Hawkesbury River Bridge new freight train mananagement

 
  jayrail Assistant Commissioner

Location: te Anau Southern Alps NZ
What operational changes  are there to the traffic flow timetables and the  modification  to signalling indicators at both access to the bridge are proposed.This is for one consist at a time?

Sponsored advertisement

  theanimal Deputy Commissioner

What operational changes  are there to the traffic flow timetables and the  modification  to signalling indicators at both access to the bridge are proposed.This is for one consist at a time?
jayrail
what are the signalling changes?
  gordon_s1942 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
Many years ago the bridge over the MacQuarie River at Bathurst was apparently causing some concerns as I was told by a Surveyor it was being carefully watched.
Although the bridge was intended for a double line, only a single was over laid on it.
He said they had fitted 'sight boards' I think he called them and watched as Goods Trains passed over the bridge to watch for any movement in the structure.
He said there were times the whole thing shook quite markedly when a loaded and banked East bound Goods was building up speed to climb the steep Raglan Bank ahead.

I believe a completely new bridge crosses the river now so hopefully those problems were also fixed with the replacement.
  jayrail Assistant Commissioner

Location: te Anau Southern Alps NZ
Yes a little ambiguous perhaps; I take it before this restriction the trains from both sides of the river shot through at same time passing each other on the bridge .
  awsgc24 Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney
What operational changes are there to the traffic flow timetables and the  modification  to signalling indicators at both access to the bridge are proposed.  This is for one consist at a time?
jayrail
At the moment, the up and down signals protecting the HR bridge are automatics, and cannot be put to stop by the signalman. If these signals are converted to controlled signals, then a system of one-train-on-the-bridge-at-a-time could be instituted.

The interlocking of these up and down signals could be manual, or could be compulsary.

A similar system affected the old HR bridge, albeit with one track out of use.

Platforms 1 and 2 at Gosford, because of narrow track centres, also had a manual one-train-at-a-time system, later upgraded to an interlocked system.
  Just The Tip Locomotive Fireman

Location: Danger zone
I'm sorry, a little lost. What is this thread actually about?
  jayrail Assistant Commissioner

Location: te Anau Southern Alps NZ
What operational changes are there to the traffic flow timetables and the  modification  to signalling indicators at both access to the bridge are proposed.  This is for one consist at a time?
At the moment, the up and down signals protecting the HR bridge are automatics, and cannot be put to stop by the signalman. If these signals are converted to controlled signals, then a system of one-train-on-the-bridge-at-a-time could be instituted.

The interlocking of these up and down signals could be manual, or could be compulsary.

A similar system affected the old HR bridge, albeit with one track out of use.

Platforms 1 and 2 at Gosford, because of narrow track centres, also had a manual one-train-at-a-time system, later upgraded to an interlocked system.



That sounds practical thanks for comment   awsgc24;
awsgc24
  georges Junior Train Controller

What operational changes are there to the traffic flow timetables and the  modification  to signalling indicators at both access to the bridge are proposed.  This is for one consist at a time?
At the moment, the up and down signals protecting the HR bridge are automatics, and cannot be put to stop by the signalman. If these signals are converted to controlled signals, then a system of one-train-on-the-bridge-at-a-time could be instituted.

The interlocking of these up and down signals could be manual, or could be compulsory.

A similar system affected the old HR bridge, albeit with one track out of use.

Platforms 1 and 2 at Gosford, because of narrow track centres, also had a manual one-train-at-a-time system, later upgraded to an interlocked system.
awsgc24
Deja vu all over again? See also http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/230809567/24659463

Just straight reporting in that article. None of today's Shock 'n' Horror.
  historian Assistant Commissioner

Deja vu all over again? See also http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/230809567/24659463

Just straight reporting in that article. None of today's Shock 'n' Horror.
georges

Really? The NSWGR were showing that they can spin just as well as modern organisations, and the media was just as gullible.

Yep, there's no real problem. We're gauntleting the track and imposing a 4 mph speed restriction as an additional safety factor, but we have no doubts about the safety of the bridge. We've known about the crack for a while, but it's grown and joined by another. Perhaps now we'll send down a diver to see if any further deterioration has occurred.

And do you think that the Hawkesbury bridge was the first "railway steel bridge in the world"?
  georges Junior Train Controller

The consulting engineers’ report on the bridge's present problems was prepared by SMEC  An article in the Herald on 2 December contains links to parts of it –  the Executive Summary and the Discussion and Recommendations. Among other things, the Summary notes that, ‘------- the end-stringers appear to have exceeded their fatigue life.’

The recommended time horizons for the restoration works are:
  • Within the next two years – repairs to concrete superstructure elements
  • Within the next five years – repairs to all substructure concrete and steel superstructure elements
The extent of the work seems to exceed that acknowledged by Sydney Trains in that Herald article. The report also suggests testing and inspection of the rivets, which were not the subject of the present investigation by SMEC.
  KRviator Moderator

Location: Up the front
At the moment, the up and down signals protecting the HR bridge are automatics, and cannot be put to stop by the signalman. If these signals are converted to controlled signals, then a system of one-train-on-the-bridge-at-a-time could be instituted.

The interlocking of these up and down signals could be manual, or could be compulsary.

A similar system affected the old HR bridge, albeit with one track out of use.

Platforms 1 and 2 at Gosford, because of narrow track centres, also had a manual one-train-at-a-time system, later upgraded to an interlocked system.
"awsgc24"
That's not true. Both Up and Down signals protecting the bridge are controlled signals, which can be set and held at stop. The bridge is completely contained within Hawkesbury River yard limits.
  gordon_s1942 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
Irrespective of whether the signals are Automatic or not, it would not be hard to implement a form of spacing freight Trains using the HR Bridge in either direction.
A 'Marker Plate' could be installed on the appropriate signal (similar to a Tonnage signal) and instructions issued affecting trains of a given length and weight that THEY were NOT to pass the signal unless it displayed  a FULL CLEAR indication.
If needed, the track circuits would be adjusted to suit this requirement.

I am surprised that Hawkesbury River has any control over the signaling other than some Ground Releases as everything I thought was controlled from Broadmeadow.
  theanimal Deputy Commissioner

Irrespective of whether the signals are Automatic or not, it would not be hard to implement a form of spacing freight Trains using the HR Bridge in either direction.
A 'Marker Plate' could be installed on the appropriate signal (similar to a Tonnage signal) and instructions issued affecting trains of a given length and weight that THEY were NOT to pass the signal unless it displayed  a FULL CLEAR indication.
If needed, the track circuits would be adjusted to suit this requirement.

I am surprised that Hawkesbury River has any control over the signaling other than some Ground Releases as everything I thought was controlled from Broadmeadow.
gordon_s1942
The interlocking at Hawkesbury River is controlled by Hornsby
  awsgc24 Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney
That's not true. Both Up and Down signals protecting the bridge are controlled signals, which can be set and held at stop. The bridge is completely contained within Hawkesbury River yard limits.
KRviator

Stand corrected.

The following diagram shows these signals protecting the bridge, circa say 1990. But the Up signal may have been an automatic between 1946 and resignalling c1990?

See: http://www.sa-trackandsignal.net/Pdf%20files/Sydney/RC2307.pdf
  awsgc24 Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney
That's not true. Both Up and Down signals protecting the bridge are controlled signals, which can be set and held at stop. The bridge is completely contained within Hawkesbury River yard limits.

Stand corrected.

The following diagram shows these signals protecting the bridge, circa say 1990. But the Up signal may have been an automatic between 1946 and resignalling c1990?

See: http://www.sa-trackandsignal.net/Pdf%20files/Sydney/RC2307.pdf
awsgc24

The diagram on the ARHS CD-ROM "T&SV3" dated 1959 shows the UP Accept signal on the south side of the HR bridge, NOT protecting single line working. This would have lasted from 1945 to 1996.

The diagram on the same CD dated 1995 shows the Up (Outer) Accept now on the north side of HR bridge, protecting single line working.

There is a possible second reason for the relocation of the Up Accept, and that is to allow for the overlaps for bidirectional working from Cowan to Hawkesbury River. Thus protecting single line working on the HR bridge may not have been contemplated.
  jayrail Assistant Commissioner

Location: te Anau Southern Alps NZ
will action be undertaken on the recommendations afore indicated?
  gordon_s1942 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
For a period after the installation (but NOT Operational) Bi-Directional signaling between Coal Stage Lithgow and Edgecombe, there was an incompatibility' that only appeared during when Single Line running was brought into use on that line during the laying off the concrete.
It caused a bit of a mad scramble when it happened as it allowed an 'opposing move' to be set up until it was redone.

We ran into another problem with signals being 'Booked Out' for Program works when the Sig Elect affected another not part of the working.
It turned out the group of signals (Relays) all used the one common earth so when it was removed to disable the wanted signals, it also took out which was not part of the single line working.

According to the Electrician of the day, he could not do it any other way so we had to flag it and clip a set of points it protected as there was no other choice.
  Piston Train Controller

Irrespective of whether the signals are Automatic or not, it would not be hard to implement a form of spacing freight Trains using the HR Bridge in either direction.
A 'Marker Plate' could be installed on the appropriate signal (similar to a Tonnage signal) and instructions issued affecting trains of a given length and weight that THEY were NOT to pass the signal unless it displayed  a FULL CLEAR indication.
If needed, the track circuits would be adjusted to suit this requirement.

I am surprised that Hawkesbury River has any control over the signaling other than some Ground Releases as everything I thought was controlled from Broadmeadow.
The interlocking at Hawkesbury River is controlled by Hornsby
theanimal
Homebush to be correct not by Hornsby any more
  edison Chief Commissioner

Irrespective of whether the signals are Automatic or not, it would not be hard to implement a form of spacing freight Trains using the HR Bridge in either direction.
A 'Marker Plate' could be installed on the appropriate signal (similar to a Tonnage signal) and instructions issued affecting trains of a given length and weight that THEY were NOT to pass the signal unless it displayed  a FULL CLEAR indication.
If needed, the track circuits would be adjusted to suit this requirement.

I am surprised that Hawkesbury River has any control over the signaling other than some Ground Releases as everything I thought was controlled from Broadmeadow.
The interlocking at Hawkesbury River is controlled by Hornsby
1. Has remedial work started on the offending infrastructure?
2. Is the "one freighter at a time" rule been puut into force?
3. Are these questions irrelevant?Homebush to be correct not by Hornsby any more
Piston
  MILW Junior Train Controller

Location: Earth
There is a possible second reason for the relocation of the Up Accept, and that is to allow for the overlaps for bidirectional working from Cowan to Hawkesbury River. Thus protecting single line working on the HR bridge may not have been contemplated.
awsgc24
That sounds more plausible to me. They seem to be avoiding controlled signals wherever possible, but overlaps for opposing signalled moves is usually enough to warrant one. The opposing overlaps would probably "overlap" if the first controlled signal on the up was another block in advance.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: awsgc24, jayrail, KRviator, theanimal

Display from: