Page 1 of 1
| Trains being relative to eachother 09/02/2011 at 23:19 #2371 | |
2W34
58 posts |
Hi all, How would I implement this into a TT... For example, 1M65 runs to Oxford (this is just for arguments sake) where it forms 1M66. However, if 1M65 is cancelled then obviously 1M66 will not run. How do I implement this as every rule seems to be if one runs the other doesn't? Log in to reply |
| Trains being relative to eachother 09/02/2011 at 23:19 #13504 | |
|
2W34
58 posts |
Hi all, How would I implement this into a TT... For example, 1M65 runs to Oxford (this is just for arguments sake) where it forms 1M66. However, if 1M65 is cancelled then obviously 1M66 will not run. How do I implement this as every rule seems to be if one runs the other doesn't? Log in to reply |
| Trains being relative to eachother 09/02/2011 at 23:42 #13506 | |
|
MikeW
65 posts |
2W34 said:For example, 1M65 runs to Oxford (this is just for arguments sake) where it forms 1M66. However, if 1M65 is cancelled then obviously 1M66 will not run. How do I implement this as every rule seems to be if one runs the other doesn't?Seems to me to be two sorts of circumstances in which this happens: First of all, where (to follow your example) 1M65 runs into platform xyz and immediately forms 1M66 with a N:1M66 activity. This ensures the non-appearance of 1M66 if 1M65 doesn't run. The other case is where 1M65 runs into Oxford and then goes into the carriage sidings, emerging later as 5M66 to form 1M66. That can be handled by a rule '5M66 must not appear until 5 minutes after 1M65 arrives at carriage sidings'. This will ensure that 5M66 will never appear if 1M65 doesn't run. I may be missing something, but these two cases seem to handle the situation. Mike Log in to reply |
| Trains being relative to eachother 10/02/2011 at 11:59 #13528 | |
postal
5190 posts |
To build on what Mike has said, you can also make use of the rules for trains that turn back beyond the sim boundary. This could be relevant with the 1M65 / 1M66 example if you were writing a timetable for SwinDid which would also handle 1M65 / 1M66. You can work out how long it would take for the train to reach Oxford from the SwinDid handover point, how long you are going to allow for the minimum allowable turn-round at Oxford and then how long back to the SwinDid boundary. This gives you a minimum time which you can set as a rule that 1M66 must not enter until xx minutes after 1M65 has left. Then if 1M65 is running late as it leaves SwinDid, you don't get 1M66 coming back at you before a realistic time has elapsed (or on really bad days, 1M66 entering before 1M65 has left!) - and of course, if 1M65 does not run, 1M66 does not enter.
“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 Log in to reply |
| Trains being relative to eachother 11/02/2011 at 15:50 #13588 | |
|
2W34
58 posts |
That's fantastic, thanks guys. Just to go a little deeper If we say that the minimum time between point A and point B is 20 minutes with a 10 minute (absolutely minimum) turn around, which is 50 mins overall. So I would have the rule 1M66 must not appear until 50 mins after 1M65, but it is timetabled a 60 min turn around if not delayed, then will 1M66 stick to it's entry time regardless of the rule? Log in to reply |
| Trains being relative to eachother 11/02/2011 at 17:09 #13592 | |
|
AndyG
1834 posts |
yep, won't enter early, but the rule will delay if required. That is, it will appear at due time or later only. Have a look at rules in other timetables for examples, Kurt's KX 1985 shows good use of rules for various needs. I can only help one person a day. Today's not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look too good either. Log in to reply |