Upcoming Games


Full list
Add a game

Version 1.2.1 issues

You are here: Home > Forum > Simulations > Australian Sims > Moss Vale NSW > Version 1.2.1 issues

Page 1 of 1

Version 1.2.1 issues 23/08/2018 at 13:37 #111409
Lyn-Greenwood
Avatar
157 posts
Here's a couple of issues that I reported just before version 1.2.1 was released and which haven't been fixed, so thought I'd start a new thread for version 1.2.1 of the sim.

1) Trains from Unanderra which have a scheduled stop at Moss Vale Jct and need to be routed via the North Fork, call Wrong Route even when NF is chosen as the Moss Vale Jct platform. If the route is set via the Branch, then the route is accepted and the train makes its scheduled stop at signal MV35, which doesn't make sense. Train TM71 is an example.

2) Trains approaching Stockinbingal from Milvale call in with the message "Driver of [none] to Junee Control. We're approaching Stockinbingal.", but they do this as they are passing through Stockinbingal. Train 1PS6 is an example.

For info, I'm running v1.2.1 of the sim/timetable and v4.8.2 of the Loader.

Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 23/08/2018 at 18:13 #111418
Lyn-Greenwood
Avatar
157 posts
Here's another issue I've come across:

Trains routed from Signal MV26 and MV24 to signal 34.6 (Moss Vale North Fork & Branch towards Unanderra) always stop at the Branch LOS board and ask for permission to pass it.

This one's a query, but it may be an issue: Why do trains departing Cootamundra P1 towards Junee always ask for permission to depart from signal CA69, which is a main aspect signal?

Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 23/08/2018 at 19:18 #111419
GeoffM
Avatar
4223 posts
General comment: not everything reported is fixed by the next release, especially with this WIP. If you've already reported it then it probably does not need reporting again.
SimSig Boss. Website issues: Check here first: https://www.simsig.co.uk/Wiki/Show?page=newwebsite
Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 23/08/2018 at 22:06 #111427
Lyn-Greenwood
Avatar
157 posts
GeoffM in post 111419 said:
General comment: not everything reported is fixed by the next release, especially with this WIP. If you've already reported it then it probably does not need reporting again.
I wasn't complaining that the issues hadn't been fixed, Geoff, merely pointing out that I'd reported them just before the new release which would explain why the issues were still there. I also thought a new thread for the latest release would be a good idea.

Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 26/08/2018 at 00:29 #111500
Mattyq
Avatar
247 posts
Lyn-Greenwood in post 111409 said:
Here's a couple of issues that I reported just before version 1.2.1 was released and which haven't been fixed, so thought I'd start a new thread for version 1.2.1 of the sim.

1) Trains from Unanderra which have a scheduled stop at Moss Vale Jct and need to be routed via the North Fork, call Wrong Route even when NF is chosen as the Moss Vale Jct platform. If the route is set via the Branch, then the route is accepted and the train makes its scheduled stop at signal MV35, which doesn't make sense. Train TM71 is an example.
First of all, thank you for your feedback.

I just want to take this opportunity to support Geoff's statement that not all bugs identified will be fixed in the very next release or the one after (etc). Given this is "the new world" (for SimSig) and quite a departure from UK practice, much new code has had to be created and existing stuff modified. Some of those are still on the drawing board and let me say some issues have caused aspirin sales to skyrocket!! :-O. We're getting there.

There are some timetable issues which are being fixed as they are discovered. These are trains that travel via Moss Vale North Fork being incorrectly timetable at Moss Vale Jn (which only applies to traffic NOT traversing the fork). Most have been fixed. Could you please provide actual train ID's that are still doing this. Thank you.

Lyn-Greenwood in post 111409 said:
2) Trains approaching Stockinbingal from Milvale call in with the message "Driver of [none] to Junee Control. We're approaching Stockinbingal.", but they do this as they are passing through Stockinbingal. Train 1PS6 is an example.

For info, I'm running v1.2.1 of the sim/timetable and v4.8.2 of the Loader.
I also picked this up during my own testing. Mantis 21494.

Not fat ..... fluffy!! (G Iglesias)
Log in to reply
The following user said thank you: Mossy Dan
Version 1.2.1 issues 26/08/2018 at 00:59 #111501
Mattyq
Avatar
247 posts
Lyn-Greenwood in post 111418 said:
Here's another issue I've come across:

Trains routed from Signal MV26 and MV24 to signal 34.6 (Moss Vale North Fork & Branch towards Unanderra) always stop at the Branch LOS board and ask for permission to pass it.
I get this issue too but intermittently. Could you please provide a game save when this occurs. Mantis 21495.

Lyn-Greenwood in post 111418 said:
This one's a query, but it may be an issue: Why do trains departing Cootamundra P1 towards Junee always ask for permission to depart from signal CA69, which is a main aspect signal?
This particular call was used as a test bed and has been removed. That said, a similar one will be implemented at Goulburn for Up trains. Because regional interlockings do not provide for TRTS or "Stopping" and "Express" selector buttons, signals located between a platform and a level crossing are simply held at red for stopping trains. The Driver then rings to report ready to depart so the NCO can clear the signal. The call will be generated even if the signal has been cleared in advance.

Not fat ..... fluffy!! (G Iglesias)
Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 26/08/2018 at 15:51 #111520
Lyn-Greenwood
Avatar
157 posts
Mattyq in post 111500 said:


First of all, thank you for your feedback.

I just want to take this opportunity to support Geoff's statement that not all bugs identified will be fixed in the very next release or the one after (etc). Given this is "the new world" (for SimSig) and quite a departure from UK practice, much new code has had to be created and existing stuff modified. Some of those are still on the drawing board and let me say some issues have caused aspirin sales to skyrocket!! :-O. We're getting there.

There are some timetable issues which are being fixed as they are discovered. These are trains that travel via Moss Vale North Fork being incorrectly timetable at Moss Vale Jn (which only applies to traffic NOT traversing the fork). Most have been fixed. Could you please provide actual train ID's that are still doing this. Thank you.
Working in this "new world" must involve a very steep learning curve, but you're certainly getting there. I obviously don't expect issues I report to be fixed immediately, but not having access to the Mantis system, I only know that a reported issue has been noted when I see a reply to my post. What I report may be a sim issue, a timetable issue or not even an issue at all, so it is important that a feedback reply is made, which is what you've done above. Thanks for that.

As requested, here's a list of trains using the North Fork that still reference Moss Vale Jct. in the timetable: TM71 (2 instances), TM72 and TM93.

I've found some issues with trains departing Medway Quarry and also with some trains at Berrima Jct. which I suspect are probably timetable issues. I'll get some more information regarding these and make a new post.

I've just seen your reply re the Branch LOS Board and will take a snapshot when/if I get the error again. I've had it with TM98 on the North Fork and 8924 on the Branch. I'll set up a simple test timetable with just those 2 trains so I can easily run it several times to see if the issue only occurs now and again.

Log in to reply
The following user said thank you: Mattyq
Version 1.2.1 issues 27/08/2018 at 22:07 #111591
Lyn-Greenwood
Avatar
157 posts
Hi Mattyq,

I've got more information regarding the problem where trains sometimes incorrectly stop at the Moss Vale Branch LOS Board. I've cobbled the standard timetable to start off with 3 seeded trains. One scheduled to use the North Fork (TM98), one to use the Branch (8926) and one that is already in the Calwalla area (8924). All 3 are scheduled to head away from Moss Vale. I believe it is the position of the latter train that causes the problem.

I've found that if 8924 is seeded at signal 34.6, given clear signals and TM98 immediately routed behind it, then TM98 always stops at the Branch LOS Board. However, if 8924 is seeded at signal 34.28 (Calwalla Loop) and the same procedure followed, then TM98 behaves correctly. I've run both these scenarios several times and always got the same results, which is good news. I've included some saves in the attached zip file.

When I cleared the signals for 8926 (and there's another issue with that, see later), then 8926 behaved correctly, but when it was routed behind the correctly behaved TM98, then it stopped at the LOS Board! It looks to me that it could be the position of the train in front that is critical.

One thing I have noticed is that for trains coming off the Fork, the TD steps to the LOS Board, but coming off the Branch it steps straight to the berth between signals 34.6 and 34.6Dist, which might be significant.

I've attached a zip file with 2 timetables and 4 saves for you to play with. The filenames should be self-explanatory.

Now for two issues that came to light during my "testing".

1) If I try and set a route from MV44 to MV24 I always get "No overlap available", even when I've set and locked the points. However, if I first set a route from MV24 to 34.6, I can then set the route from MV44 to MV24, and when I cancel the advance route, the overlap for MV44 appears in Yellow. Is this how it's supposed to work?

2) If I bring a long train from MV17 to MV26 and hold it there to allow a train to come off the Branch, then the overlap for MV17 never times out (even when I cancel the route from MV17) and I get "Points locked normal by another route" when I try to set a route from MV26. Is this correct behaviour?

I'll report on the Medway Jct and Berrima Jct timetable issues when I've got more details.

I hope the above info is useful to you.

Post has attachments. Log in to view them.
Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 28/08/2018 at 05:28 #111603
Mattyq
Avatar
247 posts
Lyn-Greenwood in post 111520 said:
Mattyq in post 111500 said:


First of all, thank you for your feedback.

I just want to take this opportunity to support Geoff's statement that not all bugs identified will be fixed in the very next release or the one after (etc). Given this is "the new world" (for SimSig) and quite a departure from UK practice, much new code has had to be created and existing stuff modified. Some of those are still on the drawing board and let me say some issues have caused aspirin sales to skyrocket!! :-O. We're getting there.

There are some timetable issues which are being fixed as they are discovered. These are trains that travel via Moss Vale North Fork being incorrectly timetable at Moss Vale Jn (which only applies to traffic NOT traversing the fork). Most have been fixed. Could you please provide actual train ID's that are still doing this. Thank you.
Working in this "new world" must involve a very steep learning curve, but you're certainly getting there. I obviously don't expect issues I report to be fixed immediately, but not having access to the Mantis system, I only know that a reported issue has been noted when I see a reply to my post. What I report may be a sim issue, a timetable issue or not even an issue at all, so it is important that a feedback reply is made, which is what you've done above. Thanks for that.

As requested, here's a list of trains using the North Fork that still reference Moss Vale Jct. in the timetable: TM71 (2 instances), TM72 and TM93.
Thank you. I'll have our expert timetable division sort that out.

Lyn-Greenwood in post 111520 said:
I've found some issues with trains departing Medway Quarry and also with some trains at Berrima Jct. which I suspect are probably timetable issues. I'll get some more information regarding these and make a new post.
I may save you some time here....

Medway: There is a known issue with trains departing Boral Marulan booked to dwell at Medway Jn and in doing so, stops across the main line points. This is being addressed. Mantis 21506

With regards to Berrima Jn, a few issues have been identified here.
1. Trains heading south stopping across the main line points, similar to Medway Jn.
2. Some trains required to set back behind BJ82 then proceed to Picton don't fit between BJ82 and the LOS.

With regard to item 2, there are a number of considerations here. We are double-checking train lengths but it is highly likely they are correct. For trains that are overlength, you have two choices. Easiest option is to route the train onto the down line to reverse behind BJ84. The train will accept the road and reverse correctly.

If traffic movements on the Down line preclude reversing a train there, the second option is to employ "Yard Working" rules. For this specific scenario, this would mean routing the train onto the Up line to the LOS, locking and blocking between the LOS and signals MV60/62 to prevent a conflicting move then calling the train past the LOS. I have personally tested this method and the train will reverse once in clear of BJ82.

With absolutely NO disrespect to non-Australian players, I would imagine the "Yard Working" concept might take a little getting used to. There is a passage about Yard Working in the manual.

Not fat ..... fluffy!! (G Iglesias)
Last edited: 28/08/2018 at 05:31 by Mattyq
Reason: None given

Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 28/08/2018 at 05:37 #111604
Mattyq
Avatar
247 posts
Lyn-Greenwood in post 111591 said:
Hi Mattyq,

I've got more information regarding the problem where trains sometimes incorrectly stop at the Moss Vale Branch LOS Board. I've cobbled the standard timetable to start off with 3 seeded trains. One scheduled to use the North Fork (TM98), one to use the Branch (8926) and one that is already in the Calwalla area (8924). All 3 are scheduled to head away from Moss Vale. I believe it is the position of the latter train that causes the problem.

I've found that if 8924 is seeded at signal 34.6, given clear signals and TM98 immediately routed behind it, then TM98 always stops at the Branch LOS Board. However, if 8924 is seeded at signal 34.28 (Calwalla Loop) and the same procedure followed, then TM98 behaves correctly. I've run both these scenarios several times and always got the same results, which is good news. I've included some saves in the attached zip file.

When I cleared the signals for 8926 (and there's another issue with that, see later), then 8926 behaved correctly, but when it was routed behind the correctly behaved TM98, then it stopped at the LOS Board! It looks to me that it could be the position of the train in front that is critical.

One thing I have noticed is that for trains coming off the Fork, the TD steps to the LOS Board, but coming off the Branch it steps straight to the berth between signals 34.6 and 34.6Dist, which might be significant.

I've attached a zip file with 2 timetables and 4 saves for you to play with. The filenames should be self-explanatory.
This is excellent! Thank you. I won't, hoever, be able to get to this for a couple of days.

Lyn-Greenwood in post 111591 said:
Now for two issues that came to light during my "testing".

1) If I try and set a route from MV44 to MV24 I always get "No overlap available", even when I've set and locked the points. However, if I first set a route from MV24 to 34.6, I can then set the route from MV44 to MV24, and when I cancel the advance route, the overlap for MV44 appears in Yellow. Is this how it's supposed to work?
Known issue. Mantis 21411

Lyn-Greenwood in post 111591 said:
2) If I bring a long train from MV17 to MV26 and hold it there to allow a train to come off the Branch, then the overlap for MV17 never times out (even when I cancel the route from MV17) and I get "Points locked normal by another route" when I try to set a route from MV26. Is this correct behaviour?
Known issue. Mantis 21363

Lyn-Greenwood in post 111591 said:
I'll report on the Medway Jct and Berrima Jct timetable issues when I've got more details.

I hope the above info is useful to you.
Hopefully I've addressed these in message #111603 (above).

Thanks for all the work you've put into this.

Not fat ..... fluffy!! (G Iglesias)
Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 28/08/2018 at 14:49 #111613
Lyn-Greenwood
Avatar
157 posts
Mattyq in post 111603 said:


With regards to Berrima Jn, a few issues have been identified here.
1. Trains heading south stopping across the main line points, similar to Medway Jn.
2. Some trains required to set back behind BJ82 then proceed to Picton don't fit between BJ82 and the LOS.

With regard to item 2, there are a number of considerations here. We are double-checking train lengths but it is highly likely they are correct. For trains that are overlength, you have two choices. Easiest option is to route the train onto the down line to reverse behind BJ84. The train will accept the road and reverse correctly.

If traffic movements on the Down line preclude reversing a train there, the second option is to employ "Yard Working" rules. For this specific scenario, this would mean routing the train onto the Up line to the LOS, locking and blocking between the LOS and signals MV60/62 to prevent a conflicting move then calling the train past the LOS. I have personally tested this method and the train will reverse once in clear of BJ82.

With absolutely NO disrespect to non-Australian players, I would imagine the "Yard Working" concept might take a little getting used to. There is a passage about Yard Working in the manual.
I actually used "Yard Working" at Berrima Jct for the very scenario you mentioned above and it worked a treat, just don't forget to put the necessary protection in! I had a train waiting BJ84 to enter Berrima Boral Sidings, so had to use the Up for one departing the sidings bound for Picton.

Here's a few things for your timetable experts:

1) Trains 2232 & 2234 don't have the Berrima Reversing point in their timetables.

2) There's possible contention at Berrima Jct between trains SN20, 2232 and 1233. The latter should also use BJ84 instead of BJ82 as the Berrima Jct platform no., although this doesn't seem to affect what actually happens. Of course, this may all get sorted when the Berrima Jct issues are fixed.

3) Train 1223 should use the Down Refuge at Moss Vale, not the Up Refuge.

That's all for now, but I may have some more for you as I get further through the timetable.

Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 30/08/2018 at 08:51 #111648
Mossy Dan
Avatar
6 posts
Thanks all for the excellent work on the sim so far. I imagine the work would be immense and of course realise it will be a work in progress for a while yet.

Few issues I've had along with the Berrima Junction and Medway Junction stopping issues;

1) up trains requiring a crew change at Moss Vale, if routed to the down refuge they do in reality pull down to MV44 to get in clear of MV67 at the back. Currently the sim stops them at MV54 (regardless of indication) which means they foul the down main. Not sure if it's possible in the sim to have them stop at both MV54 and MV44?

2) I had equipment failures with the level crossings at Mittagong and Burradoo. The first time I played from my last save point, 1295 stopped at all the protecting signals and I authorised it to check the line and pass at stop before it called. This happened for all 3 signals concerned. After making a few stuff ups at Coota, I replayed from the same save point and with the same crossing failures, 1295 called for one signal but didn't hear from it again despite the failures still being present. The second time, 1221 behind it did call from some signals or I granted it permission once it stopped at all 3 signals despite 1295 ahead not doing so. Have attached a save. I'm only a newby so maybe 1295 just passed the signals itself (which I know it can) but I don't even remember seeing it stop at them.

3) I've got a track circuit failure between CA05 and 263.4 signals at Jindalee on the up main, MB7 and MB9 were both given shunt signals on CA08 and they continued without calling, I thought they may call at the EYL to obtain permission. I know they don't really need to so may not be a bug but maybe all ok.

Thanks again,
Danny

Post has attachments. Log in to view them.
Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 30/08/2018 at 09:22 #111649
Mossy Dan
Avatar
6 posts
i think there's a timetable error with 2232, it is not tabled to reverse at BJ82/84/86 so it sits across the up main blocking SN20. Sorry if this has already been reported.
Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 01/09/2018 at 07:44 #111728
Mossy Dan
Avatar
6 posts
Couple of other things;
1) 150.2 signal shouldn't have a medium indication, it stays at caution till MV88 is showing medium or clear. If MV88 is at caution so is 150.2.

2) 8922 shows as a length of 669m and Calwalla loop is 690m but 8922 doesn't fit as I found out.

Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 01/09/2018 at 08:10 #111732
Meld
Avatar
473 posts
Mossy Dan in post 111649 said:
i think there's a timetable error with 2232, it is not tabled to reverse at BJ82/84/86 so it sits across the up main blocking SN20. Sorry if this has already been reported.
It doesnt matter if its been reported already - its handy to have duplicate reports incase one gets missed earlier in a thread

Log in to reply
The following users said thank you: Mattyq, Mossy Dan
Version 1.2.1 issues 02/09/2018 at 09:21 #111771
Mattyq
Avatar
247 posts
Thanks Lyn and Danny for all your help. We'll attend to these in more depth as time permits.
Not fat ..... fluffy!! (G Iglesias)
Log in to reply
The following user said thank you: Mossy Dan
Version 1.2.1 issues 06/09/2018 at 04:56 #111908
Mattyq
Avatar
247 posts
Mossy Dan in post 111648 said:
Thanks all for the excellent work on the sim so far. I imagine the work would be immense and of course realise it will be a work in progress for a while yet.

Few issues I've had along with the Berrima Junction and Medway Junction stopping issues;

1) up trains requiring a crew change at Moss Vale, if routed to the down refuge they do in reality pull down to MV44 to get in clear of MV67 at the back. Currently the sim stops them at MV54 (regardless of indication) which means they foul the down main. Not sure if it's possible in the sim to have them stop at both MV54 and MV44?
Thanks, Dan. This is very helpful!

Location "Moss Vale signal MV44 has been created and all associated paths. The timetable will be left as is. If a player chooses to run the train up to MV44, then they will have to do a quick TT edit in sim. This is the easiest fix and offers best player flexibility. Happy for further feedback on this.

New location will be available next release and details added to the manual then.

Mossy Dan in post 111648 said:
2) I had equipment failures with the level crossings at Mittagong and Burradoo. The first time I played from my last save point, 1295 stopped at all the protecting signals and I authorised it to check the line and pass at stop before it called. This happened for all 3 signals concerned. After making a few stuff ups at Coota, I replayed from the same save point and with the same crossing failures, 1295 called for one signal but didn't hear from it again despite the failures still being present. The second time, 1221 behind it did call from some signals or I granted it permission once it stopped at all 3 signals despite 1295 ahead not doing so. Have attached a save. I'm only a newby so maybe 1295 just passed the signals itself (which I know it can) but I don't even remember seeing it stop at them.

3) I've got a track circuit failure between CA05 and 263.4 signals at Jindalee on the up main, MB7 and MB9 were both given shunt signals on CA08 and they continued without calling, I thought they may call at the EYL to obtain permission. I know they don't really need to so may not be a bug but maybe all ok.

Thanks again,
Danny
Both 2 & 3 above relate to the same issue and is being worked on. Mantis 21374.

Not fat ..... fluffy!! (G Iglesias)
Log in to reply
The following user said thank you: Mossy Dan
Version 1.2.1 issues 01/02/2019 at 02:12 #115244
Airvan00
Avatar
95 posts
In the issued timetable, some SNxx up trains have platform 1 specified for Picton (which is the correct platform) however simsig calls that as “wrong platform” No issue with trains that have a blank platform in the timetable.

Similarly, some trains that reverse at MV74 have a platform of “STH” in the timetable. The Validator will also suggest adding “STH” however again calls “wrong platform. No issue with trains that have a blank platform in the timetable.

Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 02/02/2019 at 05:16 #115265
Airvan00
Avatar
95 posts
Both the Berrima shunter and Pacific National (PN) control can give permission
to enter the Berrima Boral Sidings. Is this correct?

Log in to reply
Version 1.2.1 issues 03/02/2019 at 07:36 #115285
Airvan00
Avatar
95 posts
I’m not sure if this is a timetable or sim problem.

TM71 (Port Kembla to Tahmoor Colliery) is timetabled to halt briefly at Moss Vale Nth Folk. It does halt but also changes from Dn to Up so when it proceeds it goes back towards CALWALLA.

The workaround is to abandon the timetable before it gets to Nth fork and it will halt at MV28. When it’s time to proceed, reinstate the timetable with the next location BERRIMA JCT

Post has attachments. Log in to view them.
Log in to reply