and I don't mean just the safe working systems) I mean learning the
> >>>> track, the hills the dips where to power where to drift where to
brake.
> >>>> That is special knowledge and it has to learned.
>
> >>>Yep - we all know that. But having a uniform standard of safeworking,
> >>>Australia-wide - would make that easier.
>
> >>>At the moment, a Sydney NR driver transferring to Melbourne has to
relearn
> >>>all of the safeworking as well as the road. If the safeworking was the
same,
> >>>he would only have to learn the road.
>
> >>>--
> >>>DaveProctor
> >>>thadocta AT dingoblue.net.au
>
>
> >>Its also worth wondering about the requirement to "know the road."
> >>If we delete the safeworking system on the basis that we have uniform
national
> >>safeworking systems that everyone knows , then the issue is whether we
can
> >>implement a scheme of indications to provide sufficient road knowledge
to a
> >>driver who doesnt know the road to allow him / her to safely (maybe not
> >>efficiently) drive a train over an unknown line.
>
> >>Such indications would be comprehensive speed boards, indications of
presence
> >>of level crossings, indications of forthcoming crossing stations etc.
> >>Realistically , I cant see any fundamental reasons why not.
> >>Speed boards, level crossing indicators already exist, and I note that
NSW is
> >>starting to introduce location boards.
>
> >>Its also worth noting that Rails competitors, namely road , sea and to a
> >>lesser extent air , all operate without a mandatory requirement to "know
the
> >>road."
> >>All thats required is a qualification / endorsement , on the vehicle
being
> >>operated,not on where its going.
>
> >Nice idea, but the driver has to know where speed boards, signals, etc
are
> >before they get to them, so they can react to them.
>
> >Dave Malcolm
>
> >>MD
>
>
>
> Lets look at the above limitations / propositions and what can be done to
> easily fix them.
> In the case of speed boards we can solve this problem in exactly the way
its
> solved in the road environment, ie advance notice of speed restrictions.
> ie prior to say a 40 km/h curve,at a distance based on the maximum braking
> distance of the heaviest fastest train,we place a board with something
like
> 40km/h warning 2km ahead, then at 1km the same thing ie 40 km/h warning
1km
> ahead, then the actual speed board, this way the driver is made aware that
a
> speed board is coming up.
> The same can be done for signals which are closer than the maximum braking
> distance for the train , ie class X signal 2 km ahead.
>
> In Bobs case of bringing a heavy train down the Adelaide Hills, the issue
here
> is not so much the geographic location, but the skills necessary to bring
a
> train down a steep hill, any steep hill.
> For example I doubt that a freightcorp driver who daily brought heavy
trains
> down the Blue Mtns,would have any trouble bringing a heavy trains down the
> Adelaide Hills provided that we undertook the additional signage described
> above coupled with an additional sign something like severe 1:40 grade
ahead
> for 10 kms ,
> One could then possibly think about endorsements for train drivers much in
the
> same way as heavy truck drivers are endorsed.
> eg Severe grade endorsement.
> Heavy load endorsement (4000 tonnes max etc).
>
> In this way we get away from specific route knowledge , and replace it
with
> additional / enhanced operational knowledge.
>
> MD
>
Already been done. It's called ATC or ATP. Believe me MD you can't take
shortcuts teaching drivers the road. Rail companies have tried and failed.
If you ever get the chance go for ride in the cab of an ATC/ATP equipped
train. You'll soon notice which driver really knows where they are going.

I've been working for the past 18 months on route training for drivers and
the first thing we found was that any form of signage fast becomes part of
the scenery. One experiment we did was to ask drivers how many speed boards
there was in a particular yard with a branching main line. The best answer
we got was 50% under the actual number. This isn't a reflection of the route
knowledge of these drivers. All these drivers scored 100% when came to
knowing signal locations and aspects, points speed and how to drive
accordingly.

The same suggestion as yours has been raised by a manager or two but the
little problem is no one has yet figured out how to make a sign that says,
"If approach signal is proceed and is BP reduction is over 70kpa but less
than 100kpa and stabilised and all traction motors are working with all
locos having a working dynamic brake and train weight is less than 8000
tonne and speed is stabilised at 60 kmh or less and the rail is dry and you
have at least 400 meters visibility of the home signal and you have a 2 pipe
braking system with all compressors working you may release the auto brake
but keep dynamic brake at full."

That's the first part of the sign...

Jeff







  -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
   http://www.newsfeeds.com       The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including  Dedicated  Binaries Servers ==-----