(19-05-2010, 10:23 PM)cmcvea Wrote: I have just completed question 7 any feedback would be welcome.
Looks like we have two attempts at this as Hort has also posted (I have transferred attachment to this post) so I will review together.
The one from cmcvea was the fuller answer; for part a) there were 11 bullet points, so one can immediatelyly see that be able to award 0.5 marks for each and thus the answer would get off to a flying start. I'd have liked a sentence of intro re railway context and abbrieviations to be explained and some of the entries to have been slightly fuller- e.g. "Signalling Equipment Secured" could well be misinterpreted etc. However the key points were certainly there:
1) protect the situation to ensure railway is safe,
2) escalate the issue to the appropriate authorities (incident investigation, decision what train services can still operate, rearrangement staffing, alternative travel arrangements)
3) ensure the preservation of evidence relating to the incident at the actual site and at the signalling control centre and potentially other places where it might be,
4) ensure that drugs and alcohol testing of staff is initiated,
5) arrange for independent investigation to be initiated,
Obviously the question can be interpreted slightly differently re the word "immediate" and also it leaves vague "by whom"; it is for that reason that starting off by explaining that you are answering in the context of undertaking a particular role is useful to help the examiner interpret your answer. You may consider yourself to be the signalling maintenance engineer at the control centre, an IRSE memner just happening to be at the station witnessing it occuring or indeed the appointed investigating officer; the answer you give would therefore be different in each case.
My incident investiation experience is not in recent times and in the past it was less formalised / procedurised than it is nowadays; indeed there were less separate parties and possible litigation involved. My instincts are still to get as much of the perishable evidence just as soon a possible- i.e. take photographs, get people to write statements before memories fade or get contaminated and this looked to me to be the main omission. I think I'd have answered with the 5 headings (as above) but have made them fuller by giving examples- indeed I'd have used many of the 11 bullets given, but arranged in groups to support the relevant heading.
I think that cmcvea's abswer would have scored pretty well though (perhaps as much as 4/5) as it is; Hort's answer was much weaker- there was not much written and the wording seems to assume that there hd been a SPAD and fails to recognise that the fact that the driver has made a claim about having received a proceed aspect strongly suggests that the train has come to a stand and that a conversation with the signaller has taken place. I fear that 1/5 is all that would be awarded.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
There were then 10 potential marks for 5 possible causes so I'd have given 5 and written enough relevant on each hopefully to earn my quota of 2 marks apiece. It is good policy to make them as different as possible (displays knowledge, may make answering remaining part of question easier), so perhaps I'd have chosen
a) train detection showing clear when occupied. Potential causes could be for e.g. poor train shunt lightweight vehicle / rusty rails, erroneous line circuit operation due to poor cable insulation / earth fault; inappropriate reset of axle counter section whilst vehicle still within limits
b) interlocking fault. Potential causes could be for e.g. wires touching due to wire degradation affecting insulation, silver migration at relay plugboard, relay failed to release, circuit design wiring error,
c) incorrectly illuminated signal aspect. Potential causes could be for e.g. physically damaged cable cores, testing strap left inserted in error,
d) phantom aspect. Potential cause could be sunlight angle / reflection causing driver to be misled re what aspect was actually being displayed
e) misreading of signal by driver. Potential cause could be reading a signal on a parallel running line instead, correctly observing previous signal but the failing to realise that had passed the platform protecting signal.
cmcvea's answer was similar and had a good range. I liked particularly the idea in bullets 5&6 that nothing untoward may have happpened at all but in one way or another the report of it having occured was incorrect. This very much suggests knowledge acquired from personal involvement in such incidents. I think I'd have grouped these bullets together as two examples of "false alarms" and similarly I'd probably have grouped bullets 1&4 as reasons why a driver believed signal showing proceed when in fact it wasn't as by itself bullet 4 needs a bit more explanation. Also putting down 7 bullets when asked for 5 inherently is not good exam technique- it seems to send the message that not too sure so putting down a couple of extras "just in case". However this section was certainly good and although it is quite compact I'd probably award it very nearly full marks- say 8 or 9/10 to reflect a feeling that I'd have liked just a little more description re how staff working in the area may have caused the fault and more precision re wromgside failure of equipment.
Hort did list 5 posible causes but in most cases, the words could not really be said to describe. Also the selection seemed too focussed on the driver rather the signalling- they were all true but didn't demonstrate as well a wide understanding. I'd feel mean not to award 5 marks, but certainly wouldn't give more and would probably only give 4 since bullets 3&5 certainly need to explicitly say what they only imply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The last section asked for a procedure to manage the investigation of THIS scenario with reference to one or more of your POSSIBLE CAUSES.
cmcveas's answer covered a generic procedure quite well but failed to relate it to the earlier parts of the question. It certainly displayed knowledge of the relevant source material and was clearly and concisely presented. but didn't address completely what was actually asked. It was also I think too brief regarding actions and authority if faulty equipment is found / if it is not.
Hort's answer did go a little bit further relating to the scenario and possible causes, but I feel still not enough- however this may be partly down to not having selected a better selection in the initial part of the question. This answer tended to describe more the various investigations rather than A PROCEDURE TO MANAGE THE INVESTIGATION- ironically it was rather better re managing the situation after the results of the investigation. Another deficiency wa that it did not address at all the situaton of a failure not being identified (other than what seemed to be an implicit assumption that it must be the driver at fault). I think that the emphasis given in the answer to "finding the party responsible for the deficiency" is a sad (but I fear accurate) reflection on the current industry environment.
Both answers had a lot of good bits and very little that I regarded as wrong. I hope though this comparison serves to show how important it is to study the question, see where the marks are and have a strategy for obtaining them. You don't actually have to write a lot provided that what you do write is targetted and ha enough substance so that not only is the nail hit on the head but it is fully driven home.
Overall cmcvea did this pretty well, but the last section wasn't as good. May well have still got a Credit though.
Hort's answer seemed to start poorly and was quite sketchy throughout, but actually got better as it progressed. In fact the examiner would have been able to award the marks that seemed to have been missed in part a) on the strength of some of the material that was written in c). I don't think it would have been a Pass but it wasn't that far away and given the the exam is still a fair time off there is plenty of time to practice more and get more used to tackling such questions to be able to score the marks.
PJW