(21-09-2010, 06:11 PM)MarkN Wrote: Attached is my attempt at the same question.
I did the attempt WITHOUT reference to this thread first.
Going to beetle off and read the 2 answers.
I would observe that I managed 544 words in 30 mins, I am happy to be directed for better content, but would struggle to increase the pace of writing and remain legible. Indeed I have transcribed to word using dragon naturally speaking for the sake of the readers eyes.
Comments and critique welcome.
Mark
I believe that two sides of A4 normal size handwriting would be the reasonable minimum for 20 minutes; I suppose that this may work out to be ten words a line on average. At 30 lines a page thiw would be some 600 words so I don't think we are in much diagreement. Must admit that I'd hadn't realised that this equates to just one page of typescript and my initial view when looking at your answer was that it wasn't nearly enough- better not say that now.
However I still didn't feel that I got a lot of content having read it. I suppose by choosing two similar (in terms of what high level functionality they can provide) systems that it is not so easy to contrast them. Felt you sent too long describing rather than really discussing safety and level of functionality and ergonomic impact. In particular I think you sidetracked too long into discussing diodes for panel indications.
1. You had a strong point re the ability of VDU to display all aspects rather than red / green for signal indications. Iarnrod Eireann have different colour route lights on their VDUs according to whether trains are running on restrictive aspects. Network Rail uses background highlights for axle counter restoration etc and so there are lots of examples to illustrate increased functionality. However often need some form of panel with a VDU- perhaps for level crossing control, axle counter reset-restore etc.
2. I'd also have mentioned the implementation of signal collars/ point reminders on the two systems
3. Panels can be of the design that operator is sat down / on stool / stood up and may have to do significant walking; in contrast VDU operators need to have a screen break every couple of hours to rest their eyes. At a small signalling centre this can need more operators than an equivalent panel would.
4. Although unlikely a VDU could suddenly go completely black; in event of loss of control need a way at least of replacing signals to danger; also an emergency diagram of some sort so signaller knows where the signals are located when all the SPTs ring in.
5. VDUs much smaller for contollling a given layout but more care needed re lighting in the room; hence panel /VDU affects the ergonomics of whole building.
6. As a tester I personally find panels far better when needing to test simultaneously with the signaller doing their work. Physical space constraints, only the one tracker ball / keyboard, no clear demacation re who is working in which area. Also now the issue is relevant when there is an incident and a signaller could do with assistance from their neighbours in the same control centre- very easy on a panel, almost impossible on an IECC.
I think that I'd be tempted, as per examples above, to think of an issue and then compare and contrast the technologies on that basis; I think you are less likely to move into pure description (which may be good stuff but not actually what they are after).
A tabular approach would force your answer to compare and contrast more readily side by side and if you number each row you can cross refer as necessary and it is also very in-the-face of the examiner at the end when they are assessing your score. If you have 20 items and ensured that there are about 6 or 7 from each of the three categories you were requested (why not group the rows by these three headings) then it would be very hard for the examiner not to awards a mark for each such row. I think that in prose (talking about the one and then the other) you may not get as many marks.
I must admit that my initial reaction when I read your answer was dissatisfaction and felt it hadn't said much; I had to go back to extract the useful bits of your content and then realised that it was better than I first believed.
