Upcoming Games


Full list
Add a game

Upcoming Events

Who's Online

gazman321, Soton_Speed, kaiwhara, waucott, d233, agsieg (6 users seen recently)

What are the chances

You are here: Home > Forum > Wishlist > Simulation wish list > What are the chances

Page 1 of 1

What are the chances 13/02/2022 at 02:26 #145181
Guts
Avatar
458 posts
Is there any chance of The Harrogate Line to be added to York North/South in the same vein as Manchester North got an extension to Rochdale and Litteborough.

I think it would be decent addition to the Sim, allowing up another 6 more signallers in a Host, and more importantly, chaining to Leeds East/West to complete the link.

I personally believe it would still be possible to be played as a single player, plus there is ARS on the main York North/South section. It's not a massively busy line and there are still extra trains (in the 2009 timetable at least) which terminate/depart Harrogate, such as the services to KX.

It could/should be possible to fit to the left of options, at the top of the sim screen, facing back towards Leeds East/West, ie Horsforth - Popppleton (reading left to right).

Just a humble suggestion. I don't know if actual plans, TC's, signals are even available, I just thought it would be a worthy addition.

Last edited: 13/02/2022 at 02:26 by Guts
Reason: None given

Log in to reply
What are the chances 13/02/2022 at 13:33 #145191
jc92
Avatar
3467 posts
Unable to comment on the likelihood, but it would make a fine standalone sim, with the option for chaining, rather than an extra.

The current service pattern (covid excepted) is an hourly through train, an hourly knaresborough and an hourly semi fast to harrogate, with a bi hourly LNER service so a fair bit of action to be had.

"We don't stop camborne wednesdays"
Log in to reply
What are the chances 16/02/2022 at 01:26 #145222
Guts
Avatar
458 posts
I have to disagree. That’s not busy at all
Log in to reply
What are the chances 16/02/2022 at 07:25 #145226
jc92
Avatar
3467 posts
Guts in post 145222 said:
I have to disagree. That’s not busy at all
I dont recall saying it was busy, only that it was suitable as a standalone sim. Besides which, not everyone wants to run a sim thats incredibly busy and there are existing "steady" sims like hunts Cross which run on their own, but can always be chained as an extra panel if needed.

"We don't stop camborne wednesdays"
Log in to reply
What are the chances 18/02/2022 at 19:24 #145258
Guts
Avatar
458 posts
Agreed but Hunts Cross is busy enough in my opinion and facilitates a join between two major sims.

It’s a bit different to a branch that serves local stations between two existing sims, ie. if Harrogate didn’t get made, none of the Sims would miss it, it would just be a piece that could have been, or might have been.

I do think every area that is possible to be created should be, but the Harrogate line isn’t urgent or essential and adding it to York North/South would be a nice to have.

I just think it would give the Sim that bit more. It would make Leeds and York even more connectable.

For me a person who regularly plays Chained, sometimes up to 5 different Sims, I’d rather it be added than having to have another Sim that I’d have to keep switching to, rather than scanning on an already open Sim

Just my humble opinion. I’ve got 22yrs of Signalling experience so I enjoy the greater areas and challenges.
I’m not trying to deny a newer person of the chance of a smaller sim either.

Last edited: 18/02/2022 at 19:25 by Guts
Reason: None given

Log in to reply
What are the chances 18/02/2022 at 22:19 #145259
bill_gensheet
Avatar
962 posts
Also as noted it is a pure clockface most of the time (*). That would suit those liking to deal with disruptions but not to working the service fairly clean where it could get a bit repetitive.

* unless anyone has the special train details for Tour de France day (5 July 2014).
Now that *would* make it a busy sim !

Log in to reply
The following user said thank you: Guts
What are the chances 19/02/2022 at 09:50 #145261
ajax103
Avatar
953 posts
Could a compromise be made with regards to the Harrogate loop tho with it being both a single SIM as well as being part of York North South in much the same way that Royston is available both as a single SIM but is also available on the current paged version of Cambridge?

Eg it would be added to either Leeds East West or York North South not both and also be available on its own so you could run York North South and Harrogate together or Leeds East West and Harrogate together.

I am aware it is not ideal but could it be considered as a compromise to the OP's idea above?

Log in to reply
What are the chances 19/02/2022 at 11:26 #145262
Guts
Avatar
458 posts
ajax103 in post 145261 said:
Could a compromise be made with regards to the Harrogate loop tho with it being both a single SIM as well as being part of York North South in much the same way that Royston is available both as a single SIM but is also available on the current paged version of Cambridge?

Eg it would be added to either Leeds East West or York North South not both and also be available on its own so you could run York North South and Harrogate together or Leeds East West and Harrogate together.

I am aware it is not ideal but could it be considered as a compromise to the OP's idea above?
I like this too. It would be interesting and could even be in the same vein as the Derby Lines on Staffordshire, an option to have on or not.

Log in to reply
What are the chances 19/02/2022 at 12:35 #145263
ajax103
Avatar
953 posts
Guts in post 145262 said:
ajax103 in post 145261 said:
Could a compromise be made with regards to the Harrogate loop tho with it being both a single SIM as well as being part of York North South in much the same way that Royston is available both as a single SIM but is also available on the current paged version of Cambridge?

Eg it would be added to either Leeds East West or York North South not both and also be available on its own so you could run York North South and Harrogate together or Leeds East West and Harrogate together.

I am aware it is not ideal but could it be considered as a compromise to the OP's idea above?
I like this too. It would be interesting and could even be in the same vein as the Derby Lines on Staffordshire, an option to have on or not.
Indeed, it could be added to the right of where Gascoigne Wood panel is although I can see it's a tad far for users to see trains coming I could say that it is equally hard for people at the far left of the sim to see what is happening at the far right of the screen but thankfully we have it as a scrolly sim.

It could be added in the same vein as the Derby lines on Staffordshire but then again it would depend on a developer being available.

Log in to reply
What are the chances 19/02/2022 at 12:42 #145264
Meld
Avatar
993 posts
The issues about adding an additional section to an existing sim would invalidate all the current TT's available, All the TTs for Manchester North had to be redone from scratch and fully retested.

Derby Lines were put in during the early development of Staffordshire so TTs included the services straight away, so testing them was part of the whole process

To add the Harrogate loop to York would involve completely redoing all the timetables from scratch, which makes older user supplied TTs no good, of which there will be more TTs to be broken.

Therefore the only option would be for a standalone Harrogate loop sim that chains at both ends.

Passed the age to be doing 'Spoon Feeding' !!!
Log in to reply
What are the chances 19/02/2022 at 16:03 #145267
bill_gensheet
Avatar
962 posts
Meld in post 145264 said:
The issues about adding an additional section to an existing sim would invalidate all the current TT's available,
....
To add the Harrogate loop to York would involve completely redoing all the timetables from scratch, which makes older user supplied TTs no good, of which there will be more TTs to be broken.

Therefore the only option would be for a standalone Harrogate loop sim that chains at both ends.
It could be done using the 'era' arrangements.

That way all existing timetables would run on 'Era 1' (No Harrogate) while 'Era2' was 'with Harrogate' and would as you say need revised timetables.

Bill

Log in to reply
The following user said thank you: Guts
What are the chances 19/02/2022 at 16:06 #145268
Stephen Fulcher
Avatar
1826 posts
That would be complicated for timetables as well as you’d need to duplicate each one for whether or not the loop was enabled.
Log in to reply
What are the chances 19/02/2022 at 16:47 #145269
Dionysusnu
Avatar
472 posts
Maybe this is a terrible idea, but could it be done with a sort of "portal" piece of track, that checks the train's timetable, and forwards it if it contains Harrogate locations, and otherwise treats the train as dropping off the sim like it would do now.
In the other direction, it would act as a portal, sending any trains coming from Harrogate, as well as generating new trains like the current entry point.
Then again, seems like it should just be a chain with a new sim.

Log in to reply
What are the chances 19/02/2022 at 20:10 #145271
bill_gensheet
Avatar
962 posts
Dionysusnu in post 145269 said:
Maybe this is a terrible idea, but could it be done with a sort of "portal" piece of track, that checks the train's timetable, and forwards it if it contains Harrogate locations, and otherwise treats the train as dropping off the sim like it would do now.
In the other direction, it would act as a portal, sending any trains coming from Harrogate, as well as generating new trains like the current entry point.
Then again, seems like it should just be a chain with a new sim.
That is almost how 'era' works as seen from the outside. Timetable knows the era, and sets the portal (invisible points). If 'Era 1 = no Harrogate' was the default it would simply work for all existing timetables.

Anyone wanting to write a 'with Harrogate' timetable just sets it for 'Era2'. The edit to extend trains would not be much work if done as spreadsheet xml on the Harrogate line source, and still quite possible starting from the whole WTT file.
Equally there is no compulsion to produce both.

While some like chains for multiplayer, are many single players going to want to run with added chaining ? I don't, as I'm single screen.
Even with the better tools about now, creating chaining timetables is a lot more faff vs a one-sim, and one sim does avoid doing the re-entrant rules to play unchained.

How many more of these simpler passing box 'glue' areas are there that might benefit from a similar approach ?

Bill

Log in to reply
What are the chances 19/02/2022 at 20:18 #145272
headshot119
Avatar
4424 posts
bill_gensheet in post 145271 said:
Dionysusnu in post 145269 said:
Maybe this is a terrible idea, but could it be done with a sort of "portal" piece of track, that checks the train's timetable, and forwards it if it contains Harrogate locations, and otherwise treats the train as dropping off the sim like it would do now.
In the other direction, it would act as a portal, sending any trains coming from Harrogate, as well as generating new trains like the current entry point.
Then again, seems like it should just be a chain with a new sim.
That is almost how 'era' works as seen from the outside. Timetable knows the era, and sets the portal (invisible points). If 'Era 1 = no Harrogate' was the default it would simply work for all existing timetables.

Anyone wanting to write a 'with Harrogate' timetable just sets it for 'Era2'. The edit to extend trains would not be much work if done as spreadsheet xml on the Harrogate line source, and still quite possible starting from the whole WTT file.
Equally there is no compulsion to produce both.

While some like chains for multiplayer, are many single players going to want to run with added chaining ? I don't, as I'm single screen.
Even with the better tools about now, creating chaining timetables is a lot more faff vs a one-sim, and one sim does avoid doing the re-entrant rules to play unchained.

How many more of these simpler passing box 'glue' areas are there that might benefit from a similar approach ?

Bill
I won't go into too much detail right now, but that isn't the case, all existing timetables would flag up an era incompatibility warning and would need to be redone regardless.

As a development team, we learnt an awful lot when we took the decision to extend the Manchester North simulation. A lot of lessons where learnt, and it's probably not something we'd look to do again in a hurry.

If Harrogate was ever to be developed it would almost certainly be as a separate simulation. Quite a nice one too, it's an interesting area, and plenty of shunting at the start and end of the day to spice things up.

"Passengers for New Lane, should be seated in the rear coach of the train " - Opinions are my own and not those of my employer
Log in to reply
What are the chances 21/02/2022 at 11:11 #145290
Guts
Avatar
458 posts
That's a shame to hear it would be a separate sim.

I made my plea I guess. Thanks

Log in to reply