Page 1 of 2
| Performance analysis scoring 28/02/2016 at 16:00 #80918 | |
bugsy
1775 posts |
Hello everybody. I only discovered SimSig a little over 2 months ago, so I'm still a 'Newbie' and as such I have a question which relates to the scoring. I hope that you don't think I'm mad, but during each session I record the 'performance analysis' at 2 hourly intervals which gives me a target that I can try to better when running the same simulation again with the same scenarios set. My question is this. Generally speaking, would I be penalised more for sending a passenger train into an 'incorrect' or 'opposite' platform rather than delaying the train which can't be sent to the 'correct' platform because that is already occupied by a delayed train. I do understand that the degree of 'delay' has a bearing on the score, as does the alternative platform to which the train is sent, but, in a simulation, which would you say incurred the least penalty points? It may be that there isn't much difference. Would it depend on the particular simulation? Perhaps there is there no specific answer at all? However, I'd be interested in any comments. Thanks in advance. Bugsy Everything that you make will be useful - providing it's made of chocolate. Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 28/02/2016 at 16:29 #80919 | |
Peter Bennet
5402 posts 
|
Whether platforms are "alternatives" is set by the developer as is whether there is platform scoring at all. But the scoring is part of the core code where set and I don't know what that scoring is. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 29/02/2016 at 10:17 #80931 | |
WesternChampion
173 posts |
If you edit the timetable to amend the platform to the one you are planning to send the train into, you will not incur a penalty. Chris Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 29/02/2016 at 12:06 #80935 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5402 posts
|
Which is cheating: given that the reason for the score is because on inconvenienced passengers having to move platforms at the last moment. The "Alternative" is intended for relatively simple cross-platform changes. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 29/02/2016 at 13:31 #80937 | |
|
Sacro
1171 posts |
" said:Which is cheating: given that the reason for the score is because on inconvenienced passengers having to move platforms at the last moment. The "Alternative" is intended for relatively simple cross-platform changes.Of course this all depends on which station it is, and how far in advance you alter the timetable, some stations do not display platform numbers until several minutes prior to the train departing (e.g. Euston), and therefore people shouldn't be "expecting" a certain platform until then. Other stations are quite small and have good access between platforms and a platform alteration isn't a huge issue. Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 29/02/2016 at 17:28 #80940 | |
GeoffM
6377 posts |
Without going in to specifics, a train 2 minutes late but in the right platform will score slightly less than on time in an adjacent platform. It's all about balancing the impacts of timekeeping and shifting passengers en masse to another platform.
SimSig Boss Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 29/02/2016 at 21:02 #80943 | |
ozrail
197 posts
|
I'm told that in Sydney Australia authority must be obtained from Train Control to change platforms. Apparently they must inform staff who update mobile phone information about the platform changes. I believe most passengers would prefer to wait out a short delay then move to another platform. And don't forget about wheelchair passengers.
Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 29/02/2016 at 22:11 #80944 | |
|
GeoffM
6377 posts |
" said:I believe most passengers would prefer to wait out a short delay then move to another platform. And don't forget about wheelchair passengers.That's the purpose of the correct/adjacent/wrong platform type of scoring. The intermediate one is for situations like this where a cross platform change really isn't an issue for anybody. 
SimSig Boss Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 29/02/2016 at 22:51 #80946 | |
Steamer
3986 posts |
" said:" said:I think the good people of Denton would be annoyed if their one train a week didn't even use the correct platform!I believe most passengers would prefer to wait out a short delay then move to another platform. And don't forget about wheelchair passengers.That's the purpose of the correct/adjacent/wrong platform type of scoring. The intermediate one is for situations like this where a cross platform change really isn't an issue for anybody. "Don't stress/ relax/ let life roll off your backs./ Except for death and paying taxes/ everything in life.../ is only for now." (Avenue Q) Log in to reply The following users said thank you: JamesN, headshot119, Sacro |
| Performance analysis scoring 29/02/2016 at 22:56 #80947 | |
|
GeoffM
6377 posts |
41 minutes for the first sarcastic reply about the first decent picture I could find of an island platform... :dry:
SimSig Boss Log in to reply The following users said thank you: headshot119, tjfrancis, Steamer, Peter Bennet, JamesN, Humorist, andyb0607, GoochyB, Sacro, flabberdacks |
| Performance analysis scoring 01/03/2016 at 07:48 #80950 | |
|
WesternChampion
173 posts |
" said:Which is cheating: given that the reason for the score is because on inconvenienced passengers having to move platforms at the last moment. The "Alternative" is intended for relatively simple cross-platform changes.I respect your point of view, Peter, but I don't think it is cheating. Amending the timetable gives time for the pax to transfer to the correct platform before the train arrives. There may be no alternative to changing the platform if, for example, the booked platform is not accessible due to a points failure. A train just turning up on the wrong platform with no prior notice is rightly penalised. Chris Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Airvan00 |
| Performance analysis scoring 01/03/2016 at 09:12 #80951 | |
Dick
387 posts |
Instead of amending the timetable, how about an extra phone option to be able to phone station staff (or whoever needs to know) to alert them to a change of platform?
Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 01/03/2016 at 09:33 #80952 | |
|
kbarber
1743 posts |
Ee, when I were a lad... Platform changes (and sometimes all platforming) would be worked out between the bobby and the Station Inspector, with changes 'on the fly' according to conditions. At Marylebone, trains did have their booked platforms. If I recall rightly (it's a long time ago and my brain cell is distinctly rusty) there was a general pattern that Wycombe line trains used 1 & 2, while the Aylesburys went in 3 & 4. But things could - and did - change from day to day. The platforms could hold up to 12 cars, so if an 8 required fitters' attention and another 8 was arriving it would have to be replatformed (whereas if the demic were a 4 the incoming train could be platformed on top of it, provided it would be got out of the way fairly quickly; perhaps cue a quick stock swap, cooked up between the station supervisor and the diesel depot supervisor, with Control 'squared' after the event). If a points failure locked things up, arriving trains would be put in anywhere there was a space they'd fit, with the station supervisor being advised pretty much train by train what was planned (and there would be no attempt to keep units on their booked diagrams - again, Control and the Depot Supervisor would be squared afterwards). There was one memorable Monday afternoon, when I was supervisor at Barking, when an OHLE insulator at Fenchurch Street blew out at about 15:30 or 16:00. For a while, that left Fenchurch with just two platforms, but after a while (and a brief isolation - which further disrupted things) a third was restored to use. Consequently, the peak didn't really start until after 17:30 (whereas it was normally well under way by about 16:45, with the first really heavy trains hitting us at 17:00). That gave the Area Management team enough time to get themselves out to various critical locations, and the Traincrew Manager joined me at Barking. What the platforming was like at Fenchurch I cannot imagine (but I'm pretty certain no-one would've been bothering about scores of any kind even if they'd existed, they just wanted to get the punters away before there was a riot). The signalbox phoned each train down to me as it came on the describer and the Traincrew Manager immediately wrote out a set of special stop orders for all stations (regardless of what it was supposed to do) then personally handed them to the driver just to make sure there'd be no arguing. After all, we didn't want a riot at Barking either  Quite an afternoon; I'd just 'doubled back' off the Sunday night shift, but it went in a flash and I never had time to feel tired!
Log in to reply The following user said thank you: flabberdacks |
| Performance analysis scoring 01/03/2016 at 09:35 #80953 | |
postal
5265 posts |
As a starting point, the penalty is presumably applied because of the aggravation to passengers who are one platform having to move to another platform. In real life, this is only an issue if the original platform has already shown on the displays and annunciators. Until that time most of the prospective travellers will be milling around on the concourse and will then go to the announced platform so there is no mass migration from one platform to another which is what SimSig aims to penalise. In that sense SimSig is penalising the operator for platform changes which may have had no impact in real life. It is also difficult to sustain the "cheating" argument if there has been no impact on the passenger except for the change from turning left to turning right after passing through the gate line. However, if SimSig were to be realistic in handling the impact of platform changes there would have to be a whole raft of additional assumptions and code. Firstly the developer would have to assign a time interval between announcement of train and arrival for each station subject to platform alterations (or even for each individual train) which is an artificial concept in any event. Then the code would need to be written to discount any penalties if platform modifications in the TT took place in advance of the assumed announcement time. Finally this would all need to be documented so that points-chasers would know how late they could leave a platform change without incurring penalties. Seems an awful lot of work to create an artificial but maybe slightly more realistic points-scoring regime. Until then, those who are chasing points can edit the TT in the knowledge that what they are doing is no less artificial than the assumptions in the SimSig world and the rest can just carry on as they do now. Edit: Dick posted while I was typing. That looks an interesting idea “In life, there is always someone out there, who won’t like you, for whatever reason, don’t let the insecurities in their lives affect yours.” – Rashida Rowe Last edited: 01/03/2016 at 10:54 by postal Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 01/03/2016 at 13:37 #80957 | |
|
WesternChampion
173 posts |
I don't pay a lot of attention to the scores but I don't like getting penalties, as these indicate poor operating practice, e.g. for leaving level crossing closed for a long period of time. I consider it a courtesy to the (imaginary) station staff and passengers to inform them that the train in question will be arriving at a different platform. It seems to me that amending the timetable achieves the same thing as Dick's proposed telephone call option. Sometimes amending the timetable might involve omitting station stops altogether in order to recover time, so passengers at these stations would then be informed that their train had been, in effect, cancelled. Perhaps the message could be amended to add passengers and station staff to those who have been informed of the change?
Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 01/03/2016 at 16:38 #80967 | |
|
Dick
387 posts |
" said:It seems to me that amending the timetable achieves the same thing as Dick's proposed telephone call option.I just thought that a phone call was a simpler and more realistic option. Amending the timetable is effectively just the signaller telling himself to change platform rather than informing those that need to know. Just my thoughts. Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 01/03/2016 at 23:04 #80972 | |
|
WesternChampion
173 posts |
" said:" said:Perhaps the two could be combined in some way? It would probably be quite a bit of work to amend the phone call functionality to pick up calls to station staff to advise changes of platform. Could there be an option to add a call once the timetable had been amended? Currently, the driver (but no-one else) is automatically informed of a change of platform.It seems to me that amending the timetable achieves the same thing as Dick's proposed telephone call option.I just thought that a phone call was a simpler and more realistic option. Amending the timetable is effectively just the signaller telling himself to change platform rather than informing those that need to know. Just my thoughts. Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 02/03/2016 at 09:17 #80975 | |
|
kbarber
1743 posts |
" said:" said:" said:Perhaps the two could be combined in some way? It would probably be quite a bit of work to amend the phone call functionality to pick up calls to station staff to advise changes of platform. Could there be an option to add a call once the timetable had been amended? Currently, the driver (but no-one else) is automatically informed of a change of platform.It seems to me that amending the timetable achieves the same thing as Dick's proposed telephone call option.I just thought that a phone call was a simpler and more realistic option. Amending the timetable is effectively just the signaller telling himself to change platform rather than informing those that need to know. Just my thoughts. For 'Driver' read 'Driver and others concerned', I'd say. The time it takes to amend a timetable on the fly is probably akin to that spent on a phone call (particularly as, if there's a 'back row' in the box, one of the people there would be handling calls to stations etc). It may not look quite accurate but, in terms of workload, I reckon it's close enough to be acceptable. Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 20/03/2016 at 18:19 #81279 | |
Red For Danger
172 posts |
Just a quick question on this matter. If a train terminates at a particular station and is put into the wrong platform, do you loose 2 sets of score, ie one for the arrival, and then another for the new train identity that departs from the incorrect platform....?
Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 21/03/2016 at 09:59 #81285 | |
pedroathome
916 posts |
" said:Just a quick question on this matter. If a train terminates at a particular station and is put into the wrong platform, do you loose 2 sets of score, ie one for the arrival, and then another for the new train identity that departs from the incorrect platform....?I'm happy to be corrected here, but I think you just loose a correct platforming point thing on the ARRIVING service, and the outgoing isn't counted. Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 21/03/2016 at 15:35 #81290 | |
|
Jersey_Mike
250 posts |
" said:" said:Amending the timetable can be seen as a stand in for making the necessary calls in real life.Which is cheating: given that the reason for the score is because on inconvenienced passengers having to move platforms at the last moment. The "Alternative" is intended for relatively simple cross-platform changes.I respect your point of view, Peter, but I don't think it is cheating. Amending the timetable gives time for the pax to transfer to the correct platform before the train arrives. There may be no alternative to changing the platform if, for example, the booked platform is not accessible due to a points failure. A train just turning up on the wrong platform with no prior notice is rightly penalised. Not sure if anyone else here has ever used major a North American rail station, but because of the more flexible nature of our scheduling, tracks are not announced more than a few minutes before departure to avoid having to shift passengers at the last minute. There are "normal" tracks for certain trains, but in many cases the station staff will not post a track number until they see the route has been lined on their mimic board or there had been some communication with the dispatcher. To bring things full circle, when I have to amend a timetable in game I just delete the platform requirement all together. Why should simulated passengers have any better notification than I get in real life! Last edited: 21/03/2016 at 15:40 by Jersey_Mike Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 21/03/2016 at 16:33 #81291 | |
|
Lardybiker
771 posts |
" said:Ahhh, but in real life, passengers DO have access to the platform information. The platform information for multi-platform locations is written into the timetable (though it can be changed for operational reasons if required). Copies of the timetables are posted for passengers in the station concourse and on the platforms too so passengers are able to check what platform to normally go to to catch a certain train. The stations staff also have access to this information too so they can help passengers as required. In certain places there may also be a stopping pattern to the services so going to a particular destination meant you would know to use a certain platform. At Birmingham when I was a lad (and before anyone says, yes, that was some years ago so this is from memory!!), the London Euston-bound services, typically went through P2, or P3. While the north bound trains used P5 or P6/. The morning London Paddington service (which on many occasions saw a class 50 haul it which was unusual to see) used to use P1 and run around before it went back. And cross country HST's used to use P10 or P11. My train into Birmingham and the one home always used P12 (also used to be a class 31 and mark I vestibules, shows you how long ago it was!!). I agree that amending the timetable to change the platform is SimSig's equivalent for making the necessary calls and I certainly wouldn't call it cheating. I also wouldn't leave it blank either as that isn't helpful to passengers. At some point, someone has to tell them where there train is and the earlier they can be told the less problematic that is!!! Log in to reply |
| Performance analysis scoring 21/03/2016 at 17:37 #81292 | |
|
bugsy
1775 posts |
Lots of interesting points of view. In real life I would imagine that the majority of passengers would welcome a platform change in order to avoid a delay to their journey providing that they get a reasonable amount of notice regarding that change (and don't have to run), especially those on a tight schedule with a connection to make. Of coarse you could argue that these particular passengers should have caught an earlier service, but this may not have been possible. As far as SimSig is concerned, there's obviously a balance to be struck between the delay and the inconvenience. If you're wondering why I haven't responded/posted earlier, that's because I have been working my way through the forum pages reading the various postings from previous years. Very interesting. My very first question on the forum would have been answered had I read the SimSig User Guide and the relevant Manual. It's surprising how many others have asked a question and been given a reply as well as being politely advised to 'Read the Manual' It's really a must! Thanks everyone. Bugsy Everything that you make will be useful - providing it's made of chocolate. Log in to reply The following users said thank you: postal, AndyG, flabberdacks |
| Performance analysis scoring 21/03/2016 at 18:01 #81294 | |
|
GeoffM
6377 posts |
" said:Not sure if anyone else here has ever used major a North American rail station, but because of the more flexible nature of our scheduling, tracks are not announced more than a few minutes before departure to avoid having to shift passengers at the last minute.I have, plenty of times. With regard to "flexible nature of our scheduling", I think you mean "because platforms are not regularly scheduled" which - I have been told by real world dispatchers - makes it more difficult to understand what the schedulers were thinking, and causes delays when their second guess is wrong and conflicts arise. That said, the mass surge of passengers at, say, New York Penn is just as bad as at, say, Paddington when the platform is announced. NYP is perhaps worse than some because of the cramped concourse and narrow stairs/escalators down to the platforms. There is a neat solution on Metrolink (Los Angeles) where there are two or more platforms. Don't tell anybody. Delay the train when train arrives on the "wrong" platform and the conductor has to shift everybody to the correct platform, which may involve a long walk to the nearest grade crossing as most (sensibly) have a fence between the platforms. I don't think I've ever seen the customer information displays say anything other than the time. Access to Twitter or their website is a must in such situations so you can estimate which half hour your train might arrive in. " said: " said:It depends on the timetable. If the platform number is specified then it is scored, so if train A forms train B and both have a platform specified then score will be lost twice. If the outbound doesn't but the inbound does then only once. If train A just calls at, and continues beyond as A, then score will only be lost once and only if specified.Just a quick question on this matter. If a train terminates at a particular station and is put into the wrong platform, do you loose 2 sets of score, ie one for the arrival, and then another for the new train identity that departs from the incorrect platform....?I'm happy to be corrected here, but I think you just loose a correct platforming point thing on the ARRIVING service, and the outgoing isn't counted. However, there are plans afoot to improve the platform alterations. The plans are currently (subject to change): - Platforms defined in data already as "adjacent" have no time penalty - Each pair of platforms gets a change time defined by the developer, defaulting to 5 minutes if not defined. A "no timeout" can be specified, eg for termini (but devs should consider remote platforms, such as a change from platform 1-12 to 13/14 or vice versa at Paddington) - If the signaller (you) phones the station before that time period then the platform alteration will not be penalised, and the train will leave after its normal dwell time - If the call is within the timeout then the train will wait the remainder of the timeout (so if you phone 2 minutes before a 5 minute penalty, then the train will wait 3 minutes) but there would be no score penalty - If there is no phone call before the train's arrival then there is both the full time penalty AND platform change penalty. There is a bit more to it than that, single train, multiple train, corner cases, and suchlike, but that's the gist of what we're thinking at the moment. SimSig Boss Last edited: 21/03/2016 at 18:02 by GeoffM Log in to reply The following users said thank you: JamesN, flabberdacks, GoochyB, WesternChampion, Hawk777, RainbowNines, Gwasanaethau, Steamer |
| Performance analysis scoring 21/03/2016 at 21:38 #81298 | |
|
Steamer
3986 posts |
" said:" said:To clarify Lardybiker's post slightly, in the UK platform information is advertised on electronic displays around the station. There will normally be departure boards listing upcoming departures (including platform and either 'On Time' or the expected time if running late) at station entrances, waiting rooms, concourses and other strategic points. In addition, all platforms have at least one display showing the next train at that platform and its calling points. Some also show the destinations of the 2nd and 3rd trains at that platform underneath.Ahhh, but in real life, passengers DO have access to the platform information. The platform information for multi-platform locations is written into the timetable (though it can be changed for operational reasons if required). Copies of the timetables are posted for passengers in the station concourse and on the platforms too so passengers are able to check what platform to normally go to to catch a certain train. The stations staff also have access to this information too so they can help passengers as required. Station staff often have paper copies (known variously as a 'Simplifier' and 'Platform Working Book'  showing the planned platforms for each train, which also detail ECS movements. Printed platform information is generally kept away from passengers, because of course it can change for various reasons.
"Don't stress/ relax/ let life roll off your backs./ Except for death and paying taxes/ everything in life.../ is only for now." (Avenue Q) Log in to reply |