Page 1 of 1
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 08:59 #51396 | |
richard_d
3 posts |
Hello, I seem to be getting this message quite consistently when an up class 7 freight passes Bedwyn. Is this a bug? Richard Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 10:03 #51398 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2084 posts |
If the train has the correct headcode and you get a message to say otherwise then most likely yes. Do you know exactly which signal this happens at? Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 12:10 #51406 | |
Peter Bennet
5402 posts |
Frome memory there's a bit of core that does something with the Bedwin terminaters. Can't recall what but it may have been wrongly transcribed into the loader format. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 13:33 #51412 | |
|
broodje
184 posts 
|
And does that code check for the first 4 characters of the description, or all characters? If it is the latter then I can understand some trains slip through with the wrong headcode. (eg first 4 are correct, but the suffix is missing for example)
Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 19:57 #51443 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5402 posts |
" said:And does that code check for the first 4 characters of the description, or all characters? If it is the latter then I can understand some trains slip through with the wrong headcode. (eg first 4 are correct, but the suffix is missing for example)That's the answer - it compares currentTrain (unlimited characters) with the Berth contents (4 characters) - easy fix. To be honest I'm not sure why. I guess it's to tell you that a terminator has the wrong TD going to the turnback but there's no penalty or anything. Do we need it? Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 20:06 #51444 | |
|
broodje
184 posts
|
There used to be a small penalty when you send a incorrectly described train to reading. I believe it was 10 points or so. I'm not sure if it is needed, but if it stays I'd say it should only check the first 4 characters in the description.
Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 20:13 #51445 | |
|
AndyG
1842 posts |
" said:To be honest I'm not sure why. I guess it's to tell you that a terminator has the wrong TD going to the turnback but there's no penalty or anything. Do we need it?Think the penalty was for not interposing the correct TD (1Kxx or 2Kxx) for a ECS (5Kxx) out of the turnback into Bedwyn for the next working. I can only help one person a day. Today's not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look too good either. Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 20:36 #51446 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5402 posts |
" said:" said:But there is no penalty imposed, I guess I could add one.To be honest I'm not sure why. I guess it's to tell you that a terminator has the wrong TD going to the turnback but there's no penalty or anything. Do we need it?Think the penalty was for not interposing the correct TD (1Kxx or 2Kxx) for a ECS (5Kxx) out of the turnback into Bedwyn for the next working. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 21:46 #51450 | |
|
broodje
184 posts
|
From what I know from when I had the code there was not just a penalty for the empty stock at Bedwyn, but just all incorrectly described headcodes. I'm not entirely sure, but was there not also a check on the boundary between the westbury and reading panel (I mean where the real boundary is)
Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 22:56 #51456 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2084 posts |
It would seem odd to single out Bedwyn for a message of that nature at all. A more appropriate penalty would be for incorrectly describing a train to an exit point - after all in reality to incorrectly describe a train to a fringe box would demand a phone call to get the other box to interpose the correct one, whereas at Bedwyn they would just change it themselves with no harm done. Not sure if I was working the panel I would be that bothered about changing it to a 5xxx then to another 2xxx. Would probably just send it to the siding and then change it to its onward working there before sending it back out again - that is certainly what I do in SimSig in this and similar circumstances. I would only bother with the 5xxx TD if it was going to sit there for a while. Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 12/11/2013 at 23:16 #51458 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5402 posts |
It's actually testing Berth UW64 so a train leaving UP Bedwin misdescribed. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 13/11/2013 at 10:03 #51470 | |
|
kbarber
1743 posts |
" said:It would seem odd to single out Bedwyn for a message of that nature at all. From what I saw of panel working, people only bothered with descriptions for that sort of short local move if it was going to affect someone else's area or if it was going to sit somewhere for a considerable time and might thus get overlooked. (That latter criterion was a bit like the proverbial piece of string too - if you had the sort of memory that could recall every train movement for several hours, you might never put in such a description.) After all, before these clever modern train describer thingies came in you just had to remember what each train was from the bell signal with which it had been described to you. Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 13/11/2013 at 12:52 #51477 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2084 posts |
It may be that they have to change the description so that the ECS moves report correctly onto TRUST.
Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 14/11/2013 at 10:32 #51511 | |
|
kbarber
1743 posts |
" said:It may be that they have to change the description so that the ECS moves report correctly onto TRUST. I am rarely speechless (my partner will readily confirm)! But if you have to alter descriptions just to put a set of cars in & out of a reversing siding these days...??!!!!! Not for the first time, I think getting out in 1994 was the best move I ever made! Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 14/11/2013 at 11:55 #51517 | |
jc92
3690 posts |
" said:" said:I doubt those shunts are registered on TRUST at all, if they are then I can only second keiths comment.It may be that they have to change the description so that the ECS moves report correctly onto TRUST. "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 14/11/2013 at 13:30 #51521 | |
|
Zoe
254 posts |
" said:
They are showing in the NR live data: Quote: Looking at the TD data it can be seen: Quote:
Last edited: 14/11/2013 at 13:46 by Zoe Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 14/11/2013 at 13:48 #51522 | |
|
TomOF
452 posts |
" said:From what I know from when I had the code there was not just a penalty for the empty stock at Bedwyn, but just all incorrectly described headcodes. I'm not entirely sure, but was there not also a check on the boundary between the westbury and reading panel (I mean where the real boundary is)Prior to Reading going to TVSC Westbury's last berth was at UW93 after the connection to the cement factory, after which any TD would step to the last sent berth. I don't have my modern day photos to hand right now. Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 14/11/2013 at 14:28 #51524 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2084 posts |
" said:" said:Most shunts that are booked tend to be registered on TRUST, although I do not think they are always reported by Signalmen - although if they are not they will stay in the train list until cancelled off by someone. I know this is what used to happen quite often at Banbury." said:I doubt those shunts are registered on TRUST at all, if they are then I can only second keiths comment.It may be that they have to change the description so that the ECS moves report correctly onto TRUST. It is easiest for the Signalmen in areas with automatic reporting just to change the TD and be done with it. Log in to reply |
| Incorrectly described train at Bedwyn 20/01/2015 at 11:46 #68168 | |
|
bubblegut
15 posts |
I had this with stone trains from merehead when the fourth number changes in the header code when they leave whites crossing. You can see the change if you right click the header code or go to the train list. Log in to reply |