Upcoming Games

No games to display

Liverpool Street IECC

You are here: Home > Forum > General > Simulation wish list > Liverpool Street IECC

Page 1 of 1

Liverpool Street IECC 25/01/2017 at 17:13 #91776
Andrew G
Avatar
382 posts
SimSig started off with an early version of Fenchurch Street and then we were treated many years later to the complete LTS system.

Liverpool Street has also been around for quite a few years and I think it would be good if the remaining work stations could be simulated - possibly in two separate simulations to replicate the Links in the actual IECC.

So as well as Liverpool Street there are 4 Great Eastern Main Line work stations Stratford, Ilford, Shenfield & Witham.

And on what I think is the West Anglian link - another 3 - Hackney Downs, Harlow and Brimsdown.

Last edited: 26/01/2017 at 08:45 by Andrew G
Reason: Spelling

Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 25/01/2017 at 18:40 #91778
Rashan 170
Avatar
71 posts
It would be great sim with but unfortunately it cant be done Im afraid
Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 25/01/2017 at 19:21 #91779
headshot119
Avatar
2222 posts
Rashan 170 in post 91778 said:
It would be great sim with but unfortunately it cant be done Im afraid
Can't it? Are you an authority on that?

"Platform 7 your Penarth service. Platform 6 your Treherbert!"
Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 25/01/2017 at 20:21 #91783
jc92
Avatar
2141 posts
headshot119 in post 91779 said:
Rashan 170 in post 91778 said:
It would be great sim with but unfortunately it cant be done Im afraid
Can't it? Are you an authority on that?
In the same way upminster and york can't be done? I think geoff confirmed the conflict of interest no longer exists.

Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 25/01/2017 at 23:44 #91790
GeoffM
Avatar
3420 posts
jc92 in post 91783 said:
headshot119 in post 91779 said:
Rashan 170 in post 91778 said:
It would be great sim with but unfortunately it cant be done Im afraid
Can't it? Are you an authority on that?
In the same way upminster and york can't be done? I think geoff confirmed the conflict of interest no longer exists.
Not quite true: is reduced but varies depending on other work I do.

SimSig Boss. Website issues: Check here first: https://www.simsig.co.uk/Wiki/Show?page=newwebsite
Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 27/03/2017 at 20:26 #94161
Tange
Avatar
9 posts
Hi Geoff,

I am an IECC designer for Resonate. Previously, any updates we did for Liv Street would have gone to TRE to update the training SIM. However, Stratford, Ilford, Temple mills, Shenfield and Witham are now on our Scalable IECC Upgraded workstations that don't look like TRE (we provide our own simulator). Does this mean you could now produce SIMs for these areas (as the TRE data is essentially redundant)

Additionally, do you re-write all the data from scratch or use TRE data? is that where the COI lies?

Thanks

Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 28/03/2017 at 08:00 #94171
joshuapopelewis
Avatar
54 posts
Does the Reduction in COI potentially mean a Merseyrail Sim coming one day in the future!?
(My local line!!)

"There's a right way, a wrong way and the 'railway'"
Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 29/03/2017 at 03:20 #94197
GeoffM
Avatar
3420 posts
Tange in post 94161 said:
I am an IECC designer for Resonate. Previously, any updates we did for Liv Street would have gone to TRE to update the training SIM. However, Stratford, Ilford, Temple mills, Shenfield and Witham are now on our Scalable IECC Upgraded workstations that don't look like TRE (we provide our own simulator). Does this mean you could now produce SIMs for these areas (as the TRE data is essentially redundant)
So you finally caught up with a simulator that meets NR standards (set by, *cough*, TRE)! :D

Yes, previously at TRE we would have used the IECC .vw and SDS/* data to simulate the workstation. Little available documentation so we had to reverse engineer it somewhat.

Tell me, why do your people draw wiggly points? As in instead of a straight diagonal line between two point ends, it starts off diagonal, then horizontal, then diagonal again? Most of the time a straight piece would fit including labels and click zones. In all the IECCs I visited not a single signaller knew the significance of a wiggled point vs a straight point. The only suggestion was that it might have split end detection. Pretty sure MCS and Westcad don't do this either.

Tange in post 94161 said:
Additionally, do you re-write all the data from scratch or use TRE data? is that where the COI lies?
Eek, no to using TRE data! The COI did originate from any casual inference that I could have used it, so I just avoided it. I did like my job! Nowadays there is so much out there - available openly, or under FoI, or from things thrown away, or eBay - that there is no need to use any data I might have received under contract, so I don't. In a large part we have Peter Hicks to thank for more and more open data, as well as Clive Feather and Peter Bennett here on SimSig for exploring and challenging FoI responses. (That said, the UK is very open already compared to some other Western countries)

SimSig Boss. Website issues: Check here first: https://www.simsig.co.uk/Wiki/Show?page=newwebsite
Log in to reply
The following users said thank you: Tange, joshuapopelewis
Liverpool Street IECC 29/03/2017 at 08:01 #94203
Tange
Avatar
9 posts
Hi Geoff,

Thanks for the reply. The wiggly points (we call doglegs) are to maintain topology for the point ends (so if a worker is doing FPL tests or something, the signaler knows where the point end is relative to surrounding signals, points tracks). However since we draw track only at a certain angle, this means the track doesn't join up, hence the doglegging.
We did try with the new UGW scalable to join the point ends up with a curvy line, much like on scheme plans, however it just didn't look right. Example attached (screen and scheme plan). For example 8054B points is to the right of 8053A points, but 8053B points is to the right of 8051A points etc. So in complicated areas to maintain topology you end up with lots of doglegs.

Does what you said mean that you can now do simulations for any area you feel like? What source do you use for the design (screens, signaling plans?) and where do you get this kind of thing from?

Cheers

Post has attachments. Log in to view them.
Last edited: 29/03/2017 at 08:04 by Tange
Reason: attachements

Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 29/03/2017 at 17:26 #94211
GeoffM
Avatar
3420 posts
Tange in post 94203 said:
The wiggly points (we call doglegs) are to maintain topology for the point ends (so if a worker is doing FPL tests or something, the signaler knows where the point end is relative to surrounding signals, points tracks).
Well, in my 12 years of working on simulations and in signalling centres, sitting next to signallers at every IECC workstation up until around 2012, that's the first I've ever heard of that explanation! As I said earlier, no signaller I asked ever knew either so it seems they didn't get the message! I don't have the latest VDU standards but I'm fairly sure the only requirement in screen positioning is the alignment of signals on parallel lines.

Tange in post 94203 said:
Does what you said mean that you can now do simulations for any area you feel like? What source do you use for the design (screens, signaling plans?) and where do you get this kind of thing from?
Well, I still avoid certain areas if I'm doing real world work on them, but I'm less concerned if there is a paper trail of acceptable sources of information. I've sourced stuff wherever I can (see earlier).

SimSig Boss. Website issues: Check here first: https://www.simsig.co.uk/Wiki/Show?page=newwebsite
Last edited: 29/03/2017 at 17:27 by GeoffM
Reason: .

Log in to reply
The following user said thank you: Tange
Liverpool Street IECC 30/03/2017 at 11:21 #94222
Tange
Avatar
9 posts
Quote:
I don't have the latest VDU standards but I'm fairly sure the only requirement in screen positioning is the alignment of signals on parallel lines.
Took me a while but found it. GK/GN0525 states:
"b) The track and signalling (for example signals, points, train detection
sections) in the correct geographical relationship. It is not necessary to
depict the railway to scale, but any distortion due to the representation of the
layout not being to scale shall not be such as to cause confusion."

Just checked with our Principles tester :-).

So after all this discussion... any chance of a Stratford/Shenfield SIM? :-)

Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 31/03/2017 at 17:27 #94238
GeoffM
Avatar
3420 posts
Tange in post 94222 said:
Quote:
I don't have the latest VDU standards but I'm fairly sure the only requirement in screen positioning is the alignment of signals on parallel lines.
Took me a while but found it. GK/GN0525 states:
"b) The track and signalling (for example signals, points, train detection
sections) in the correct geographical relationship. It is not necessary to
depict the railway to scale, but any distortion due to the representation of the
layout not being to scale shall not be such as to cause confusion."

Just checked with our Principles tester :-).

So after all this discussion... any chance of a Stratford/Shenfield SIM? :-)
Yep, a 2003 version certainly states that. It would seem the other companies take a little more of a pragmatic view to this - stuff is generally in the right vicinity but not pixel perfect in alignment. Note the next point though: "the limits of each interlocking and ARS sub-area [shall be shown]". Unless Scaleable is different, you don't do that unless [communication to] an interlocking fails. MCS does show all the time. Can't remember for Westcad. And, as for sub-areas, nobody shows those limits as they're too difficult to show!

GEML, maybe one day

SimSig Boss. Website issues: Check here first: https://www.simsig.co.uk/Wiki/Show?page=newwebsite
Last edited: 31/03/2017 at 17:36 by GeoffM
Reason: .

Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 31/03/2017 at 19:45 #94241
Stephen Fulcher
Avatar
1292 posts
I don't think Westcad shows them unless the interlocking fails.
Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 01/04/2017 at 12:19 #94248
Hpotter
Avatar
202 posts
WestCAD does have an option to enable the user to select if the interlocking boundary is displayed.
Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 01/04/2017 at 17:41 #94259
Tange
Avatar
9 posts
GeoffM in post 94238 said:

Note the next point though: "the limits of each interlocking and ARS sub-area [shall be shown]". Unless Scaleable is different, you don't do that unless [communication to] an interlocking fails. MCS does show all the time. Can't remember for Westcad. And, as for sub-areas, nobody shows those limits as they're too difficult to show!

GEML, maybe one day :p
You can toggle the interlocking lines on and off, in which case they come up white (its in the vicinity of the signal/point/track toggles)

ARS limits, we did have that in originally but ergonomics didnt like overlaying highlights on the live railway. Instead, on scalable the signaller can have access to an online PC that connects to the ARS, and displays amongst other things images that show what each subarea controls (also shows train details and timetable info)

Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 01/04/2017 at 17:43 #94260
GeoffM
Avatar
3420 posts
Hpotter in post 94248 said:
WestCAD does have an option to enable the user to select if the interlocking boundary is displayed.
Tange in post 94259 said:

You can toggle the interlocking lines on and off, in which case they come up white (its in the vicinity of the signal/point/track toggles)

ARS limits, we did have that in originally but ergonomics didnt like overlaying highlights on the live railway. Instead, on scalable the signaller can have access to an online PC that connects to the ARS, and displays amongst other things images that show what each subarea controls (also shows train details and timetable info)
Both of these would appear to be recent upgrades - recent, as in the last 5 years!

SimSig Boss. Website issues: Check here first: https://www.simsig.co.uk/Wiki/Show?page=newwebsite
Log in to reply
Liverpool Street IECC 21/04/2017 at 00:44 #94607
DaveHarries
Avatar
658 posts
Online
GeoffM in post 91790 said:
Not quite true: is reduced but varies depending on other work I do.

Indeed. If you look on the SimSig Wiki then the list includes "Liverpool Street (GE lines to Marks Tey and Stansted North Jn)". Fair enough: if it can't be done then it can't be done.

However I can't help thinking that, seeing as the NLL sim has Woodgrange Park to Barking and also the LTS sim has Woodgrange Park, albeit on a fringe, through to Barking, I would hope that the existing Liverpool Street sim could, at some point in the future, be expanded to do Liverpool Street to Woodgrange Park from where the Upminster IECC (LTS) sim could pick up control, thereby forming a chain.

Or, otherwise, have a point where the NLL sim could chain to the LTS sim although you would probably need to take Barking out of the NLL one.

Just a thought.
Dave



Post has attachments. Log in to view them.
Last edited: 21/04/2017 at 00:49 by DaveHarries
Reason: None given

Log in to reply