Page 1 of 1
| Operational Trains which must remain on planned path 30/11/2013 at 22:46 #52201 | |
pedroathome
887 posts |
Hi All. Hopefully I won't sound like I'm waffling here, but here I go. Something which I have been thinking about over the last few days, while seeing the RHTT around, which I understand has to keep to it's planned route when operational (same as the NMT, and maybe a few others). Anyway what I am getting to here is it would be nice to maybe have an option in the TT editor, or other appropriate location which says that a train MUST keep to it's planned route (platforms, lines, etc), and if sent onto a different path to phone in wrong route, which I understand would happen in reality. On the phone menu there could then be the current wrong route options. Not sure what others would think about this nor how difficult it would be to implement, but in my opinion would add in some realism on these trains. James Last edited: 30/11/2013 at 22:47 by pedroathome Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Josie |
| Operational Trains which must remain on planned path 06/12/2013 at 13:15 #52470 | |
clive
2737 posts |
It's an interesting idea, but very difficult. It would require additional data to be added to the simulation that the core code could read. That's actually going to be far more work than implementing it in the core code. Let me explain in a bit more detail. Consider the junction at Hitchin for down trains. You've got two potential routes: to Sandy and to Letchworth. The two signals (on the Down Fast and Down Slow) each have three routes. For routes A and B the data says "IVL=LTCHWTH", meaning "phone and complain if you're timetabled to go to Letchworth and this route is set", while route C has "IVL=SANDY". (These may not be the correct codes, as I don't have the sim data to hand, but that's irrelevant.) Between King's Cross and Sandy, at the edge of the sim, there are lots of opportunities to switch between fast and slow lines, but at present there's no need to distinguish them in the data. Let's say there are 20 such places. To implement your feature, the sim author has got to take those 20 places, making 40 signals. For each of those there will be two routes. Assuming we have a new tag IVT for this, at each signal we'd need to add "IVT=FL" for one route and "IVT=SL" for the other. The same needs to be done for platforms. Testing this could easily become a nightmare, as you've got to check each of the 80 cases in turn. And that's just the down direction! Log in to reply |