20-03-2016, 05:01 PM
(This post was last modified: 20-03-2016, 05:08 PM by TheRailwaySignaller.)
(07-03-2016, 10:07 AM)dorothy.pipet Wrote: An attempt for comments please
Here are some brief thoughts:
When I first read the answer I thought that it was lacking in content to receive high marks. However, having given it consideration, I am struggling to see where significant extra content needs to be added.
The choice of hazards is pretty straight forward. It would be nice to have some hazards that are not SPADs, but once again I am struggling to see what they could be. Another category of SPAD that could have been added was head on collision between two tourist trains due to one having SPADed, but this would lead to problems in part © since ATP would have little effect on it. Another suggestion would be to consider the points that connect the tourist line to the freight line. of what type are these and how are they operated? is it possible that the passage of a freight train over them 6 times an hour could lead to damage to the stretcher bars, point operating mechanism or the like? Could this then lead to the derailment of either the passenger train, the freight train or both?
In part © the analysis could have been somewhat more nuanced. Yes, ATP would not prevent a passenger train passing a signal at danger, but it could prevent a freight train from plowing into it if the driver hasn't noticed the signal unexpected go to red ahead oh him/her? Thus ATP could reduce the severity of the SPAD.
On the whole, i don't get the feeling that the answer is of distinction level, yet fail to see what needs to be added to it. It's one of those questions that I would probably avoid if I was sitting the exam.