You probably dont care but does anybody know a method to log back into an Instagram account..? I somehow lost the login password. I would love any help you can offer me.
@Theo Kelvin I really appreciate your reply. I found the site thru google and im in the hacking process now. I see it takes quite some time so I will get back to you later with my results.
I would really have preferred ATP. Maybe ATP on the ECML would have permitted 140mph operation. But when ETCS is rolled out it will have similar protections.
People's lives should not be reckoned with in terms of money. Every time we travel by train, however great or small, we take a risk. There were a series of SPAD incidents that culminated in the Paddington train crash and it was only after 31 lives were lost that the adoption of TPWS was put into place, ideally ATP would be better but costs...
It is about cost benefit analysis though, ATP would cost too much money per prevented fatality. Think of it this way, there is only a limited amount of money, and it may be better spent (save more lives) on the NHS. It is important to have a consistent approach on this, not that "peoples lives should not be reckoned with money", but instead that everyone is treated fairly and the chance of survival is determined logically, not by circumstances of funding.
Oliver Keating I'm not saying that the railways are solely guilty of this, but it is sad that sometimes the travelling public pay the ultimate price for necessary safety improvements to be made. In the case of Paddington, changing SN109 from the reverse "L" shape that was notoriously difficult to sight by drivers, to a standard design that is far easier to see
Assumedly part of how cheap TPWS overall is comes from the fact that it isn’t fitted in relation to all (stop) signals? The highest risk if I recall correctly is from conflicting movements (rather than where trains are in general moving in the same direction) and so it may have been the case that complete fitment would have had the whole project rejected on cost...
There’s probably also the matter of a lack of necessity at some signals, like long express lines with lack of connections to other lines or branches - there’s no point putting them at every signal, instead putting them where crossovers and major junctions etc exist, or at least spreading them out every 3 or more signals.
Where the emergency brake application has a greater deceleration rate than full service. Often with many brakes of "the past" emergency was just "full service applied faster" so there wouldn't be a benefit of emergency braking and nothing more would happen if you already were in full service
@@fetchstixRHD Alright thanks for explaining. So to be clear a full service brake wouldn't be full service but just another step with emergency being the actual 'full service'?
@@xLars_ no, full service is the full normal braking. enhanced emergency braking means it uses an extra, separate system for even better braking, that would be too expensive to use in normal operation. Usually, this is a strong magnet that is pushed down onto the track. The friction from the magnetic force then slows down the train.
cheeper option is wroung the best sistem should be chosen as it will stop more acdents and save lives but the govermeant clearly cares more about money then safty and lives
The fact that the loops are only energized when the signal shows danger doesn´t seem to be really safe to me. If a cable gets loose somewhere for example, the loops won´t work any more and a train could pass the signal and the overlap and crash. Wouldn´t it be much safer and fail safe if the loops were energized constantly, and shut off when the signal shows danger ? So "dead" loops will always cause an emergency brake application.
That’s what I thought the first time I heard about TPWS. I’ve always been paranoid in that way, but I would want it to be failsafe in a similar manner to AWS in that a lack of power to the loop means you get tripped. With that said, TPWS does a good job, it’s unlikely that you’d get to a point where the loops can’t be powered at all before trains can be stopped, and I’m sure that they must have investigated having it in that manner but it must have been “too difficult” (to the point that it wouldn’t have been implemented due to the cost otherwise.) (Technically, the loops do exactly as the original post describes, but then to have them “energised” constantly would need a source of power incorporated somewhere.)
Large sections of your video have been copied in this youtube video ->(ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-retxLd5lHQg.html ). Some of the sections are in minutes 0: 54 - 1:10; 1:42 - 2:01; 2:12 - 2:16. This person who has copied your video has got 100K+ views and his video is monetized. If this copy is unauthorized, you could notify RU-vid about copyright infringement and take down.
