Redirect Left wrote:modern ones can detect extremely oddly shaped and tiny objects that shouldn't be there)
They can? Not in my experience There's never a guarantee they can always detect objects.
The ones i have mucked around with, which weren't even industrial grade, i never managed to defeat, not without using a single bit of paper, something of no thickness for it to really get any sort of reading from. Any part of a coat is thicker than that, except perhaps (hopefully faux) fur, which should just rip off or slide straight through anything like that. I've even used very simple magnetic based detection that was incredibly accurate.
And of course, I am sure that people building say a train, are going to use stuff better than i can get off chinese exporters
Need some good tested AI? - Unofficial AI Tester, list of good stuff & thread is here.
Geo Ghost wrote:Although the PSA is at fault for a break in procedure, the fact the CCTV had a fault that was unknown and/or hard to identify further reinforces my dislike for DOO systems on mainline traffic and that the vast majority are not safe for purpose - especially when they fail or become faulty.
I understand your concern but DOO has worked fine on Chiltern and others for years. I think northerns efforts to move to DOO are a load of rubbish though - the trains need conductors anyway to buy tickets and the only reason to move to DOO is to reduce their responsibilities and pay..
Chris wrote:I understand your concern but DOO has worked fine on Chiltern and others for years. I think northerns efforts to move to DOO are a load of rubbish though - the trains need conductors anyway to buy tickets and the only reason to move to DOO is to reduce their responsibilities and pay..
I think some areas are better invested than others for DOO. But I still firmly don't like it and believe it to be far less safe than a good pair of eyes.
Dodgy mirrors and unreliable monitors, for example, going unresolved for so long really gets to me too - whilst someone up in an office who's never even seen the frontline boasts on going "Oh it's totally safe and fine!". Now that certain places are axing platform staff from dispatching as well as guards... I don't like the way it's going.
I haven't seen completely convincing evidence saying one is better than another, but I do think that dispatch staff is reassuring. You see them at busy calls (Clapham junction) for trains that don't have guards. The tube even uses dispatch staff at peak times. What does that say about dispatch staff?
Some people may remember two rail accidents that happened last year around the New York area, the Hoboken & Brooklyn crashes.
Undiagnosed sleep apnea in both drivers has now been discovered, and thought to have potentially contributed to both of the accidents.
Redirect Left wrote:modern ones can detect extremely oddly shaped and tiny objects that shouldn't be there)
They can? Not in my experience There's never a guarantee they can always detect objects.
The ones i have mucked around with, which weren't even industrial grade, i never managed to defeat, not without using a single bit of paper, something of no thickness for it to really get any sort of reading from. Any part of a coat is thicker than that, except perhaps (hopefully faux) fur, which should just rip off or slide straight through anything like that. I've even used very simple magnetic based detection that was incredibly accurate.
And of course, I am sure that people building say a train, are going to use stuff better than i can get off chinese exporters
Where do you draw the line though? Make it too sensitive and you'll never get interlock in the autumn because of leaves blowing about or someone leaves their sandwich wrapper about and a member of staff has to walk along and resolve the issue. Lots of delays coming up for that one.
The Victoria Line got battered by that soon after the appearance of the 2009 stock, the doors weee way too sensitive, leading to LU actually using “sensitive edge” as a public delay reason
Rather odd sight today, Huddersfields smaller platforms being occupied by Transpennine trains. Very rare I see this, overhanging at the end too.
I assume something went wrong for the Hull train to start(?) at Huddersfield.
Redirect Left wrote:Rather odd sight today, Huddersfields smaller platforms being occupied by Transpennine trains. Very rare I see this, overhanging at the end too.
I assume something went wrong for the Hull train to start(?) at Huddersfield.
Last edited by Geo Ghost on 14 Oct 2017 14:34, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:Aurgh, sorry Dave. I edited your post instead of quoting it! >< Hope I fixed it correctly..
Redirect Left wrote:Rather odd sight today, Huddersfields smaller platforms being occupied by Transpennine trains. Very rare I see this, overhanging at the end too.
I assume something went wrong for the Hull train to start(?) at Huddersfield.
Platform 6 at Huddersfield, which is the platform in question here, is officially 73 metres long (which I believe is from the buffers to the starting signal, which I think is on the Platform), whilst a 185 is just under 72 metres in length, so the unit should just, in theory, fit on the platform. Of course, whether that actually works in practice is a completely different story.
If I remember rightly, on that particular day, the 185 was running rather late with a train from Hull, so instead of running all the way to Man Picc with it, they decided to turn it around at Huddersfield.
I can confirm that that train did indeed set off to Hull after a while.
As I said, the overhang was only minimal, no more than 2-3 metres. Even though he had pulled up very close to the buffers (as you can see on images). Not sure how much overhang you can get away with without tripping the signal relays. If it did keep interfering with signals, bet that signalman was kept busy authorising other trains setting off and arriving!
HUD P6 signal is directly at the end of the platform not shoved trackside later down the line, as Pilot mentioned.
Also, even though it is completely valid English, any sentence where I have to type 'that that', as above really makes me cringe and constantly check if its correct or not.
Need some good tested AI? - Unofficial AI Tester, list of good stuff & thread is here.
There's never a guarantee they can always detect objects.
There's never a guarantee they can always detect objects.
OTTD
