Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Why does the DRA affect braking on some modern units ? Surely if it’s on/set you could just have the software prevent a request for power from being actioned and warning alert come on the DMI/HMI.
What are the implications for DRA procedure if a green signal unexpectedly changes to red as a train is approaching it or while a train is awaiting departure at a station?
What are the implications for DRA procedure if a green signal unexpectedly changes to red as a train is approaching it or while a train is awaiting departure at a station?
Why does the DRA affect braking on some modern units ? Surely if it’s on/set you could just have the software prevent a request for power from being actioned and warning alert come on the DMI/HMI.
Selecting Neutral also allows you to release the DSD without the setting the Vigilance alarm off and sending alerts to the Signaller. That was long before DRA and GSMR came into existence and some older hands I've worked with used to wrap the cab-to-cab phone cord around the brake handle if they were in a scenario that would today require the DRA to be set.
Remember the DRA doesn't prevent brake release, it prevents traction power being applied and it's specifically associated to signals for the purpose of bringing them back to the Drivers mind and check what they're looking at or what they last looked at in the case of a signal not being in view. The reverser/master switch/direction selector isn't intended to be a reminder for signalling as you would use it in situations that wouldn't fit the DRA purpose.
But in GTR's case as we're talking about it currently, you wouldn't set the DRA on the move and they're instructed to apply full service braking either way so it doesn't really matter. I honestly don't see many reasons to set it on the move in general, and on some trains it's not an option due to braking applications when doing so.
It's just adding more layers of protection, the DRA is just making sure if the driver had the train ina scenario where he/she was using DRA it would MAKE them recheck the signal aspect, ie if they forgot the starting signal was on danger in the middle of self dispatch, they closed doors (closing doors on red is a incident in itself) select foward and take power the DRA stops them taking power.
Don't you think if they've already set the reverser without checking the aspect, they will just reset the DRA too? The reverser having some sort of warning label could, as I said, work similarly as a reminder, or a voice announcement which the 700s and 717s make upon resetting the DRA. I do understand you can't have too much safety but I think its theoretical effectiveness as a separate unit is somewhat diminished nowadays.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
What are the implications for DRA procedure if a green signal unexpectedly changes to red as a train is approaching it or while a train is awaiting departure at a station?
Really this should never happen without the signaller first informing the driver (usually not at all). But I would assume you would just use it as normal.
Surely programmers are smart enough to write code that says if at a stand don’t allow traction power to be taken but if moving allow dynamic/regenerative braking.
I guess I must have, although to be honest I only drove them for a couple of years before they went west in the form of castle class sets, and in that time I didn't actually attempt to set it on the move, so I was wrong to assert that the DRA applies the brake. The reason why I never attempted it was because of this in the professional driving policy regarding DRA usage:
"When driving a class 25x, the DRA cannot be applied on the move, a full service brake application will result if applied."
So I never tried! But having looked at other docs today, including the traction manual, there's no mention of this behaviour anywhere else.
I guess I must have, although to be honest I only drove them for a couple of years before they went west in the form of castle class sets, and in that time I didn't actually attempt to set it on the move, so I was wrong to assert that the DRA applies the brake. The reason why I never attempted it was because of this in the professional driving policy regarding DRA usage:
"When driving a class 25x, the DRA cannot be applied on the move, a full service brake application will result if applied."
So I never tried! But having looked at other docs today, including the traction manual, there's no mention of this behaviour anywhere else.
Surely programmers are smart enough to write code that says if at a stand don’t allow traction power to be taken but if moving allow dynamic/regenerative braking.
It has to physically cut power somehow though, and you can't have regenerative braking without being connected to power lines! It isn't possible to have it one way but not the other (except with some overly complex electronics maybe). Rheostatic braking is different, as power would need to be disconnected before the resistors are connected (or you'd have a fire), and should be possible to keep active.
Surely programmers are smart enough to write code that says if at a stand don’t allow traction power to be taken but if moving allow dynamic/regenerative braking.
A - can they write it to be sufficiently robust to pass the requisite group standard? (I.E. that there is absolutely no chance of, and double or triple security against, motoring power of any kind being applied to the traction motors whilst the DRA is applied).
As saismee rightly says, it is physically possible, but requires complex code and electronic safeguards.
B - could they do all this in the late 90s/early 2000s when most of the trains with this affliction were designed and built?
C - (sadly) can they do all this in the time and for the money?
I’m not a software engineer but I’ve been involved in some of that work in the signalling side and the amount of codes and safeguards (rightly) required for something even as innocuous as mouse input into a signalling system is mind blowing
I’m not a software engineer but I’ve been involved in some of that work in the signalling side and the amount of codes and safeguards (rightly) required for something even as innocuous as mouse input into a signalling system is mind blowing
To be honest, I think it's more of an electrical engineering problem than software here. The software would be relatively simple to do this (likely no more complex than how it currently disables traction), but you'd need to prevent current from flowing back into the motors. I'm not in electrical engineering and have little knowledge of how electric traction works, but as I understand it, it might require a whole second traction setup. It just isn't a justifiable cost when asking drivers to set it once stopped works just as well!
It has to physically cut power somehow though, and you can't have regenerative braking without being connected to power lines! It isn't possible to have it one way but not the other (except with some overly complex electronics maybe). Rheostatic braking is different, as power would need to be disconnected before the resistors are connected (or you'd have a fire), and should be possible to keep active.
A - can they write it to be sufficiently robust to pass the requisite group standard? (I.E. that there is absolutely no chance of, and double or triple security against, motoring power of any kind being applied to the traction motors whilst the DRA is applied).
As saismee rightly says, it is physically possible, but requires complex code and electronic safeguards.
B - could they do all this in the late 90s/early 2000s when most of the trains with this affliction were designed and built?
C - (sadly) can they do all this in the time and for the money?
I’m not a software engineer but I’ve been involved in some of that work in the signalling side and the amount of codes and safeguards (rightly) required for something even as innocuous as mouse input into a signalling system is mind blowing
True. But given the robust coding used in aircraft autopilots and flight management computers for decades it’s difficult to believe the railway standards are going to be more demanding.
The cynic in me thinks it is the last reason. Train specifications provided the DfT/buyers were so poorly defined that the manufacturers took the quickest/cheapest route to satisfying them.
Weirdly I never set them on the move on a 360 but I do on a meridian. I have a love hate relationship with the DRA on a meridian being active. It was the one thing I occasionally forgot to do , was setting the DRA after a single yellow and stopping at a station and the red is out of view and so that really helped me. The flip side though is that on one or two occasions I tried to take power with it still set and of course the alarm starts screaming , made me jump The other annoying thing is coming in on double yellows or a speed restriction and still having to set it at a yellow.
Looking at it that way I guess there is a point, fair play.
But in GTR's case as we're talking about it currently, you wouldn't set the DRA on the move and they're instructed to apply full service braking either way so it doesn't really matter. I honestly don't see many reasons to set it on the move in general, and on some trains it's not an option due to braking applications when doing so.
Don't you think if they've already set the reverser without checking the aspect, they will just reset the DRA too? The reverser having some sort of warning label could, as I said, work similarly as a reminder, or a voice announcement which the 700s and 717s make upon resetting the DRA. I do understand you can't have too much safety but I think its theoretical effectiveness as a separate unit is somewhat diminished nowadays.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Really this should never happen without the signaller first informing the driver (usually not at all). But I would assume you would just use it as normal.
Turning DRA off is just a physical reminder of red ahead, same as you would take a lower power notch out of the station as a reminder of danger ahead, physical actions as reminders.
Turning DRA off is just a physical reminder of red ahead, same as you would take a lower power notch out of the station as a reminder of danger ahead, physical actions as reminders.
Yes I know that. But really, is setting the reverser to Forward from Neutral (again, a warning label or voice announcement could be used to instill its use as a reminder) any different in the sense that it's a physical reminder?
Yes I know that. But really, is setting the reverser to Forward from Neutral (again, a warning label or voice announcement could be used to instill its use as a reminder) any different in the sense that it's a physical reminder?
No I guess but it's a 2nd physical reminder that won't physically let you take power until you disable it thus acknowledging the red. If you had no DRA and just the reverser and you forgot that's it your off with no idea your about to SPAD. Because Brake 3 and N is what you do at every stop not just ones with reds ahead. Brake 3 and N becomes the norm for regular stops, DRA becomes the norm only when there is red ahead, conditioning yourself to take care when disarming the DRA
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.