Page 2 of 2
| Re: Hand-working failed points 05/11/2011 at 15:16 #22515 | |
mfcooper
707 posts |
The issue with all the comments about getting someone to wind the points to the required position is having to wait for them to arrive! Currently in SimSig you have to wait for the S&T to arrive, and they tell you when they have fixed the problem. The first people to arrive at a points failure (be it the points failing or the track circuit failing over the points) are usually S&T, and they will get on with trying to fix the problem. A dialogue between a technician and the signaller with regards to fixing failures might be a more realistic addition to SimSig. Say a set of points fail with no Normal detection. Eventually S&T arrive on site. The require the line to be clear of trains so they can work on the points, so you stop trains (no Line Blockage form required; the S&T usually have their own lookouts). S&T will inspect the points, and ask the signaller to move them back-and-forth between Normal and Reverse; this gives them an idea as to what is wrong (a lump of ballast in the way is not uncommon), and then they can fix the problem. Finally, they will ask the signaller to swing the points again to confirm their fix is working, and then normal operation can resume. [NB: There is a similar dialogue when a track circuit has failed, where the signaller blocks the line and tells the S&T what indications he is getting from the affected track circuit.] Throughout this procedure, the points will need to be put into the required position, and a reminder used. Many times in SimSig games have I seen only the blue (in more recent core code) highlights used, indicating that the points have been manually set in one position, but I rarely see the full reminders (yellow in more recent core code) used. However, if you wish for a scenario where the Mobile Operations Manager (MOM) gets there first [or perhaps another track worker with the correct competency), then you can start looking at points being set on the ground with confirmation from the MOM that they are clipped and scotched in the required position. With certain failures you will not get point detection and will need to pass the signal at danger, which requires the route cards. The signaller sets up what is needed from the signal box, but anything set by the MOM (at the signaller's request) out on the ground over-rides any indications in the signal box. The signaller has to be happy that all points are set for the movement, be it from the indications in the box, or from the information passed to him from the MOM. Log in to reply |
| Re: Hand-working failed points 05/11/2011 at 15:57 #22517 | |
Peter Bennet
5363 posts |
" said:By grouping all your replies, I understand the usage of the Incident Panel. The host canI think the incident control panel can remove it completely- in fact I think you can remove pretty much any blockage/closure/isolation even those imposed by the start-up scenario- though not fully if the developer codes the TC at 0mph and disables the ability to set a route! Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Re: Hand-working failed points 05/11/2011 at 17:07 #22519 | |
GeoffM
6288 posts 
|
" said:which requires the route cards. The signaller sets up what is needed from the signal box, but anything set by the MOM (at the signaller's request) out on the ground over-rides any indications in the signal box. The signaller has to be happy that all points are set for the movement, be it from the indications in the box, or from the information passed to him from the MOM.I forgot to mention earlier, SimSig ought to be able to produce route cards - and also check the points are keyed/remindered correctly when playing. An idea for the future. SimSig Boss Log in to reply |
| Re: Hand-working failed points 07/11/2011 at 11:52 #22579 | |
|
kbarber
1712 posts |
This seems to be another area where details will depend on selected eras. In 1985 most locations where there were points also had staff within a reasonable distance who were passed as competent to wind & clip points (we all worked for the same firm in those days and BR was happy to train station staff in operational duties). Therefore, to be strictly correct, selecting a pre-1994 era should also shorten the time taken to get point operators/handsignalmen to the failure, such that they would be there in less than half the time it would take the S&T. There tended to be more locally-based supervisors around in those days too; in fact the prototype MOMs were the "Flying Ds" introduced in the Broxbourne Area in the spring of 1987 (having been proposed some 2 years before - it was a long & not untroubled gestation). So there would also be supervisors (and indeed station managers) able to do things like set up single line working much more quickly than is the case nowadays, when a MOM has to drive through rush-hour traffic from the far side of the area. Log in to reply |
| Re: Hand-working failed points 07/11/2011 at 23:46 #22586 | |
|
Firefly
521 posts |
kbarber - I agree completely.
Log in to reply |
| Re: Hand-working failed points 09/11/2011 at 05:47 #22628 | |
|
pilotman
189 posts |
mfcooper: Your 5 November 20:15 was the most clear, and informative comment I have ever seen on Simsig. Ray Last edited: 09/11/2011 at 05:49 by pilotman Reason: change of emphasis Log in to reply |
| Re: Hand-working failed points 10/11/2011 at 13:39 #22693 | |
ajax103
1107 posts |
" said:" said:Yes please, the number of times this method would have been so useful is more times then I can count - please do write a Wiki article on how to perform this method.[quote]When I was hosting yesterday I carried out a Release of Controls by clearing a failed track circuit and then dropping it again once the route had died out using the F11 incident panel. The ability to "Blow the route" is very useful, and in fact I think it should be published how to do it so that anyone playing can do so. Log in to reply |