Page 3 of 3
| Partial timeable information 10/12/2020 at 20:23 #134571 | |
mjkerr
195 posts |
Steamer in post 134569 said:It's an auto-inserted location (notice it's in lower case); the sim does this automatically. If I remember rightly, it won't appear in the 'Show timetable' window when playing. Yes, currently following my 1M18 test, and sure enough it does not show Departed Lockerbie on-time, arrived Carlisle 9 minutes early! Initially it looked like it would not use the 110mph max speed, then between Quintinshill and Carlisle all at 110mph DELETED Last edited: 10/12/2020 at 20:29 by mjkerr Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 10/12/2020 at 21:20 #134575 | |
|
mjkerr
195 posts |
Simulation commences at 06:00 First service needs to already be in Platform 4 1A18 : 06:10 Carlisle - London Euston How do I create this? DELETED Last edited: 10/12/2020 at 21:21 by mjkerr Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 10/12/2020 at 21:26 #134576 | |
Steamer
3981 posts 
|
See seeding: https://www.SimSig.co.uk/Wiki/Show?page=usertrack:ttuse:ttseed I've no idea if you can set this up in a CSV file; it may only be possible using the built in TT editor (or editing XML). (You should also read through the timetabling documentation here: https://www.SimSig.co.uk/Wiki/Show?page=usertrack:ssrun:func:f4 ) "Don't stress/ relax/ let life roll off your backs./ Except for death and paying taxes/ everything in life.../ is only for now." (Avenue Q) Last edited: 10/12/2020 at 21:27 by Steamer Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 11/12/2020 at 08:03 #134583 | |
|
mjkerr
195 posts |
Steamer in post 134576 said:I've no idea if you can set this up in a CSV file; it may only be possible using the built in TT editor (or editing XML) This should be possible, as the 2000 timetable has several DMU that stable overnight in the station for the morning services I tried to recreate this, but 5A18 would not appear DELETED Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 11/12/2020 at 09:32 #134584 | |
|
clive
2781 posts |
Steamer in post 134565 said:Some of us don't find GUIs "user-friendly". I can work much more efficiently with a text editor, perhaps invoking sed and awk scripts (or Python when I get round to learning it properly) from within it, than fiddling with the GUI. I'm not saying that approach is right for everyone, but don't denigrate it. Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 11/12/2020 at 09:34 #134585 | |
|
clive
2781 posts |
postal in post 134568 said:1) IIRC the TT does not sort properly if there are key locations missing which could be the cause of the original problem e.g. Penrith which shows in your latest attempt (although the locations are sometimes interpolated by the core code).More precisely, the simulation data tells the core code what key location insertions it should do and under what circumstances. If the data doesn't list an insertion, it won't happen; the core code doesn't try to guess. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: postal |
| Partial timeable information 11/12/2020 at 10:48 #134586 | |
|
Steamer
3981 posts
|
mjkerr in post 134583 said:Steamer in post 134576 said:Without any details of how you're attempting to set it up, or a copy of the .WTT file, there's not much anyone can do to help. The link I posted above gives full details of how to set a seed train up. I doubt it can be done via a CSV import, but I've not checked.I've no idea if you can set this up in a CSV file; it may only be possible using the built in TT editor (or editing XML) May I also add that a simple 'thank you' to people who are giving you information and trying to help out is very much appreciated, rather than just posting your latest problem. "Don't stress/ relax/ let life roll off your backs./ Except for death and paying taxes/ everything in life.../ is only for now." (Avenue Q) Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 11/12/2020 at 13:08 #134592 | |
postal
5260 posts
|
Steamer in post 134586 said:May I also add that a simple 'thank you' to people who are giving you information and trying to help out is very much appreciated, rather than just posting your latest problem.Tried that here yesterday and it went clean over the top. Unlikely that I'll try and give any more help. “In life, there is always someone out there, who won’t like you, for whatever reason, don’t let the insecurities in their lives affect yours.” – Rashida Rowe Last edited: 11/12/2020 at 13:09 by postal Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 11/12/2020 at 16:53 #134605 | |
|
Steamer
3981 posts
|
clive in post 134584 said:Steamer in post 134565 said:Perhaps 'more beginner-friendly' would have been a better description. I don't doubt your efficiency claims, but contend that a pre-requisite is a pretty thorough knowledge of what the program requires and why. In this instance, I get the impression that the OP is trying to learn the fundamentals of timetable writing while simultaneously trying to learn how to do data imports. Hence my suggestion that they focus first on mastering the former via the built-in editor. With that foundation, they can then work out what they can and can't do with imports.Some of us don't find GUIs "user-friendly". "Don't stress/ relax/ let life roll off your backs./ Except for death and paying taxes/ everything in life.../ is only for now." (Avenue Q) Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 12/12/2020 at 08:25 #134626 | |
|
mjkerr
195 posts |
Steamer in post 134586 said:May I also add that a simple 'thank you' to people who are giving you information and trying to help out is very much appreciated, rather than just posting your latest problem I have never seen this before on any other forum I use (I do not use that many now), so here goes These are not problems, but stages of re-learning SimSig as quickly as possible I am swapping over from years of using the EXE version and saved timetables from years ago They were so much easier then I have had to re-learn it all So thanks to everyone who has replied (including positively) so far with solutions and alternatives I prefer the method : Spreadsheet -> CSV -> Import However, I now have to agree it has it's failings as I have now found out I then tried the ConvData as the Manual and FAQ advised to use that However, that did not even import and so learning that over a day last week was actually helpful in finding some other issues I was noticing I was rather confused as to why the same train kept appearing in the Up and Down files, even though there was no change of direction Then when imported it was in the wrong order or completely ignored (eg Penrith) As a result yesterday I amended and finalised these two files Now the only time this is required is for a change of direction, which in most cases now is just the shunt movements and loco changes I have tested the entire day-time passenger loco hauled services : 110mph Mark 3 sets (Euston) 100mph Mark 2 A/C sets (Birmingham and Stranraer) 100mph Mark 2 sets (Manchester) 95mph Mark 1 sets (GSW and Settle) The Carlisle - Leeds services did not look right though I then realised the timetable I am using is September 1986 to May 1987 Just two services each way In Summer 1988 this is three northbound and five southbound (not sure why there is an imbalance) With the spreadsheet it is easy to see the services that require addition or amendment, quite simple to update I have tried the F4 interface and it is not so easy I am missing one of the timetables for Summer 1988, so I can use this spreadsheet as a basis for it I have also noted that many services run earlier than expected The timings are correct, so I suspect it is the performance data Again, this is a failing of the Spreadsheet; it is neither included and as far as I can see can not be imported So once the spreadsheet is finalised and imported each train then needs to be tweeked for the missing data What I have noted is the WTT has some loco movements that I do not remember One example is the Euston - Stranraer Stranraer - Euston The northbound AC loco is taken off and would sit in SB or SC, and then return southbound Two Class 47/7 locos would be observed However, I am fairly sure a Class 08 would shunt Motorail (GUV) to and from this service It may be due to it being the Winter 1986 timetable that it is included on the sleeper only Another are the Class 47/4 on the GSW The WTT seems to have them releasing and moving off Platforms 7 and 8 However I always remember them sitting there, and only leaving if refueling was required As a result services swapped between Platforms 7 and 8, and photos show this Perhaps it is an option, so the WTT includes it if it is required only Next up are the Newcastle and Whitehaven services DELETED Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 12/12/2020 at 12:35 #134635 | |
|
bill_gensheet
1403 posts |
mjkerr in post 134626 said:
Yes, that is going to be a painful leap. A LOT has moved on ! mjkerr in post 134626 said: That is one area where the built in F4 has advantages. You are already using one timetable for each type, eg "110mph Mark 3 sets (Euston)", but for F4 initially only put in one train each way (eg 0745 Euston). By running that alone you can fix the timing data for that train type. Only when that works would you use 'duplicate' to make up the rest of the day. So for Eustons you'd choose increment TD by 4, time by 2 hours and (IIRC) 8 trains. Yes there are a few further tweaks like Penrith stops but it gets more useful as you get into more clockface timetables. CONVDATA had a semi-programming language to do the same. mjkerr in post 134626 said:
Sorry not got a GBTT to double check that. Maybe a typo in the WTT not showing some trains as dated/SO/SX one way ? Bill Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 12/12/2020 at 17:35 #134649 | |
jc92
3683 posts
|
1989 WTT (as closest best fit) shows MSX: 2P00 arrive 0821 from Skipton (DMU) 1M09 arrive 1115 from Leeds (loco hauled) 1M43 arrive 1348 from Leeds (loco hauled) 2M77 arrive 1611 from Leeds (DMU) 1M72 arrive 1941 from Leeds (loco hauled) 1E09 dep 0634 for Leeds (loco hauled) 2E76 dep 0941 for Leeds (DMU) 1E11 dep 1242 for Leeds (loco hauled) 1E12 dep 1615 for Leeds (loco hauled) 2E78 dep 17:57 for Leeds (DMU) The service balances with one loco hauled set stabling at upperby Yard overnight for servicing. "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 13/12/2020 at 08:48 #134669 | |
|
mjkerr
195 posts |
bill_gensheet in post 134635 said:You are already using one timetable for each type, eg "110mph Mark 3 sets (Euston)", but for F4 initially only put in one train each way (eg 0745 Euston). By running that alone you can fix the timing data for that train type. There are actually four 110mph Mark sets in my template (spreadsheet) Up 87/0+NHA+2FO+RFB+6TSO Up 87/0+BFO+FO+RFB+8TSO+FO+NHA Down 87/0+6TSO+RFM+2FO+NHA Down 87/0+NHA+FO+8TSO+RFB+FO+BFO To this I plan to add another eventually, which has NHA+3FO+RFB+5TSO instead (Pullman sets or WB308 or WB309) There is also a Saturday Only Down Mark 2F set To this I am using a template Polmadie Cross Country 2TSO+BFK+2TSO+RBR+2TSO+BFK+2TSO To this I plan to amend the Glasgow - Penzance, as this had additional NEA A template Glasgow - Birmingham BSO+FO+3TSO+RMB+3TSO+FO+BSO (although the FO were rare and more commonly FK) A template Glasgow - Manchester (although at the time was Nottingham, and the rakes were slightly longer) TSO+BFK+TSO+RMB+TSO+BFK+TSO For the Glasgow - Dumfries - Carlisle services I used the Duplicate option, as the features and times are almost identical Equally, I have simplified these rakes with (Mark 1) SK-SK-BSK-SK-BSK and (Mark 2A) TSO-TSO-BSO-TSO-TSO I can then also use this for the Carlisle - Newcastle DMU, pretty much every two hours Oxenholme - Windermere DMU, pretty much hourly (plus remembering some extend to Lancaster) Carlisle - Whitehaven - Barrow, hourly duality DELETED Last edited: 13/12/2020 at 08:54 by mjkerr Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 13/12/2020 at 09:24 #134670 | |
|
mjkerr
195 posts |
jc92 in post 134649 said:1989 WTT (as closest best fit) shows MSX: I plan to add the DMU services in due course (as they are easier with no loco run round) As above, I suspect the issue is I am using the winter 1986 timetable, then comparing it to the summer 1988 timetable However, I had missed out the 1M09 08:25 Leeds - Carlisle 1M09 07:40 Hull - Carlisle 11:35 1M72 16:05 Leeds - Carlisle 18:57 1E20 10:40 Carlisle - Leeds 13:21 1E33 16:46 Carlisle - Hull 20:25 1M09 08:25 Leeds - Carlisle 11:08 1M43 10:45 Leeds - Carlisle 13:46 13:03 Leeds - Carlisle 16:16 1M72 16:33 Leeds - Carlisle 19:45 1E09 06:34 Carlisle - Leeds 09:38 09:41 Carlisle - Leeds 12:51 1E11 12:42 Carlisle - Leeds 15:38 1E12 16:15 Carlisle - Leeds 19:12 17:55 Carlisle - Leeds 21:10 DELETED Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 04/01/2021 at 23:45 #135973 | |
|
mjkerr
195 posts |
bill_gensheet in post 134635 said:Only when that works would you use 'duplicate' to make up the rest of the day I think you are the person to THANK for this Equally, if anyone else suggested swapping to solely relying on Spreadsheet import, many thanks I had hoped to use Spreadsheet import, but that clearly was not an option I started from scratch The Duplicate feature was excellent for some trains, not so good for others I duplicated one of the Down 1Sxx services I amended the Carlisle to Lockerbie times However I had not amended the Carnforth to Carlisle times correctly On that test the services were pretty much on top of each other, which they should not have been So, lesson learnt on that one! The duplicate feature worked excellent on the Oxenholme - Windermere shuttle Equally, it worked on many of the Carlisle - Whitehaven / Barrow-In-Furness Although some adjustments and checking was required Finally, the same also applied to the Carlisle - Newcastle However this was complicated by the stopping / express pattern I now have all the main published passenger trains loaded and operating correctly To this I then added the basic fixed-formation freight between Carnforth and Lockerbie; Containers, BAA/BBA Steel Carriers This test also went very well I then added all the remaining freight between Carnforth and Lockerbie Although one service was timed for a loop, which was not required (as I assume it was faster and so a loop would be irrelevant) I then added all the Harrison freight The north and south Glasgow Travelling Post Office workings were then added, although by 1986 they were very simple Next was the Dalston Oil Terminal I have not yet tested this, but the full working is in place This seemed odd with 12 TEA incoming southbound but only 6 TEA going to the terminal I then realised it was split over two days Today I have started on some of the Scottish regional cross-border freight workings Initially I had some issues with this as they do not quite match However, on completion I found one conflict which was resolved by adjusting the northbound working by one minute! I have still to add the Carlisle station shunt workings (as I call them) One Carlisle - Euston and Euston - Carlisle Sleeper to add / remove Three NEA to add / remove from Euston - Stranraer Split two TPO on to northbound Glasgow Two NEA to add / remove from Glasgow - Bristol No doubt there are a few others like Carlisle MotoRail Oddly I still need to add the "The Lakeland Pullman" workings I have the all the timings, but I do not know what time it arrives in Carlisle from Euston! Next up are parcel trains, although there do no appear to be that many Finally, spreadsheets Yes, I have five of them UP-all trains DOWN-all trains Carlisle Station Shunt Movements Train Types DELETED Last edited: 04/01/2021 at 23:48 by mjkerr Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 08/01/2021 at 23:27 #136133 | |
|
mjkerr
195 posts |
mjkerr in post 135973 said:Split two TPO on to northbound Glasgow It has taken me two days to work this out! I kept ending up with one spare BG and no onward working It turns out by 1986 this had changed In one respect it was simplified, but the working was more complex instead! I had to work out how to get one rake of (parcel) coaches to split into three in P5, which I have now done I have also now noticed I have a Class 47/4 and Mark 1 coaches coming from Kingmoor Depot for a morning CAR - GLC, which is incorrect! I had assumed this Class 47/4 arrived with the coaches, for which there is run round However the I cannot find the incoming working from Upperby Yard (even taking into account a possible divide within the station) I might just need to deduct 30 minutes and invent it! I doubt it would be stabled in the station overnight? -> The original Class 47 then becomes spare and goes to Wapping or Wall (undocumented?) DELETED Last edited: 08/01/2021 at 23:31 by mjkerr Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Partial timeable information 09/01/2021 at 09:27 #136140 | |
|
kbarber
1737 posts |
mjkerr in post 136133 said:mjkerr in post 135973 said:My italics. I think you need to remember that in 1986 there were an awful lot of undocumented moves. For one thing, the pre-privatisation environment was unbelievably different. Even sectorisation was still in its early days, with rigid division of loco fleets by sector only just under way if memory serves. There were loco diagrams, to be sure; often they would have a day's workings (and would therefore be significant at terminal stations like Euston, where an incoming loco would have a definite next train to go to when released from the stops), and I suspect often they would then have a 'works x' reference to the next day's diagram. But I've an idea even regular maintenance wasn't programmed so Control would have to be watching mileage and hours in traffic of locos entering their area; as a loco approached exam, their job would be to arrange a swap (often within the diagram). Where there were powerboxes (such as Euston & Willesden) it would be enough that they arranged for Willesden TMD to have a loco or 3 and a ferry set (traincrew booked for Euston/Willesden LE moves) ready in time. The 'outside foreman' at the TMD would be told when they were ready and advise Willesden PSB accordingly; the Willesden box supervisor would then decide when to let them out to go to Euston (usually as soon as possible, and let Euston sort out the consequences). There were headcodes in the WTT specifically allocated to such movements. Control would tell the Euston Train Crew Supervisor what engines were arriving (and very approximately when), and what substitutions were required. No such thing as STP and VSTP schedules. Not even 'Control specials' for moves like that. Pretty much the whole railway worked the same way.Split two TPO on to northbound Glasgow Also worth remembering train describers were used somewhat differently to now. For one thing, there were still an awful lot of electro-mechanical systems (relays or uniselectors, often driving mini-CRT displays, and hard-wired for movements between berths). (Some of them weren't even standard 4-digit descriptions. The LTS used a 4-number variant until very late, perhaps even until the resignalling of the 1990s. The local codes system used on lines radiating from Liverpool Street wasn't replaced until the mid-1980s.) That meant far fewer berths than we currently have. Little or no connectivity with train reporting systems too. So the attitude to train describers was that they were an aid to signalbox operation, really only essential to passing descriptions between boxes (Southern magazine-type describers did precisely that, of course, with descriptions transmitted manually and received descriptions cleared out likewise as trains passed). So it would be rare for an experienced signalman to set up a description for any kind of local shunt move; he'd deal with it just as he would've done in a mechanical box, by remembering what & where it was as he moved it around the layout. I wonder, for example, how often Target 3 (the local 'trip & shunt' in the Willesden area) ever actually got a description as it meandered randomly in, out & around the complex of yards. As for going to the bother of interposing a description for a loco running round...!!!!! I think that's the sort of thing that makes historic timetables so much more interesting. Ask 58050 about some of the wrinkles... he was a driver so he got a subtly different view from me (Yard Supervisor, having previously been a signalman). You'd be amazed how much discretion we had to keep the railway running our own way. Log in to reply |