Jump to content

Talk:Radio Electronic Token Block

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Inauguration date

[edit]

The source used for the date of 6 July 1984, now contested, is the work cited: Vann's Illustrated History of Railway Signalling. A new date has been substituted (by a well-regarded editor) without indicating a source: I am adding a {{fact}} request. --Old Moonraker 21:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scotrail has 6 July as well [1]. --Old Moonraker 21:48, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a source ("The Directory of Scottish Signal Boxes"). While searching for sources to cite, I came across a third date, 5 August 1984, in "Single Line Operation" by David Stirling (ISBN 1 872826 13 X). The reason I am certain that my date is correct is that I have the official Weekly Operating Notices for the period in question. I am reluctant to cite these as a source as they are not easily accessible to everyone. I can think of two possible reasons for the confusion over the date. Firstly, there was a trial of the RETB equipment in advance of it being finally put into use. Secondly, the semaphore signals were removed and RETB stop boards etc. provided at the three crossing loops some months before RETB replaced electric token block working on the line. It might therefore have appeared to a bystander that RETB was in operation earlier than it actually was. Signalhead 22:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Vann's and Scotrail's date must have been the trial, then. Do we need to make this clear? Something like "Trials were started on 6 July 1984 and the system was inaugurated on 28 October 1984", etc, followed by citations. ----Old Moonraker 07:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Something like that would sound fine. Are we absolutely certain that the 6 July date refers to the trial though? Is there a source for that? Or might 6 July have been a planned final commissioning date that slipped? Signalhead 11:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's something I hadn't thought of. Perhaps just let it lie. --Old Moonraker 23:15, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]