LETTER No- 86-T/359/TGP/Policy/Pt-V by Devendra Sir to Advisor Safety, Railway Board dated 05.09.2018
Sub: Review of CRS’s recommendations
Ref: CRS letter S-6/1/94/269-271 dated 26.07.99 (simultaneous
reception in station yards)
CRS in 1999, about 20 years ago, recommended certain severe restrictions which have curtailed the simultaneous movement and shunting movements in a station yards. Massive investment to strengthen infrastructure will not yield the desired results if mobility in the terminals is not looked into. The recommendation of CRS refers the case of 1963 and 1992 instances. Now all the stock is air brake and locos, rolling stock, signaling and monitoring has undergone major change hence the recommendation does not stand to reason and logic.
The pre-supposition that Loco pilot is going to overshoot the signal even if he is entering at a restricted speed or 15/30 kmph. at a terminal and to implement the restriction all over the Indian Railways’ terminals on the basis of one instance or abnormality, does not hold much water and is detrimental to the operating health and flexibility of operations at major terminals.
A large number of works for strengthening the infrastructure which include ‘doubling’, ‘quadrupling’, ‘terminal development’ ‘yard remodelling’, ‘coaching terminal’ etc. have been sanctioned and are being executed at a brisk pace in the Zonal Railways. It has come to light that at many locations specially at the terminals, where work of ‘EI’, ‘new RRI’, ‘yard remodelling’ has been initiated, as per SIP, many restrictions are being put in the working of a station which are not guided by G&SR, Signalling / Engineering Manual, Operating Manual etc. but are guided by CRS’s recommendations of 1999. For example, Amritsar where mechanical interlocking has been replaced by Electronic Interlocking many restrictions on simultaneous movement and for shunting operation have been incorporated which have severely restricted the shunting movements within the terminal, like engine attachment/detachment to & fro movement from washing line to platform, sick coach movement, fuelling movement, stabling movement and simultaneous movements. It has literally become like this that either the trains can be received/dispatched or shunting can take place. It implies that Amritsar is not able to handle those numbers of trains after Electronic interlocking which it was handling during mechanical interlocking and hardly any mishap/accident took place at Amritsar with mechanical interlocking. Some infrastructural work of new platforms is also going on. Work of EI/replacement of RRI/PI or terminals like PBH, RBL, BSB, LKO etc. will be taken up in Northern Railway and these severe restrictions will be put. These RRIs, PIs, Mechanical interlocking were installed before 1999. So, whatever facility of simultaneous movement/shunting operation is permitted today, it will be restricted after EI due to CRS’s observations of 1999. Similarly, Faizabad is an important junction of Northern Railway where Mechanical signaling is to replaced by EI and it has been suggested on the basis of recommendation of CRS of 1999 that the existing facilities of simultaneous reception from Lucknow side and reception and dispatch from Banaras side is going to be restricted. This will take away the operational flexibility and planning of train operation. There are many cases like this in which severe terminal restrictions are being put regarding simultaneous reception and dispatch, shunting operation etc. By putting these restrictions as per CRS’s recommendations where existing movements and facilities will be restricted may be counterproductive as staff will be forced to adopt short cut method to do necessary movements.
It is to be informed and requested that many of the CRS’s recommendations are almost 20 years old and during this time passenger and freight traffic has increased manifold at almost all terminals of Indian Railways. Now that special emphasis is being given for upgradation of the existing infrastructure and creation of new infrastructure with infusion of funds, it has become imperative that all restrictions which are not guided by G&SR, Signaling/Engineering Manual, Operating Manual or any other Rule Book may not be imposed and accepted.
As per the rough calculations, Indian Railways crew pass approximately 4.2 million signals in a day and there are only 25 to 50 SPAD cases in a year which comes to one SPAD approximately in passing 6.1 crore signals which is better than any highly computerized system. This is possible because of very robust rules, regulations, monitoring culture and practice over Indian Railways over decades. It is the greatest strength of this great organization. It is fully evident that by putting such restrictions at terminals which are put in routine manner on CRS’s recommendation is detrimental to the investment, terminal development, operations, punctuality and speed.
Summary of the CRS’s recommendations of 1999 already being implemented in the field and remarks and action to be initiated are given below:-
The safe distance for isolation in a major flat terminal/junction having gradient of more than 1 in 400 m should be kept equivalent to 120m (like signal overlap).
Terminal mobility and flexibility is of paramount importance in addition to mobility between block stations and in sections. It is seen that most of the terminals are saturated and number of movements inside a terminal are approximately 4 to 4½ times of number of trains being handled at that terminal. For example New Delhi handles around 325 trains per day and number of shunts are around 1200. Amritsar handles around 100 trains per day and number of shunts are around 400. Similar is the situation with other terminals as well.
The matter was discussed with Member Traffic on 08.08.2018 by COM, CTPM & CPTM in connection with cancellation, diversion, and short termination and S&T restriction in connection with Amritsar yard remodeling and Electronic interlocking.
Credits: Devendra Sir (CTPM/NR)
