Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2007 Mainline layout
#23
(22-09-2010, 05:12 PM)alexgoei Wrote: Sorry for the late request. Would appreciate it if you can let me have your comments.

Cheers
Alex
You appear to have misunderstood what we mean by "standage" and have interpreted this as the place where a locomotive runs around its train to haul in the other direction.
In some cases this is indeed the REASON for standage but not in this particular case, nor in fact generally.

All we require is that a train held at one signal does not prevent the use of the layout by locking points etc behind it. Ideally we would always have a full train length clear so that the back of the train is no longer on any track circuit that would lock points, extend over a level crossing or indeed would be needed to be proved clear for the signal behind to show a proceed aspect.

Almost always the train fro which standage is being provided is only stopping for a while and will then contnue on its journey as an entity and in the same direction. A train is left without a locomotive on the running line only extremely rarely and certainly wouldn't be here. The ability for a locomotive to run around its train is a special case of providing standage; it MAY be a consideration but mostly that is NOT what is required.

What is meant are things like:
a) a train waiting at 202 should not prevent the use of the single line section over the viaduct in the Down direction,
b) the next signal must be placed hard onto the junction (as you indeed have placed 207) in order to get the rear of this train to be off CL track so that 703 points can be placed normal and therefore other trains can be operated over the Branch whilst the freight itself is waiting to be able to join the Main line

Placing 204 and 207 and marking the standage between them was perfect and addressed the requirement in the Plan Notes; the wording of your general notes actually in this case showed your misunderstanding whilst the plan by itself was fine. {see next section though whilst still a good thing that you noted].

Without having anything in rear, standage at 201 doesn't mean anything.

However although they didn't explicitly require, demonstration that you had also thought of the issue when placing 202 by marking that standage would have been a good idea.
PJW
Reply


Messages In This Thread
2007_ how to achieve standage? - by Astubbs - 12-09-2008, 04:32 PM
RE: 2007 Mainline layout - by dorothy.pipet - 28-05-2014, 09:42 AM
RE: 2007 - by Peter - 12-09-2008, 07:24 PM
RE: 2007 - by PJW - 12-09-2008, 08:24 PM
RE: 2007 - by Astubbs - 16-09-2008, 09:20 AM
Help with 2007 Layout - by probert1 - 01-10-2008, 10:58 PM
RE: 2007 Mainline layout - by alexgoei - 14-09-2010, 12:15 PM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by PJW - 02-10-2008, 07:49 AM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by probert1 - 02-10-2008, 10:11 AM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by nthomso3 - 02-10-2008, 03:49 PM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by nthomso3 - 02-10-2008, 04:38 PM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by probert1 - 02-10-2008, 05:32 PM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by probert1 - 02-10-2008, 05:53 PM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by PJW - 02-10-2008, 06:09 PM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by PJW - 02-10-2008, 06:27 PM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by PJW - 02-10-2008, 06:59 PM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by PJW - 02-10-2008, 07:15 PM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by PJW - 02-10-2008, 07:39 PM
RE: Help with 2007 Layout - by probert1 - 02-10-2008, 07:40 PM
2007 Mainline layout - by PJW - 07-09-2009, 06:33 PM
2007 Attempted Layout - Part 1 - by alexgoei - 22-09-2010, 05:07 PM
Calculations - by PJW - 26-09-2010, 02:50 PM
2007 Attempted Layout - Part 2 - by alexgoei - 22-09-2010, 05:12 PM
Freight Standage - by PJW - 26-09-2010, 09:04 AM
RE: Route Boxes - by PJW - 26-09-2010, 09:33 AM
General look at the layout - by PJW - 26-09-2010, 11:58 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)