29-05-2010, 10:14 AM
Comments on Q7
I think that you have answered the first part in the same way as IJP did in this thread - that is to say you have given the advantages of changing to another point machine per se, rather that, what I think the question was asking which is what is the advantage of changing the point machine when the pway are doing work anyway. This means that in the disadvantages section, you have looked at the problems with not having a new machine, rather than the things like "the pway will be in the way". What you have written is not wrong in itself, I just do not think that is what the examiner was looking for to give you marks.
Personally, I think you have made work for yourself on part 2. The question was looking for THE testing and commissioning process. It did not ask what sort of testing regimes could be required. Hence you have spent time outlining two different regimes when you could have stated the assumption that it is similar enough for "like for like" (or different enough to need to be works, depending on what you are more comfortable with) and then going into detail. I also think, like IJP, you have concentrated a bit too much on some of the specific tests, rather than what the T&C process would be (eg some sort of planning, some levels of testing and documentation, then bringing into service).
Part 3 says about fitting monitoring to all other sites. I would imagine that if replacement of the other machines is not cost effective, putting a monitoring system on there would also be similarly prohibitive. You did not mention some sort of inspection regime (in the UK example this si crying out for a dectiption of the SIN process (note a description of it, not just stating that a SIN would be issued). You have however redeemed things a bit at the end by talking about finding an replacing the affected module. The detailed analysis you suggest to find the root cause is a sensible point.
Peter
I think that you have answered the first part in the same way as IJP did in this thread - that is to say you have given the advantages of changing to another point machine per se, rather that, what I think the question was asking which is what is the advantage of changing the point machine when the pway are doing work anyway. This means that in the disadvantages section, you have looked at the problems with not having a new machine, rather than the things like "the pway will be in the way". What you have written is not wrong in itself, I just do not think that is what the examiner was looking for to give you marks.
Personally, I think you have made work for yourself on part 2. The question was looking for THE testing and commissioning process. It did not ask what sort of testing regimes could be required. Hence you have spent time outlining two different regimes when you could have stated the assumption that it is similar enough for "like for like" (or different enough to need to be works, depending on what you are more comfortable with) and then going into detail. I also think, like IJP, you have concentrated a bit too much on some of the specific tests, rather than what the T&C process would be (eg some sort of planning, some levels of testing and documentation, then bringing into service).
Part 3 says about fitting monitoring to all other sites. I would imagine that if replacement of the other machines is not cost effective, putting a monitoring system on there would also be similarly prohibitive. You did not mention some sort of inspection regime (in the UK example this si crying out for a dectiption of the SIN process (note a description of it, not just stating that a SIN would be issued). You have however redeemed things a bit at the end by talking about finding an replacing the affected module. The detailed analysis you suggest to find the root cause is a sensible point.
Peter