London Banter - View Single Post

[email protected] · September 12th 10, 09:21 AM posted to uk.transport.london

In article , ] (Steve
Fitzgerald) wrote:

In message ,
writes

I tentatively think this focus on the lack of signals is a bit
misleading. Ultimately, all safety on non-ATO lines depends on
drivers correctly responding to signals (barring tripcocks - am i
right i thinking these are only present at a fraction of signals?).
If we accept that stopping at a red is an acceptable part of the
safety mechanism, why can't we also accept that stopping at the
absence of a green, or the absence of any signal, is?

Tripcocks are present at all home signals on LUL lines.

You meant to say:

Tripcocks are present at all stop signals on LUL lines.

Didn't you?

Yes. I wondered whether I'd got it wrong when I wrote it. I meant to
exclude distant signals.

--
Colin Rosenstiel