 |
Re: Capitol Corridor Overspeed at Crossover- FULL STORY TEXT
Author: Dr Zarkoff
Date: 03-29-2017 - 18:39
>Is the signal aspect clear that the speed is reduced? Is the reduced speed somehow shown in the signal aspect, or does the engineer have to know how much that will be?
If you're asking whether the UP uses speed signaling or route signaling, it uses route signaling, in which there is also a speed component in the indication.
>Either in a job briefing before leaving Sacramento (the start of the run, for most Capitol Corridor trains) or in conversation with the dispatcher on the radio, there would have been some direction as to the track the train would stop on at Davis - which in this case would have required using the crossover that, as noted by others, would have been known to be a reduced-speed one.
No, because this would poison the engineer's perception of the signal indication when he encountered it. In fact, for this very reason the DS is prohibited from telling an engineer or train crew what any signal indication is. Besides, things are always susceptible to change, and the whole point of signal systems is to obey the indications as you see them on your trip over the railroad.
"Job briefing" "Job briefing" Job Briefing" has been the catch-all excuse/mantra for at least 15 years, and it has become rather pointless and self-defeating, mainly because it can't realistically take into account all the dynamics encountered in a trip. If you can't follow (and obey) signal indications as you encounter them, how did you get certified as an engineer in the first place?
If you're asking whether the UP uses speed signaling or route signaling, it uses route signaling, in which there is also a speed component in the indication.
>Either in a job briefing before leaving Sacramento (the start of the run, for most Capitol Corridor trains) or in conversation with the dispatcher on the radio, there would have been some direction as to the track the train would stop on at Davis - which in this case would have required using the crossover that, as noted by others, would have been known to be a reduced-speed one.
No, because this would poison the engineer's perception of the signal indication when he encountered it. In fact, for this very reason the DS is prohibited from telling an engineer or train crew what any signal indication is. Besides, things are always susceptible to change, and the whole point of signal systems is to obey the indications as you see them on your trip over the railroad.
"Job briefing" "Job briefing" Job Briefing" has been the catch-all excuse/mantra for at least 15 years, and it has become rather pointless and self-defeating, mainly because it can't realistically take into account all the dynamics encountered in a trip. If you can't follow (and obey) signal indications as you encounter them, how did you get certified as an engineer in the first place?
