Page 1 of 1
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 17/12/2022 at 07:25 #149389 | |
drew
69 posts |
I'm offering this timetable, my first effort at writing one for SimSig (or anywhere else, really) for testing and evaluation by anyone brave or foolhardy enough to attempt it. I've enjoyed SimSig Moss Vale with the default timetable and would like to thank everyone responsible for creating it. However, after enough runs through any timetable, you might get to wanting something a bit different. I did, and I happened to have a copy of the State Rail Authority of New South Wales, Southern Division working timetable, Book 1 (passenger) and Book 3 (freight), commencing May 31st 1987. Could it be made to work in SimSig? How hard could it be? Fools rush in, etc. So, 1987 was a bit different from 2018, when SimSig came to Moss Vale. There was a lot more infrastructure and people to do work (sometimes) on the railway. And it was still "The Railway" at that point, a NSW government monopoly statutory authority, vertically integrated and monolithic. For our UK friends, think British Rail in the 1980's, only on a state rather than national basis. History aside, there's quite a bit of signalling infrastructure missing today that the 1987 railway was still using merrily. So, I've had to compromise and make do a bit. I've also had to make stuff up. The WTT is only the core, predictable working. It's missing the limestone and cement working centred out of Berrima Cement Works, and the coal pages. There's just not much traffic on the Illawarra Mountain. The grain terminal at Port Kembla Inner Harbour won't open until 1990, and all the export wheat goes to Rozelle, on Sydney Harbour. The WTT lacks all the ad-hoc freight, notable the domestic "mill wheat" working, and local workings bringing export wheat traffic into Cootamundra for forwarding to Sydney. Educated guesses were also made about shunting traffic around Moss Vale itself. If anyone has better info or was there and can demonstrate the more authentic path, I'm all ears. Not all of the infrastructure that made it from 1987 into SimSig Moss Vale works as one might wish it to, either. I've found and reported (and kind people like Bill Gensheet have been good enough to investigate and raise tickets for) a fair number of things that don't work as intended in the sim. Not all the sidings we'd like to refuge our relatively modest 1987 trains in are as long as they should be according to the manual. Harden goods loop, Moss Vale Up Refuge, and the arrival road at Berrima Junction are notable examples (Harden cruelly so). There are also ground frames that don't connect to other locations in timetables, reversing points that don't work, and stations that don't register as passing locations, which limits our options to use the surviving infrastructure in a meaningful way. That didn't matter for the 2018 timetable, those things weren't used and all the trains these days are too long to put away most places. But in 1987 it's an issue. Fingers crossed these issues can be addressed one day and I can add some additional (fun?) 1987 style activities. There's a lot of ground frame use required for the 1987 timetable. More trains visit more yards and sidings, more often, compared to the default timetable. I think you get used to it. You'll often have to let a train come to a stand and time out the overlap before proceeding on shunt signals to ground frames and into yards. "Right click on the normal indication light of ground frame releases to open the pop up window" is your new friend. And handsignals, don't forget those. I think it's often fiddly, but you'll pick it up, and ATRC et al have rationalised and voluntary redundancy'ed us to this point, so it's up to you to do the hard work. The sim is still in 2018, so the people you have call on the phone will have their current day titles. Pretend the train order working is electric staff (token) working and you're good to go. The train numbering is weird. Passenger train numbering should make sense pretty quickly, it's very close to current practice. The freight train numbering is at an interesting point in it's development. We're just after the "arbitrary three digit number that everyone just understood" era, and just before the 1988 change to add priority to the number. The first digit is point of origin, based on the intra-state area numbering of today. So the old 401 south on the down out of Sydney (Enfield drivers cringe!) is 1401. We're nowhere near the current numbering practices where it would be 1233 or similar. Interstate trains (there are quite a few) re-number at the border (to or from NSW intrastate numbers and the Victorian numbering scheme), so there are no 4SM2's or 1MB7's. It was thankfully last digit, odds down, evens up. They weren't completely primitive in 1987. Is anyone still interested after that spiel? Lower expectations and then try to surprise, I say. You can expect trains to run bit late or early, don't expect to get 100%. There are a few conflicts but they're often like that from the WTT, probably because they had more and different sidings and yards to use at certain places. Many trains go into yards at one end and then continue on out the other end once they've transacted their business. There are rules to keep them from multiplying when running late. There are also rules to keep late trains from passing themselves coming the other way at loading and unloading points, delays may manifest. Tahmoor coal trains come from Picton on the down and return on the up once loaded, just as the builders of the balloon loop intended. Their numbers might be more 1988 than 1987 but I'm not sure. I've got several trains running that would become either/or in actual practice. There are a couple of optional however many % of the time trains in there too. I'm also using a decision for the first time for one shunt at Moss Vale. I'm presuming it's later in the year, the fruit is ripening, and the wheat is coming in. We get to run more trains that way. It's still 1987 though, the next timetable in early 1988 changes the train numbering considerably. It's probably mostly a Tuesday, but don't hold me to it. I'd welcome feedback and comments, preferably via the forum (or private message if you're shy). I've run though several cycles of noting and fixing bugs but there will still be stuff, I'm sure. I'm a bit time poor but I'll do my best to reply, explain, and/or fix stuff. Go at it! Post has attachments. Log in to view them. Log in to reply The following users said thank you: latello99, ozrail |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 17/12/2022 at 19:06 #149402 | |
flabberdacks
582 posts |
Good on you mate. Thanks for persevering through all the issues. Some of the things that don't work look like they'll require quite a bit of work/rework to sort out, but we'd really like to see it working for you. Moss Vale isn't my sim (I'm working on the short north and another Sydney metro sim at the moment), but hopefully a few of us can put our heads together and sort it all out. Cheers Log in to reply The following user said thank you: drew |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 19/12/2022 at 08:23 #149426 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
I figure that while there’s only the default timetable, that doesn’t require any tweaking to the sim, there’s no real reason to expend time and effort squashing bugs. Having another timetable like this one at least puts fixing stuff on the radar. I totally understand that these things are a labour of love and there are competing priorities. Thanks to everyone who has helped get us to where we are.
Log in to reply The following user said thank you: flabberdacks |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 21/12/2022 at 18:25 #149493 | |
bill_gensheet
1318 posts 
|
All good fun Drew. The train 'notes' are very useful as well as the TT description. Compiling a list of minor fixes. However, and maybe more sim related..... Had this odd semi-Mexican at Tarago - looks like trains can get stuck in the off sim loop setup ? Sent SR39 to Tarago with train order as usual 14:18:56 CRN Train Order (Canberra line) has been given CRN requested for 2440 with SR39 still in sim - should I not have agreed, or should they not request ? Anyway I gave permission, their area after all. Relevant sim messages below 14:41:44 CRN SW Controller: Permission granted for 2440-1 to enter 14:42:45 2440-1 has entered: Tarago 14:43:35 2440-1 waiting at red signal TGO_UM 14:44:46 SR39 waiting at red signal TGO_DH - and then both trains on phone to me ! Fixed by PSAD on SR39 14:52:37 Train SR39: Authorise driver to pass signal at stop 14:53:55 SR39 arrived at Tarago 9 min(s) late Have 14:40 and 14:51 saves - will raise Mantis if required Bill Log in to reply The following user said thank you: drew |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 22/12/2022 at 01:52 #149506 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
Cheers Bill. I haven’t encountered that issue but I may have exacerbated it a little. 2440-1 was struggling to get into the yard at Goulburn on time, so I think I recently tweaked its entry time by 4 minutes. That may have increased the likelihood of the Tarago standoff. I’m considering not yarding 2440 at Goulburn, it only gets 23 minutes at Goulburn, it can sit on the platform or in the up refuge and wait for relief, if there’s nothing else happening. It could enter at the original time. Might update the consist though. But it sounds like that standoff could happen pretty easily anyway, if a down train is in the section (possibly running late) and another is due to enter at Tarago. I would have done what you did and trusted the sim to work it out. Dunno. Log in to reply |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 22/12/2022 at 10:44 #149512 | |
|
flabberdacks
582 posts |
Do you know what activities it did in the yard at Goulburn? Wouldn't be much in 23 minutes. I'd recommend the up refuge, myself, unless there's evidence for something else. With a 'regulation stop' in the refuge, in case the player has delays and wants to keep it going. Last edited: 22/12/2022 at 10:46 by flabberdacks Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 22/12/2022 at 11:47 #149513 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
The yard had a full time shunting engine, and presumably ample manpower. I would stretch plausibly to adding or swapping locos, maybe adding locos and pre examined loading. It would be plausible to add any empty fuel tanks on hand, from Goulburn or points south. It’d be all hands on deck though. I think the crew of 2440 would almost certainly have been relieved at Goulburn, so I’ll use that to regulate the departure time somewhat, whether in the refuge or on the platform. I may do all three options and use a decision to pick one. That would keep it interesting. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: flabberdacks |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 23/12/2022 at 09:36 #149529 | |
|
kbarber
1712 posts |
flabberdacks in post 149512 said:Do you know what activities it did in the yard at Goulburn? Wouldn't be much in 23 minutes. I'd recommend the up refuge, myself, unless there's evidence for something else.From my experience at Willesden, quite long enough - provided the train is appropriately marshalled - to drop off and attach. Front portion pulled off and dropped in an empty road by the train engine. Meanwhile the yard pilot that's been waiting on the new rear portion shunts them on to the rear. Buckle up, brake test and away. It might even be nominally the same train but in fact it's only the front portion that runs through, all done by the train engine. Hook off the portion that's going forward, shunt back on to the assembled train on an adjacent road; again, buckle up, brake test & away. 20 minutes should do the job either way. Log in to reply |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 24/12/2022 at 16:05 #149560 | |
|
bill_gensheet
1318 posts
|
Got through it :-) ...... (badly....) thanks Drew. The notes on each train were very useful along the way. Bugs noted below, my comments with ===>. While this looks like a long moan list, please do not take it that way most are pretty trivial and only upset a few trains or had to resort to a bit of manual 'driving' from the F2 menu. Really only the issues around 2432 are fatal to that train. Bill --------------------- From TT_analysis.txt file *** ANALYSIS SUMMARY *** Errors (1): DL49[136.1]: Invalid timetable data ===> v0.2 has simplified SL49/HL49 to ease the Goulburn south end shunts Warnings (19): 1423: Dep/pass time at Binalong earlier than previous location time ===> Retime, but not sure which timing is out 1907-1: Dep/pass time at Medway Jct earlier than previous location time ===> problem is dep time at Medway jn. Also should it be pass ? 1907-2: Dep/pass time at Wallendbeen earlier than previous location time 1907S: Dep/pass time at Wallendbeen earlier than previous location time 1913: Dep/pass time at Medway Jct earlier than previous location time 2432-1: Final location should not have a departure time specified 2432-1[53.1]: Length 336m not the same as next working 2432-2[54.1] at Moss Vale (336m vs 339m) ===> adjust a length 3910: Cootamundra West not valid to have set down with a passing time 3914: Dep/pass time at Harden earlier than previous location time HL20: Reverses at Goulburn Roundhouse Jct but has "passing time" ticked ===> Use Stop-Go set down type instead of pass SL13: Final location should not have a departure time specified SL-3: Bargo out of order in timetable SL-3: Dep/pass time at Bowral earlier than previous location time ==> typos in timings, not sure which are wrong SL49: Final location should not have a departure time specified SL51[161.1]: Remainder too short after dividing DL51[137.1] at Moss Vale ==> DL51 wrong train type SR37: Dep/pass time at Bargo earlier than previous location time ST16: Dep/pass time at Picton earlier than previous location time ST22: Dep/pass time at Moss Vale earlier than previous location time Warnings (4): Rule 2011 must appear after 2429-23 has been formed; error: unknown train 2011. >>> ? >>> Doubt this will work anyway, 'has been formed' is triggered by JOIN / NEXT activities not entries. Rule 3970-2 must appear after 3870 leaves the area; error: unknown train 3970-2. >>> Typo - 3870-2 Rule D432-2 must appear after D432-1 leaves the area; error: unknown train D432-1. Rule D432-2 must appear after D432-1 leaves the area; error: unknown train D432-2. >>> To use rules on a UID it is $D432-2 etc From running timetable: 3908-1 3908-2 no rule at Yass Jn yard. Entered before exit. Headway from Picton seems too tight or is this a real WTT error ? 1911-1437-2T11 ST15 - 1491 - 1409 Several shunts have arrive - pass set up. You can now use 'set down types' for this, suggest a dwell time plus setdown type 'stop-go'. SL53, the DL & HL etc D432-1 and -2 1497S Demondrille Suggest a dwell time plus setdown type 'stop-go' or 'set down variable' ST22 time at Exeter wrong reports 38 E - 09/21 then back to time. 3488 got 48 early into Goulburn. Should it stop somewhere, Harden, once sim can deal with GF B ? Just tempting folks to get it wrong and block Goulburn awaiting crew .. ;-) 1403 stop at Cootamundra - regulating stop ? crew change ? tea break Wait 10 ? Rang out straight away on my run Just tempting folks to get it wrong ... ;-) Rule 3870 to 3870-2 at Moss Vale BSS. Typo in rule Harden looping - can use down main - 3120m to HN10/HN19 eg train 3406 Might be better than in and out of Yass Jn unless trains call HL20 needs arr/dep at G42 to reverse, not pass. Then manual intervention as per notes Goulburn Roundhouse Jn (42) is a through route not reversal. HL20, 13 and similar trains need 'G42/G38 rev' as a location, HL12 similar, manual rev in UR line [Requested 'G42/G38 rev' location - Mantis 37350] Else could run to Roundhouse line and re-enter SL49/HL49/DL49 amend once the G38/G42 rev location is provided I edited this to see how it would work out. Also needed manual rev at G59 I tried Nth Goulburn 'Plat 64' but not OK for reversals north end. 2432-1 did not step up at Towrang - same as [Mantis 37203] Train needs F2 timetable edit once in sim to set next location Medway jn so it picks up locations to make the divides happen at Moss Vale 2432-1 Moss Vale stop needs to be set to 'Far End' and 'Adj +300'. This allows the portion space to join and still be behind MV54 DL51 wrong platform Moss Vale Cannot pass P2 Moss Vale to run round stock in P2 DR is OK, or no platform specified 3910 'speeding' - 60k train doing 80k on main line after Cootamundra West call. Is category change intended ? Quite a few empty trains are weight = heavy. is this OK ? eg 2x44+21 NPEF empty (C) is shown as 'heavy' Several wheat/grains too Not checked timing outcomes. Sim notes say a preference to use Yass and Goulburn P1. SL-1 wanted Yass P2 Seems same for all/most down passenger trains Seeds: If you put the seeding offset to 100 not 15 it means seed trains are not at a stand, chance to clear controlled signals before trains stop. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: drew |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 24/12/2022 at 21:50 #149564 | |
|
bill_gensheet
1318 posts
|
Mantis 37373 for the Mexican at Tarago For sim author / update editor - completed all the Mantis reports from my end. Last edited: 24/12/2022 at 22:22 by bill_gensheet Reason: None given Log in to reply The following user said thank you: drew |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 25/12/2022 at 01:38 #149586 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
Thanks Bill! There’s lots of good stuff there to work through, post Christmas. Some things I can answer now. The tightly spaced Picton entries are as per the WTT, or follow similar practices. They’ve got them 5 minutes apart in some cases. In the sim the second train ends up stopped at a signal, but they seems to sort themselves out. Drivers would know they were following something and drive accordingly to avoid stopping. Not sure that it’s worth going the defensive driving rules route. I’ve never had any luck getting that to work, but I’m sure it’s possible. 3488 has vexed me too. It’s a very slow path in the WTT and the train is already set as Very slow / Heavy. I can’t really get it to go any slower unless I drop the max speed. I could make it a 65km/h runner out of Cootamundra and see if that helps. I guess this is not an unusual issue when trying to match sim performance to a real world TT. I’d kind of like an option to set a power to weight ratio. That leads into the “empty train heavy” issue. If the empty train gained excessive amounts of time I’ve nobbled them by upping the weight and/or lowering the acceleration. The default timetable does the same at times, I believe. Empty can be heavy depending on what loco power you have compared to the train, although the two 44’s with the empty hoppers would move along quite nicely. The sim drives faster than real world expectations in most cases. For 1403 stopping at Cootamundra for 10 minutes (and there are other instances, I recall one at Moss Vale on the down), I think you’re close to the money with the tea break. I believe they’ve timetabled a 10 minute CRIB break as per the Stable Rostering Code. Drivers could pull up on the main line within a window of time mid shift and have a meal break. Some faster trains had a particular agreed arraignment to avoid this, and not every crew would necessarily exercise the condition every time. But that’s what I think it’s about. The 3910 speeding thing, this could be an issue. The train enters from Temora as a 65km/h runner because the track is class 2 until you get to the main line. (Off the top of my head, the issue is the axle load of the 81 class). I do a consist swap at Coota West to raise the speed to 80. This doesn’t seem to reflect in the info box. That could be a sim issue, or it could be the way I’ve done the description. I entered everything manually rather than using the “template” description feature, mostly because I didn’t understand or trust it. I’ve done other consist swaps but they’re not as evident because the trains enter at their top speed and then drop (and in one case revert back). Platform preferences, I’ve pretty much ditched current practice deliberately. I’m going to say they were a lot less worried about making people walk over stairs and such in 1987. The platforms are assumed to be better maintained and fit for purpose. I still put everything through platform 1 at Coota, because I’m less sure what was going on there at the time. Seed offsets, that’s a great idea, will adopt. Can we go more than 100? I assume that’s metres. Love the feedback. Merry Christmas! Log in to reply |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 25/12/2022 at 11:00 #149622 | |
|
bill_gensheet
1318 posts
|
drew in post 149586 said:Thanks Bill! OK, leave alone. drew in post 149586 said:
Light / normal / heavy and the acceleration rates should do that, but would be based on working OK for typical UK train and track parameters. Think 2000/3000hp on 500/1200/2000T and 1:80. May be a case for adding a category 'superheavy' if this is a consistent problem on AUS sims. In any case daily train weights will vary, just SimSig drivers prefer going flat out. Again UK timetables being passenger dominated the station stops tend to mask a lot of performance issues drew in post 149586 said: Suggest going for: Dwell 10 or 20, or 45 if you think it is meal break Fixed arrive and depart times from WTT Set Down as 'Set Down variable' that should give roughly that behaviour. drew in post 149586 said:
It is just how the sim shows it. If it makes the timing work, then leave it. drew in post 149586 said:
OK, but Yass is the wrong way round - or the platform numbers got mixed up in the sim drew in post 149586 said:
Yes, m. There is some upper level where it goes a bit cranky, especially if it takes you out the back of the track circuit. 300m should still be fine, and ensure the signal is outside the SimSig drivers 'view'. drew in post 149586 said: Merry Christmas to you too, I'm definitely sticking to indoors eating though ! Bill Log in to reply The following user said thank you: drew |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 29/12/2022 at 12:36 #149774 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
I've fixed most of the identified issues. Mostly typos in entering passing times. Fixed the rules that were broken, usually because I made the rule and then changed the train or UID, but didn't come back for the rule. Gave 3488 the 65km/h treatment. I've added a note to 2432-1 re: the Towrang bug, to let the user know to update the location past Towrang on leaving Goulburn. I've gotta go back and update the other Goulburn Dn Yard Nth trains to do the same. I plan to experiment a bit with Cuningar and/or Galong silo shunts (providing notes with advice about the Galong bug), and maybe add those into the timetable before reissuing it for further testing. Has anyone else had a go at running it? If so, how did you go? Post has attachments. Log in to view them. Last edited: 29/12/2022 at 12:37 by drew Reason: None given Log in to reply The following user said thank you: bill_gensheet |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 29/12/2022 at 13:52 #149778 | |
|
flabberdacks
582 posts |
So long as you've left yourself a list of bodge fixes to undo when the actual problems are resolved!
Log in to reply |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 29/12/2022 at 23:41 #149787 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
flabberdacks in post 149778 said:So long as you've left yourself a list of bodge fixes to undo when the actual problems are resolved!I think I could get most of the toothpaste back in the tube. It would be a pleasant problem to have to deal with. Log in to reply |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 02/01/2023 at 11:04 #149915 | |
|
geswedey
192 posts |
Up to 2035 Same Mexican Standoff as expected, dealt with by going back to a save point and holding the Freight. otherwise OK
Glyn Calvert ACIRO Log in to reply The following user said thank you: drew |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 17/03/2023 at 09:49 #150842 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
I’m still working on the 1987 timetable. Fair to say it’s taking longer than anticipated. I’ve done a bunch of experimenting with timing trials for the various combinations of acceleration, weight and top speed options, to get sectional running times. It’s been tricky to then find the best combination to match the published timetable. I don’t think it’s ever going to match 100%, but it’s closer than when I started. Every time I run the timetable through, I find more things to fine tune. The plan is to get it well enough sorted for an initial release for the current state of the sim, and then revisit it if and when an updated version is developed to remedy some of the known issues. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: flabberdacks |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 30/03/2023 at 12:49 #150976 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
As I recently read in another forum, regarding projects, "at some point you have to shoot the engineers* and release a product". I've submitted a version 1.0.0 for upload. *No offense intended to any actual engineers. No engineers were harmed (or indeed consulted), etc. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Jsun |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 01/06/2023 at 07:34 #151998 | |
Bonan
52 posts
|
I'm running this timetable right now and have made it up to 08:45 wihtout any major issues so far, and been thoroughly enjoying it. One thing I just noticed, 3906 has a very low speed of 15 km/h from Harden to Picton. Any particular reason for this? If it had some sort of defect I would assume the faulty wagon would be shunted out of the train at the first suitable location. Swedish driver and part-time signaller Log in to reply |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 01/06/2023 at 07:58 #151999 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
Glad you’re enjoying it! I’ll have to look into 3906 and get back to you. It probably has a 15km/h consist for reversing moves, and possibly it’s got that allocated by mistake, or it failed to swap to the normal 80km/h consist at some point. It’s not supposed to do 15km/h going forwards on the main line, that’s for sure. Log in to reply |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 01/06/2023 at 09:36 #152001 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
So the second leg of 3906 out of Harden is UID 3906-2, due to enter Harden GF C at 0410. Its consist is “2x 81 + 34 NGTY loaded (15km/h)”. I put that in there because reverse movements or “propelling” is typically limited to 15km/h in NSW (10km/h over level crossings). Its first location after entering is “HARDEN REV @ SIG 24/26” and I’ve opted for 24 signal. It’s supposed to do a category change there to “2x81 + 34 NGTY loaded (J)” and run at (up to) 80km/h to Yass Jn yard. It does something similar at Yass Jn, appears in the yard at 06:30, reverses out with the 15km/h consist to YJ18 signal, does a category change to the regular (J) consist, and continues at 80km/h to Picton. If it’s not swapping categories, I’m not sure why not. I haven’t noticed it before. If it turns out to be an ongoing problem, I’ll change it to be the normal consist in either direction, we just won’t tell the powers that be that the drivers are over enthusiastic when reversing. Maybe edit the timetable for your game to the above mentioned “2x81 + 34 NGTY loaded (J)” consist, unless the slow running is to your liking? Log in to reply |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 01/06/2023 at 09:45 #152002 | |
|
bill_gensheet
1318 posts
|
You might be seeing this bug: https://www.SimSig.co.uk/Forum/ThreadView/54492?postId=149951 Train reports as the original (at entry) speed, but is behaving correctly. Is your 3906 doing 80 or 15 k's ? Quote: Mantis 37598 and shows fixed for next core code update Log in to reply |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 04/06/2023 at 17:36 #152071 | |
|
Bonan
52 posts
|
Another minor issue, might be due to me running the timetable with some delays to make things more interesting. 2555 enters early from Picton as stated in the notes, right in front of SL13. 2555 "shunts" at several stations, but as these boxes/ground frames aren't simulated it's impossible to move the train away from the mainline. Also, 2555 has "wait for departure" in its timetable so it will wait for the scheduled time, even when early. I think you can insert a custom dwell time, so the train waits for a certain time before departing regardless if it's early or late, but I'm not an expert. Also, you could add a rule so that 2555 can't leave Picton before SL13. The next train to leave Picton isn't until 12:39. Swedish driver and part-time signaller Last edited: 04/06/2023 at 17:36 by Bonan Reason: None given Log in to reply The following user said thank you: drew |
| Moss Vale 1987 Timetable for SimSig - for testing 05/06/2023 at 01:38 #152074 | |
|
drew
69 posts |
Yes, putting 2555 out in front of SL13 would be painful. I've just added a rule that says 2555 has to enter 7 minutes after SL13. That should keep things a bit more civilized in the event of late running. My implementation of 2555 is a workaround at best. In 1987 there were signal boxes at places like Bargo, Yerrinbool, Mittagong, and Bowral. 2555 could have been shunted clear of the main line for passing trains as required. We can't do that with the 2018 ARTC layout, so I had altered 2555's times to avoid any conflicts. There are a number of other trains that also had to be re-ordered out of Picton because they were tabled to go away at Bargo for a faster train to overtake. I take your point with the dwell times and I have added that to 2555's stops at Mittagong and Bowral. I'm OK with the wait for time if 2555 was early, but if it was late it wouldn't stay long enough to do the required work. I've submitted an updated version 1.0.2 with the 2555 and SL13 stuff. Also took out 3906's 15km/h entry to avoid the reload after save reversion to initial consist problem. I appreciate the feedback, thank you. Let me know if anything else interesting pops up. Log in to reply |