Here are your first route CTs.
You need to declare the practices you are following; i am assuming in your case will be SSI CT, probably relatively recent NR?
Also I notice that both for the points CTs and these CTs that you are prefixing the identities by P or R- I expect this comes from familiarity with SSI data, but NR doesn't do this on Control Tables.
114AM:
You put some superfluous route locking on the CT whereas in reality the locking is achieved via point locking. However you missed 107A(M)
The back-back locking of the platform staring signals is occasionally done but not generally in the UK nowadays.
Watch the route indicators; MARI stands for Minature; it is confsusing that a (M) route can have a SARI and a (S) route can have a MARI!
Need to learn how to determine the time for A/L release; see time values.
Comprehensive A/L- have made some notes but we'll discuss separately
123AM:
Some similar comments but also probably a couple of silly slips on this one.
Specific issue though is missing 211 as trapping / flank as discussed when comenting on that point's CT.
142B(W):
Basically similar comments but also some specifics:
a) foul tracks
b) specific Warning route features; see revision bite.
142B(C ):
Some similarities, but the specifics here relate to the stupidity that having correctly asked for DB or DC occupied when the signaller is setiing the call-on route, that the aspect controls demand the tracks clear! Signal is never going to clear.
You also got carried away by demanding 206R; yes from the selfish viewpoint of 142B(C ) it would be an advantage, but would be a nonsense for the site as a whole to destroy trapping from the sidings to a running line!
144A(S):
You missed out some opposing route locking; mind you it does depend what you are doing with the points to some extent; you were inconsistent re 206.
You attempted to record the fact there would be last wheel replacement, but didn't use the CT format correctly; having put $40 then you didn't fill in the relevant box. Instead you attempted to put the replacement condition into the disengagement box- this is closely related but different. So the examiner is left with the feeling that you have leant a bit form here and some from there and have ended up falling between two stools; actually your fellow student did much the same, so this is another area to tackle!
You need to declare the practices you are following; i am assuming in your case will be SSI CT, probably relatively recent NR?
Also I notice that both for the points CTs and these CTs that you are prefixing the identities by P or R- I expect this comes from familiarity with SSI data, but NR doesn't do this on Control Tables.
114AM:
You put some superfluous route locking on the CT whereas in reality the locking is achieved via point locking. However you missed 107A(M)
The back-back locking of the platform staring signals is occasionally done but not generally in the UK nowadays.
Watch the route indicators; MARI stands for Minature; it is confsusing that a (M) route can have a SARI and a (S) route can have a MARI!
Need to learn how to determine the time for A/L release; see time values.
Comprehensive A/L- have made some notes but we'll discuss separately
123AM:
Some similar comments but also probably a couple of silly slips on this one.
Specific issue though is missing 211 as trapping / flank as discussed when comenting on that point's CT.
142B(W):
Basically similar comments but also some specifics:
a) foul tracks
b) specific Warning route features; see revision bite.
142B(C ):
Some similarities, but the specifics here relate to the stupidity that having correctly asked for DB or DC occupied when the signaller is setiing the call-on route, that the aspect controls demand the tracks clear! Signal is never going to clear.
You also got carried away by demanding 206R; yes from the selfish viewpoint of 142B(C ) it would be an advantage, but would be a nonsense for the site as a whole to destroy trapping from the sidings to a running line!
144A(S):
You missed out some opposing route locking; mind you it does depend what you are doing with the points to some extent; you were inconsistent re 206.
You attempted to record the fact there would be last wheel replacement, but didn't use the CT format correctly; having put $40 then you didn't fill in the relevant box. Instead you attempted to put the replacement condition into the disengagement box- this is closely related but different. So the examiner is left with the feeling that you have leant a bit form here and some from there and have ended up falling between two stools; actually your fellow student did much the same, so this is another area to tackle!
PJW