Page 1 of 2
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 17/06/2014 at 14:07 #61766 | |
maxand
1637 posts |
This one's got me baffled. 0V47 needs to join 5V47 at Newton Abbot P3, yet each time I try setting a route from Heathfield S672 to Newton Abbot P3 S388 I get the message "Subroute locked in opposite direction". As you can see, no other routes have been set. Is this a bug? PS I tried saving and resuming but this didn't help. Post has attachments. Log in to view them. Last edited: 17/06/2014 at 14:14 by maxand Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 17/06/2014 at 14:12 #61769 | |
Steamer
3925 posts |
Can't work out what's going on there- you can set a call on from 386 to 388 no problem, but it doesn't like it from Heathfield for some reason.
"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 |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 17/06/2014 at 14:27 #61770 | |
headshot119
4869 posts |
Clip the points and talk 0V47 past the signal as a solution.
"Passengers for New Lane, should be seated in the rear coach of the train " - Opinions are my own and not those of my employer Last edited: 17/06/2014 at 14:27 by headshot119 Log in to reply The following user said thank you: maxand |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 17/06/2014 at 16:19 #61776 | |
|
AndyG
1835 posts |
probably one of two:- a) Permissive working not authorised from branch to platform; b) minor error with route data (occ TCs for permissive). I can only help one person a day. Today's not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look too good either. Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 17/06/2014 at 18:46 #61787 | |
postal
5191 posts |
" said:probably one of two:-I've logged it on the Issue Tracker for Peter's attention. “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 |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 00:40 #61796 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
Headshot119's solution worked, thanks. Quote: Permissive working not authorised from branch to platform Is this something built into the sim or the TT and can I change it? Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 01:15 #61797 | |
|
Finger
220 posts |
1. It's a regulation of possible moves and (if we're lucky) reflected in the sim 2. You can't change it Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 01:32 #61799 | |
|
Muzer
718 posts |
Permissive working, if you weren't aware, simply refers to the ability to signal more than one train onto the same section of track - obviously required for things like joining trains and double docking at platforms. It's also used on some London Underground lines to squeeze as much capacity out of the line as possible, and was historically used more widely for such purposes (notably on the Watford DC lines, as shown in the Euston sim).
Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 04:37 #61803 | |
|
Hawk777
386 posts |
I don’t know what timetable this is, but for science’s sake, I just did some experimentation. If the train herein labelled 5V47 is initially travelling in the down direction before it arrives at Newton Abbott P3, then the route from the branch to P3 can be set, but the shunt signal never clears, and a route out of P3 towards Totnes can be set simultaneously. This points at the route being a non-permissive shunt class route which agrees with the suggestion that, at least in the sim, permissive working is not authorized from branch to P3. If the initial train is up instead, then I get the same behaviour, subroute locked in opposite direction—precisely what you would expect from a non-permissive move being signalled in the opposite direction as the move that initially occupied the target track circuit! Log in to reply The following user said thank you: maxand |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 07:43 #61807 | |
|
GoochyB
222 posts |
Considering the location, would any need have been envisaged for permissive working from the branch to P3? From 386 makes sense for adding a loco or joining units, but is it not likely to be the case that IRL no-one saw any need to be able to permissively signal from the branch so it wasn't unnecessarily implemented?
Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 09:42 #61812 | |
lazzer
605 posts |
Out of interest, all three platforms at Newton Abbot are permissive working, "for the purpose of detaching multiple unit trains only", in the words of the Sectional Appendix.
Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 20:01 #61831 | |
|
Steamer
3925 posts |
This appears to be an example of artistic license used in historical TTs- the timetable is set in 1980, and Exeter power box didn't open until 1985. They layout at Newton Abbott was probably more complex back then, and would have allowed the move. As it is, a bit of a fudge is required to get the TT to work in SimSig.
"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 |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 20:05 #61832 | |
jc92
3631 posts 
|
" said:Out of interest, all three platforms at Newton Abbot are permissive working, "for the purpose of detaching multiple unit trains only", in the words of the Sectional Appendix.I wonder what the 1985/86 sectional appendix would have shown, ie. at the time of commissioning. didn't the overnight Beds still attach/detach a banker here? "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 21:34 #61835 | |
|
kbarber
1712 posts |
" said:" said:Out of interest, all three platforms at Newton Abbot are permissive working, "for the purpose of detaching multiple unit trains only", in the words of the Sectional Appendix.I wonder what the 1985/86 sectional appendix would have shown, ie. at the time of commissioning. Unless I'm much mistaken the BR Rule Book of the mid '80s didn't have all these silly restrictions on permissive working. Where permissive block was in use, lines would be classified as Freight, Passenger or Platform (F, P or PF in the Sectional Appendix) and the regs were specific on how they were worked. I think where permissive moves existed in TCB areas there would've been similar instructions. The modern restrictions emerged, I suspect, with the massive increase in elfin safety paranoia post-privatisation. Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 21:57 #61838 | |
Peter Bennet
5362 posts |
Surely the signalling system does not know whether the train in question fullfills the permissive working criteria or not. Either the signal is set up to allow permissive working or it is not, whether the signaller uses the ability correctly or not is a separate matter. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Stephen Fulcher |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 18/06/2014 at 22:41 #61839 | |
ozrail
197 posts |
I uncounted the same situation with Motherwell. Turned out to be train waiting to come out from a non track circuited siding before I could clear the signal to go in. Also reminds me of how the signalling works in Sydney. When a shunt signal (Permissive) is used for a running or timetabled movement the train stop lowers, but if the same signal is used for another route the train stop stays raised.
Last edited: 18/06/2014 at 22:43 by ozrail Reason: spelling Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 19/06/2014 at 12:29 #61844 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
OK, thanks for explaining permissive working - I wasn't clear about that before. In that case, wouldn't it be clearer to see an error message such as "Permissive working not allowed" displayed, rather than "Subroute locked in opposite direction?" Maybe there isn't one in SimSig, but if there were, it would be an instant flag to TT writers pushing beyond the default TT, which may not have picked it up. Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 19/06/2014 at 13:31 #61845 | |
|
Sacro
1171 posts |
" said:No, you can't set another route if one is already locked, same direction or opposite. If permissive working is not allowed and the subroutes required aren't locked then the signal will just remain at red. Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 19/06/2014 at 13:54 #61846 | |
Simdmuk
153 posts |
" said:This appears to be an example of artistic license used in historical TTs- the timetable is set in 1980, and Exeter power box didn't open until 1985. They layout at Newton Abbott was probably more complex back then, and would have allowed the move. As it is, a bit of a fudge is required to get the TT to work in SimSig.Quite correct Steamer. Back then Newton Abbot had four platforms,a Motorail bay,two through lines,carriage sidings and motive power depot adjacent to the station ,sidings at the racecourse (opposite side of Hackney Yard)and Newton Abbot goods ,which spurred of the Heathfield branch. So trying to fit the activity at the time into the yard,branch and three platforms is somewhat tricky :yikes . Hence the "fudging" :cheer: Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 19/06/2014 at 15:01 #61847 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
Sacro wrote: Quote: No, you can't set another route if one is already locked, same direction or opposite. If permissive working is not allowed and the subroutes required aren't locked then the signal will just remain at red.I can't see why the signal should remain at red: 1) Whether or not permissive working is allowed, IF a subroute happens to be locked, then the subroute error message should take precedence as it is more fundamental than permissive working. 2) When no subroute is locked, if the signaller attempts to set a route where permissive working is not allowed, a specific error message to this effect should appear. So if a subroute error message is received when it is apparent that there is no locked subroute nor any subroute at all, it has to be a bug that may have nothing to do with whether permissive working is allowed or not. Am I right in this? (added) Of course, with a little extra development, Newton Abbot could be optioned to appear as it was in its heyday as Steamer described, similar to the display switch used for Tiverton Station/Tiverton Junction. Then, permissive working might depend on which era is chosen. Last edited: 19/06/2014 at 15:03 by maxand Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 19/06/2014 at 15:46 #61848 | |
|
postal
5191 posts |
" said:That would make normal working of a sim very awkward as it is quite common to set a route forward before the preceding train has cleared the section. This then enables the entry signal to clear when the route is available. Most routes do not allow permissive working so the operator would be inundated with messages stating that permissive working is not allowed. For example, in your Newton Abbot instance, the signaller could set the route for a scheduled train from the branch into P3 before the preceding train had left and then concentrate on some action elsewhere in the sim, knowing that the train from the branch would be held at the signal until the platform was clear and then be allowed to proceed into the platform. This would generate an error message under your scenario. I'm afraid we are once again back to the fact that a lot of successful operation of a sim is achieved by spending the time and effort to learn the panel. Not every eventuality can be covered in the software and neither can everything be documented while keeping the manual to manageable proportions. “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: 19/06/2014 at 15:49 by postal Log in to reply The following user said thank you: maxand |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 19/06/2014 at 15:47 #61849 | |
|
lazzer
605 posts |
" said:I can't see why the signal should remain at red:In case you didn't know, the main aspect of any signal will always remain red when a train is signalled permissively. It's the subsidiary signal (the "dots"  that will show the proceed aspect to the driver. If the main aspect clears to a proceed aspect, there shouldn't be another train in the section ahead!
Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 19/06/2014 at 16:10 #61851 | |
|
Sacro
1171 posts |
" said:" said:In the current era, yes, but in times gone by (Euston older eras?) you'd get a yellow for a call on, or a green for unoccupied.I can't see why the signal should remain at red:In case you didn't know, the main aspect of any signal will always remain red when a train is signalled permissively. It's the subsidiary signal (the "dots" Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 19/06/2014 at 16:43 #61852 | |
|
lazzer
605 posts |
" said:" said:Pass. But interesting." said:In the current era, yes, but in times gone by (Euston older eras?) you'd get a yellow for a call on, or a green for unoccupied.I can't see why the signal should remain at red:In case you didn't know, the main aspect of any signal will always remain red when a train is signalled permissively. It's the subsidiary signal (the "dots" Log in to reply |
| Heathfield subroute locked in opposite direction 19/06/2014 at 16:45 #61853 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5362 posts |
" said:Yes: but for the avoidance of doubt, in the initial scenario there was a locked subroute so there was no reporting error. " said: I'd be happy to if I had the plans, though I'm not sure if the rationalisation was in conjunction with the Exeter box extending to cover the area. If so that of itself presents other issues - though I covered that in the early era of Cowlairs so not insurmountable. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply The following user said thank you: maxand |