Sometimes I'll use the quote tags themselves if I want to bring in several quotes from different posts, or perhaps just another section from the same post I'm quoting. Forum code is similar to HTML, but uses brackets [] instead of the less than < and greater than > signs. Seems like there used to be a key here somewhere, but I haven't looked for it in a long time.
Just using quote and /quote will set what's between them apart. If you want to get fancy, or are quoting different people in the same post, you'll want to add the 'user="Name"' as well. What you end up with in your post looks like what follows, except you'll use [ and ] instead of { and }
{quote user="Name"}Quoted text here.{/quote}
Which will end up looking like this:
NameQuoted text here.
As Balt says, the quote function will usually add a few blank lines between the quoted text and the end tag. I also generally delete those lines, which results in a little less white space. It also ensures that I know where my cursor is.
As noted, what usually gets people in trouble is not ensuring that the cursor is after the /quote tag. Then you're left to figure out which part is the quote and which part is their contribution.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Just look up "BBcode" for the syntax. A surprising number of the tags work here.
Part of the great mobile-site crap-up is that selecting part of the text in a reply doesn't always 'take' on an iPhone ... just goes ahead and pastes the whole quote. This promptly combines with the improper implementation of keyboard codes when backspace-deleting and the poor method of selecting text past the tiny visible edit window to make attempts at quoting suck pretty badly.
I use the code frequently .. great for google maps
I use the 'Share or Embed' option to get a link
<iframe src="https://www.google.com/maps/embed ....
And then I hit the <> (source code) button and paste it in at the end.
tree68 BaltACD In CTC territory - Signal Indication conveys the Authority for movement. Well, there you go, then. That was the source of the confusion.
BaltACD In CTC territory - Signal Indication conveys the Authority for movement.
Well, there you go, then. That was the source of the confusion.
Except when the signal is at Stop and can't or won't be allowed to be cleared by conditions in the field. Then you have to be verbally authorized to proceed.
CTC limits are designated in the timetable. Sidings within CTC limits are controlled sidings and are governed by CTC rules. A train must not enter or occupy any track where CTC is in effect unless a controlled signal displays a proceed indication or the control operator authorizes:
Movement past a Stop indication under Rule 9.12.1 (CTC Territory).
A train to enter track between block signals as follows: "(Train) at (location) has authority to enter (track) and proceed (direction)." After entering the track, the train is authorized to move only in the direction specified. or
Track and Time under Rule 10.3 (Track and Time).
Signal Governing Movement Over a Hand-Operated Switch
If a signal governs movement over a hand-operated switch that is not electrically locked, the control operator must authorize the train to enter or occupy any track where CTC is in effect before the switch is opened. After the switch is opened, if the signal does not display a proceed indication, a crew member must wait 10 minutes at the switch. After the 10 minute wait if the signal does not display a proceed indication, move the train at restricted speed and notify the control operator.
However, if the block to be entered is occupied by its own standing train or when the hand-operated switch remains open, the movement may, after stopping, pass an absolute signal displaying a Stop indication without waiting 10 minutes and without contacting the control operator.
Jeff
tree68 Cotton Belt MP104 Was I the source of the confusion? Not really - what got lost in the discussion was the difference between ABS and CTC and that it was a factor.
Cotton Belt MP104
Was I the source of the confusion?
Not really - what got lost in the discussion was the difference between ABS and CTC and that it was a factor.
Not splitting hairs.
In the case of CTC, where the signal indication grants authority to occupy the track beyond the signal, a signal that can't/won't clear (as Jeff notes) requires the dispatcher to orally do so (give permission), thus conferring authority to a train. No sense in using both terms (and potentially confusing), so authority alone is used.
While this may appear to be the same thing as talking a train past a stop signal in ABS, it is not, as with ABS the train already has authority on the track beyond the signal but needs assistance (permission) to pass that signal.
Hence the difference between the use of the two terms.
The fact that we (as a whole) focused for a while on the passing a stop signal angle vs the CTC angle speaks to the confusion amongst us all. But that may have been a good thing, as it did nicely illustrate the difference between the two.
BaltACD tree68 jeffhergert Notice the word AUTHORITY is used. And in black and white. I do notice, however, that as opposed to the ABS rules, there is no mention of the train involved having to have authority to occupy the track beyond the signal in question, only that there be no conflicting movements, switches are aligned, etc. The signal notwithstanding, how does a train in CTC territory gain the authority to occupy a given stretch of track? In CTC territory - Signal Indication conveys the Authority for movement.
tree68 jeffhergert Notice the word AUTHORITY is used. And in black and white. I do notice, however, that as opposed to the ABS rules, there is no mention of the train involved having to have authority to occupy the track beyond the signal in question, only that there be no conflicting movements, switches are aligned, etc. The signal notwithstanding, how does a train in CTC territory gain the authority to occupy a given stretch of track?
jeffhergert Notice the word AUTHORITY is used.
And in black and white.
I do notice, however, that as opposed to the ABS rules, there is no mention of the train involved having to have authority to occupy the track beyond the signal in question, only that there be no conflicting movements, switches are aligned, etc.
The signal notwithstanding, how does a train in CTC territory gain the authority to occupy a given stretch of track?
In CTC territory - Signal Indication conveys the Authority for movement.
If the signal is clear in ABS, does the train not have authority to occupy track beyond the signal? Does signal indication not convey authority for movment in ABS? If so, what does convey authority for trains to pass clear signals in ABS?
EuclidIf the signal is clear in ABS, does the train not have authority to occupy track beyond the signal? Does signal indication not convey authority for movment in ABS? If so, what does convey authority for trains to pass clear signals in ABS?
A track warrant conveys authority in that situation. The signals simply indicate the occupancy status of the tracks ahead.
If you look back at the rule cites on passing a stop signal in ABS territory, you'll note that the dispatcher can only give permission to pass a stop signal if the train already has authority on the track past the signal.
Angela Pusztai-Pasternak, Production Editor, Trains Magazine
Angela Pusztai-PasternakPlease keep this to friendly conversations about railroading and not nitpicking one another about language usage. Happy Fri-Yay! Ang
Thanks.
Where have you been when ranting and raving about Southwest airlines customer service and other side related issues were going on.
For instance the tragedy of two crewmembers who died at Casey were discussed on a thread that degenerated into getting drunk and playing whack a mole.
When i brought up that disgrace, I was told to go start my own "serious thread" if i was offended. Seriously? endmrw0309180909
tree68 Euclid If the signal is clear in ABS, does the train not have authority to occupy track beyond the signal? Does signal indication not convey authority for movment in ABS? If so, what does convey authority for trains to pass clear signals in ABS? A track warrant conveys authority in that situation. The signals simply indicate the occupancy status of the tracks ahead. If you look back at the rule cites on passing a stop signal in ABS territory, you'll note that the dispatcher can only give permission to pass a stop signal if the train already has authority on the track past the signal.
Euclid If the signal is clear in ABS, does the train not have authority to occupy track beyond the signal? Does signal indication not convey authority for movment in ABS? If so, what does convey authority for trains to pass clear signals in ABS?
Okay, I see the distinction. If a train has a track warrant conveying authority, and an ABS displays stop, does the stop indication suspend or override the track authority conveyed by the warrant?
EuclidOkay, I see the distinction. If a train has a track warrant conveying authority, and an ABS displays stop, does the stop indication suspend or override the track authority conveyed by the warrant?
I think you have missed the whole point of the thread up to now.
The only way a train will pass an ABS displaying 'stop' is if it is given permission to do so. That is completely different from the authority that ensures it is the only train able to operate in that section of railroad.
If you read up on the early history, first of the block system and then on implementation of automatic block systems (notably in the early years of the 20th Century) you will appreciate why this distinction is so important ... and why the display on the signals is different from train-order and track-warrant control of movements.
It does not help that the signal displays have been 'overloaded' (in the computer sense) with more aspects that convey different information -- for example, 'diverging clear' on NS. (These are not limited to color-light signals; there are some for PRR-style position lights and BaltACD can explain some for CPLs). Remember that at least nominally the dispatcher controls the extra aspects, and therefore they constitute a form of 'permission' not requiring explicit communication with the dispatcher via radio.
I'm sure you recognize that the effectiveness of ABS as a safety system would be fundamentally destroyed if track-warrant authority 'superseded' a stop signal it displayed.
When I was young, I was fooled by analogy into thinking that signals worked as they do on the roads, and by extension on the New York subways, and that as a B&O engineer famously said about Patenall's signals "when I see a green anywhere I go like hell". There have been arguments over the years to implement just this kind of signal-based 'authority' and I believe some of the PTC proposals in that time either tacitly or explicitly contain some details (albeit with the 'safety' aspects sent in code rather than with colored lights for human eyes). But there are likely to remain valid reasons to retain some form of authority, if only as a 'backup', even in a world of full and effective bandwidth and communications enabling good CBTC.
Euclid...does the stop indication suspend or override the track authority conveyed by the warrant?
No, aside from prohibiting further movement in that direction until the signal aspect becomes less restrictive. As mentioned, the signal simply indicates track occupancy in the block ahead. Suspend is too strong a term. The train still has authority to occupy the track, just not until the light turns green, if you will.
For all intents and purposes, an automatic interlocking like Rochelle is still a track occupancy indication - it's just that your track may not be occupied, but the intersecting track is.
OvermodI think you have missed the whole point of the thread up to now.
I am sure that I did miss the whole poing of this thread up to now because I was not reading the thread up to now. So I was just asking a pinpoint, stand alone question regarding the relationship between signal indication and track authority for ABS and CTC.
tree68The train still has authority to occupy the track, just not until the light turns green, if you will.
If I might recommend a semantic change: the train still has authority to be on the section of railroad it occupies, to the exception of any other train. That says nothing about its progress down that section of railroad -- which, to be safe, is governed by ABS or, in its absence, by a very careful version of block working.
As a very imperfect analogy: a driver's license allows you to operate a vehicle on a given section of public road, and without it you're not supposed to turn a wheel there. But having a valid license in your possession does not allow you to run red lights or roll through stops with impunity. Likewise primarily for safety, not operational-efficiency, reasons.
tree68 Euclid ...does the stop indication suspend or override the track authority conveyed by the warrant? No, aside from prohibiting further movement in that direction until the signal aspect becomes less restrictive. As mentioned, the signal simply indicates track occupancy in the block ahead. Suspend is too strong a term. The train still has authority to occupy the track, just not until the light turns green, if you will. For all intents and purposes, an automatic interlocking like Rochelle is still a track occupancy indication - it's just that your track may not be occupied, but the intersecting track is.
Euclid ...does the stop indication suspend or override the track authority conveyed by the warrant?
So the ABS stop indication, does not actually eliminate the track authority, as may be implied by my use of the word "suspend." But the ABS stop indication does prohibit movement past it even though track authority exists beyond the stop indication. So even though track authority exists, the right to use it is voided as long as the ABS indicates stop (unless permission is granted to proceed past the stop indication). So track authority can exist without the authority to move through it.
OvermodIf I might recommend a semantic change: the train still has authority to be on the section of railroad it occupies, to the exception of any other train. That says nothing about its progress down that section of railroad -- which, to be safe, is governed by ABS or, in its absence, by a very careful version of block working.
Agreed.
In the absence of ABS (and without CTC), though, aren't we look at dark territory, in which each train will be given exclusive authority (TWC/DCS/etc) to occupy a specific stretch of track?
The driver's license analogy is appropriate.
Overmod Euclid Okay, I see the distinction. If a train has a track warrant conveying authority, and an ABS displays stop, does the stop indication suspend or override the track authority conveyed by the warrant? I think you have missed the whole point of the thread up to now. The only way a train will pass an ABS displaying 'stop' is if it is given permission to do so. That is completely different from the authority that ensures it is the only train able to operate in that section of railroad.
Euclid Okay, I see the distinction. If a train has a track warrant conveying authority, and an ABS displays stop, does the stop indication suspend or override the track authority conveyed by the warrant?
In ABS, if you have a track warrant authorizing movement past the signal displaying stop (This does not apply to interlockings, manual or automatic. Those are covered by other rules.) you can pass the signal without permission if you can't get hold of the dispatcher.
After stopping and attempting to contact the dispatcher, you can pull past the signal 100 feet and then again stop. Wait 5 minutes and then proceed at restricted speed to the next signal. Pulling past, stopping and then waiting 5 minutes establishes opposing block signal protection.
Euclid So even though track authority exists, the right to use it is voided as long as the ABS indicates stop (unless permission is granted to proceed past the stop indication).
See Jeff's corrections to what I wrote. The right to 'use' the authority remains regardless of what the ABS says; it establishes the right of the train to be where it is. All that is "voided" by the ABS indicating red is the permission to advance the train into the (unknown) hazards that caused the safety signal to display 'stop'. Note that the procedures Jeff provided are all relatively safe ways to move up and confirm what made the signal drop without having to, say, wait for someone on the ground to confirm the situation for the dispatcher. But they involve aspects of permission; without pre-existing and continuing authority none of them could be utilized.
Overmod Euclid So even though track authority exists, the right to use it is voided as long as the ABS indicates stop (unless permission is granted to proceed past the stop indication). See Jeff's corrections to what I wrote. The right to 'use' the authority remains regardless of what the ABS says; it establishes the right of the train to be where it is. All that is "voided" by the ABS indicating red is the permission to advance the train into the (unknown) hazards that caused the safety signal to display 'stop'. Note that the procedures Jeff provided are all relatively safe ways to move up and confirm what made the signal drop without having to, say, wait for someone on the ground to confirm the situation for the dispatcher. But they involve aspects of permission; without pre-existing and continuing authority none of them could be utilized.
That is what I said.
Cotton Belt MP104Where have you been when ranting and raving about Southwest airlines customer service and other side related issues were going on.
Even God had to take a break on the 7th day.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
EuclidThat is what I said.
Except that you said 'voided' which is not right. "Suspended" might be a better word but still not semantically quite right. The train reserves the 'sole right' to be there at all times; that does not go away if the train is 'held' for safety reasons. And if there is some other train causing the ABS stop, it will not be allowed to move without a release and reassignment of the unvoided use of authority that has been granted.
Overmod Euclid That is what I said. Except that you said 'voided' which is not right. "Suspended" might be a better word but still not semantically quite right. The train reserves the 'sole right' to be there at all times; that does not go away if the train is 'held' for safety reasons. And if there is some other train causing the ABS stop, it will not be allowed to move without a release and reassignment of the unvoided use of authority that has been granted.
Euclid That is what I said.
"Voided" is just fine. Obviously the train cannot have the right to be where it has track authority if a stop signal prevents the train from being in that place of track authority. So in that case, track authority alone does not grant a right to be there. So in a practical sense, I would say that the stop signal voids the track authority. Then when the signal clears, the track authority becomes unvoided.
Actually, the perfect word is "suppress." This allows the concept that when a stop signal prevents movement through a zone of track authority, the track authority is still there. But is suppressed by the stop signal. I'm going with suppress. It means to restrain or subdue the effect without removing the underlying cause. Suppress... A stop indication on ABS suppresses track authority beyond the signal.
Yes, but!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
YES SUPPRESS
I'd say interrupt.
Would Johnny Cochrane say "if the 'spatch don't bless you must suppress"?
In the spirit of the Pythons, "Stop! Stop! This sketch is not funny!"
zugmann I'd say interrupt.
I thought we were told that track authority continues to exist while movement over it is prohibited due to a stop indication from ABS. Interrupt means that the thing interrupted ceases to exist during the interruption. So I don’t think the glove fits.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.