Talk:Multiple working

Trains: in UK / Operations High‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	2008-02-23

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the Operations task force.

This article lacks references.

Naming[edit]

This isn't the most useful title for this article. --Dweller 11:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the official name recognised by the rail industry, in rail literature and on other wiki pages. Nickg1980

Would something like British multiple working be more appropriate - Multiple-unit train control deals with the technology, this page deals with the British system more specific. Wongm (talk) 00:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like British multiple working. Back to the point though, it shouldn't be merged as this is british specific wheras the other one is more general to the world. Ralph Chadkirk (talk) 12:37, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose rename -- The term 'British multiple working' is not used anywhere, so changing the title would create a neologism. I don't see anything wrong with the title. A reader wanting to discover what it meant would read the article, same as he would for anything else (eg pony truck).

EdJogg (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The present title gives no indication that the article is about railways. I suggest renaming it Multiple working (UK railways). Biscuittin (talk) 09:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coming back to this afresh after 3 weeks, I take on board the comment about the current title not relating to railways, so I am inclined to agree with this alternative. -- EdJogg (talk) 12:02, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

International uses[edit]

Does anyone mind if I make this article more international? Or is it better to start a new one and give this one a more appropriate name? --Kabelleger (talk) 17:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Best to have a single article with subsections for different locations- see merge proposal below

This article covers British practice only, and is better kept country-specific. Other country practice can be covered in separate articles, or in the parent article, depending on breadth of coverage. EdJogg (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge[edit]

See Talk:Multiple-unit_train_control#merge for detailsFengRail (talk) 20:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose -- this topic is quite large enough to stand as a separate page. No benefit in merging which will dilute what is here. Multiple-unit_train_control could include a section that links to this one as the main article. EdJogg (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger but perhaps rename this article "Multiple working (UK railways)". Biscuittin (talk) 08:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This is a country specific article about how The UK has it all set up including information, that wouldn't make sense on the other page--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 02:03, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per above as a country specific article (which therefore should be in Category:Rail transport in the United Kingdom, which I will do). Hugo999 (talk) 22:50, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SR DEMUs[edit]

I think the SR DEMUs (British Rail Class 201, etc) had red circle control gear. Was this compatible with red circle locomotives? Biscuittin (talk) 08:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re-use of symbols[edit]

It has been suggested that the control gear on the BR Class 56 and 58 was different from that on the Class 17. The Class 17 had been withdrawn before Classes 56 and 58 were introduced and BR re-used the red diamond symbol for a new system. Does anyone have a reference for this? Biscuittin (talk) 11:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More information needed[edit]

We could do with more information about how the Green circle, Orange square and Red diamond systems work. Are they electro-pneumatic or electro-magnetic? Biscuittin (talk) 11:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The AAR system [1] seems to be electro-magnetic, using a coded arrangement of governor solenoids. I think the British Red circle system was similar but used eight solenoids which were activated in sequence and not coded. Biscuittin (talk) 11:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That link -- good find! -- fascinating reading -- could do with something like that for the BR systems.

-- EdJogg (talk) 13:10, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is an error in the table at Railway Technical Web Pages. There are five governor solenoids (A-E) but there is no numbered wire for solenoid E. Biscuittin (talk) 12:18, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-displaying symbols[edit]

The yellow/red 'triangle' symbols in the tables are not showing up on my PC: in Firefox they show as a yellow/red hex code in a square, in IE/Google Chrome they appear as outline squares. Tested using Firefox 3.5.3 and IE6 (using IEtab) on Win2K, and Firefox 3.1.14 (and IE6) on WinNT.

Other symbols are fine. Note that Hymek page has no symbol in infobox. -- EdJogg (talk) 13:30, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With Opera 10.00 the blue star shows as a blue rectangle and the yellow triangle shows as a yellow square. This is like the old problem of trying to display a pound sign. Biscuittin (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the answer is to use graphic images rather than special characters. Shouldn't be too tricky (for someone with a bit of spare time!) Better if they can be based on the actual symbols...

In the mean-time, we can probably use

and File:T. equilatero.jpg (and

?) from Commons. -- EdJogg (talk) 23:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced the three symbols as you suggest and they now show correctly in IE7, Firefox 3.5.3 and Opera 10.00 (all using Windows XP). Biscuittin (talk) 12:35, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've corrected the Hymek page too. -- EdJogg (talk) 13:21, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Class 70 (diesel)[edit]

Does the British Rail Class 70 (diesel) have AAR control gear? Biscuittin (talk) 13:24, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Multiple working. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080201090339/http://www.railway-technical.com/us-musp.shtml to http://www.railway-technical.com/us-musp.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:38, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]