Manually reversing the wrong way

This "manually reversing" thing is a confounded nuisance!

I reliase it's there to prevent people exploiting a reverse instruction when they want to set a signal to danger, but let's be honest - it's a very brutal and kludgy workaround.So, I tell it to reverse and get "Manually reversing", the enforced two-minute kludge to prevent naughty players from decieving only themselves. Besides, why exactly is it two minutes? The driver of a twelve carriage train could never make it to the opposite end in that time. But this is just a locomotive - it shouldn't take any time at all to reverse.

Anyway, eventually it does get moving, and takes it's sweet time to crawl back to the point where it should've been reversing from in the first place, and gradually makes it's way to signal 1391, where exactly the same thing happens again! It waits for right-away, and hurtles off towards Brighton. With the same consequences that it must be manually reversed, two minute wait, the the slow crawl back to the signal it just left.

I'm not sure which to report. One or the other must be a bug, perhaps both. What do you think?

More suprisngly, it fixed it for 1391 as well! Can't work out why, since that was always direct with nothing in between.

Assuming Mr. Fulcher is correct (and I have no desire to check given the accusations), perhaps you could use the tools provided for free to check the timetable before venting?

Sat here hating myself now for upsetting people again. :(

As it was a single requirement coded to meet a specific goal, I think we can agree you probably meant something else.

Assuming Mr. Fulcher is correct (and I have no desire to check given the accusations), perhaps you could use the tools provided for free to check the timetable before venting? If there is still a bug then of course I will attempt to fix the problem.

" said:

Assuming Mr. Fulcher is correct (and I have no desire to check given the accusations), perhaps you could use the tools provided for free to check the timetable before venting?

Sorry Geoff, it wasn't meant as an accusation nor a vent. I was trying to express a problem I was experiencing in full, and intended no actual offense. I sincerely apologise if my words came across as angry (it's been said before) and is genuinely accidental.

The problem is that the "hack" was a fairly accurate simulation of reality. If a signal needs to be knocked down for whatever reason the signalman should be able to talk to the driver and then cancel the signal without getting "points off". I actually know of situations where canceling route is used as a strategy to speed trains up due to limitations in the ATC system! In less favorable circumstances the conversation is used to establish an alternative reality that won't get the signalman marked off if the signalman has in fact made a routing mistake. "Can you please reverse direction" would simply be a euphemism for "I have to take away your signal because I screwed up but I don't want my management to know".

People like yourself often have the mistaken belief that telling the driver the signal is going back is something that is perfectly acceptable and possible. It's not. If a driver has a signal go back in his face then his stopping distance has suddenly plummeted and he needs to act swiftly to be able to stop in time - if he can. Sometimes it may not be a problem; other times there may be no slack in the system. Either way, you don't try to hide behind tricks. Dispatchers I know would take an extremely dim view of your final sentence.

Mike in this country a Signaller making a mistake that required him to replace a signal, for example wrong routing, is in itself unlikely to get him in much trouble providing there isn't a pattern of him doing it too often.

If he were to cover it up, as suggested in your last statement, and the boss found out, he would probably lose his job.

Since stopping distances are wildly conservative it's usually not a problem and certainly better than waiting for the driver to stop "on sight" in the face of a mis-route.

I've have observed similar operations at other points and usually the dispatcher calls and asks if a train can get stopped by the such and such signal. The crews know that sometimes s*** happens. For realism SimSig should offer a "stop shot of next signal" feature and once the train has stopped (if it can stop) the signal can be taken away without penalty.

I thought you folks worked in the land of Big Labour where unionized workers looked out for eachother. With what dispatchers and crews tell me here, nothing has happened until it goes on the recording tapes. Dispatcher friend once forgot to pull up a signal and delayed a train for about 5 minutes. The crew was nice enough to entertain the suggestion on the radio that there had been a disabled passenger needing assistance at a certain station. Another time a train had gone past a place it needed to stop and the dispatcher offered up on the radio that he was in the correct place, right?

On the other hand my friend once did a favor to a freight train trying to get onto the NEC before the white period and it took longer than anticipated so my friend had to run a commuter train to another interlocking and change ends on the main line. The commuter engineer was pissed off and give my friend a slow turn which then delayed a high speed train and got my friend a letter of screw up in his file. That's what can happen when people get snippy with eachother.

Unless you've managed to foster some sort of antagonistic relationship between operating crews and signalers this sort of back scratching goes on all the time.

I thought you folks worked in the land of Big Labour where unionized workers looked out for eachother. With what dispatchers and crews tell me here, nothing has happened until it goes on the recording tapes.

This topic has drifted somewhat, nevertheless I have a question regarding the taking-down of signals.
I respectfully ask that this picture be considered in detail.

[img size=400]http://canis.dynu.com/~lee/LJ/SimSig.png[/img]

2B60 is delayed at Burgess Hill and has had it's signal removed.
1F64 has dropped it's rear coaches and is set to depart in a minute or two, but is still stationary for the time being.
2A68 had just this minute reported it will be delayed, and it's signal has been removed, subject to a 120 second wait.

My question is this:
Wouldn't the driver of 1F64 prefer to have his signal removed, and wait two minutes to be redirected onto the empty Up line instead of becomming stuck behind 2A68 for twenty minutes while the correct food trolley is arranged?