Re: Ararat BG connections- Lets Standardise instead!

[David Langley <del@ancc.com.au>]

Rod wrote:

> >    Keep the safe working as train orders, costing less than ASW or CTC,
> and easier for the train controller if trains are all running in the same
> direction on different lines.
>
> Safe working  in Victoria will be restricted to three systems
> Double Line Automatic Signals
> CTC [include ATC]

Here I wish to clear up a popular misconception about these terms. Only one is
a safeworking system.
Automatic and Track Control describes the system of three position signalling
(either two or four wire systems) on single lines. Centralised Traffic Control
is a system of remotely controlling a number of crossing loops. The system of
signalling between the loops on the SG both NE and West is still two wire ATC.
Of course Victoria had to go and blur the difference by relating pay scales and
job descriptions to these terms i.e. CTC is for Train Controllers and ATC is
for other staff.
Ferntree Gully - Belgrave is very much a standard sort of CTC if ever I saw one
and likewise Eastmalvern - Glen Waverley prior to duplication. What about
Herne's Oak and Moe surely they are not CTC from Morwell.

>
> Train Order
> the last will be the most used
> The days of lineside signalling are about to pass

Except where there is CTC and DL autos.

>
> ASW will be Dumped with the 30 million thrown at it...wonder if China wants
> to buy a cheap ASW system, hardly used at all...

ASW. Alternative Safeworking System is it not. Then what is Electric Staff if
not an alternative to Staff and Ticket.
Why doesn't everyone give it it's proper name - Section Authority Working. But
of course it is after all an electronic token system just like the pom's RETB
(Radio Electronic Token Block) which saved many a line in the far flung corners
of UK (or Scotland to be precise).

>
> Rod :o)

DEL.

A cynic is what an idealist calls a realist.