Page 1 of 1
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 27/03/2017 at 20:37 #94162 | |
Tange
9 posts |
On real IECCs lots of functions are there for SPADS. Would be cool if you could set random drivers to SPAD (say one in a session of up to X hours, but you dont know when it will happen) then have SGRCs and emergency stop messages etc. On Flight SIMs you have random failures and those scenarios are the most fun, trying to figure out the mystery/critical actions. Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 27/03/2017 at 20:57 #94164 | |
headshot119
4869 posts |
SGRCs already exist in several simulations. It's a SimSig policy not to reproduce incidents such as SPADs, one unders, etc. "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 |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 11:23 #94177 | |
|
Richard42
45 posts 
|
SPAD I know, but SGRC??? (please, for those of us who aren't railway acronym experts!)
Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 13:45 #94180 | |
|
joshuapopelewis
55 posts |
As much as random SPADs etc. would increase realism, the potential outcomes of real-SPADs can be fatal. This reason alone justifies why they shouldn't be implemented in any way. Simulating (What could be) a catastrophic accident. To put it into perspective, the Flight Sim you mention, may include failures (As I very well know) but it doesn't include things such as....explosions...of whatever nature, due to the element of loss of life only things that are/can be manageable and YOU are in control, you have decided what actions to take (and even stop the failures, using the magic buttons) With SimSig, you are not, if something was to happen a SPAD or whatever, there is nothing you can do, you couldn't stop it, control it in any manor therefore it would be the simulator itself making up the situation. As in real-life the signaller can't control these actions. The stress a real signaller would go through if he saw such an incident happen, is unimaginable so replicating that would be highly frowned upon by a lot of people. "There's a right way, a wrong way and the 'railway'" Last edited: 28/03/2017 at 13:48 by joshuapopelewis Reason: Spelling errors Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 13:50 #94181 | |
|
WesternChampion
173 posts |
JamesN in post 94178 said:Richard42 in post 94177 said:See the glossarySPAD I know, but SGRC??? (please, for those of us who aren't railway acronym experts!)Signal Group Replacement Control Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Richard42 |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 14:17 #94182 | |
|
Tange
9 posts |
That's fair enough, I wasn't aware of this policy. Personally I wouldn't have a problem with it (its a bunch of 1's and 0's on a screen) and I've grown up watching movies and playing games filled with 'people' dying. I know it's not real. As someone has stated, there are SGRC's on some simulations, but these seem pointless without unexpected events (as far as I am aware we don't get bridge strikes, tree falls or anything like that). Simsig is still great though without this kind of thing, and agree real life SPADs must be scary. With the advent of E420 there will be even more tension. We had a POP group activation (basically when a SPAD occurs at one signal, others in the area are immediately placed to danger) but on Bristol Stoke Gifford when a rescue loco moved into a section and the signaler had forgotten his SPAD inhibit, the POP group went off and put a signal ahead of a train on another line to danger, which then SPARed (signal passed at red). Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 14:20 #94183 | |
|
RainbowNines
272 posts |
A couple of experienced simmers have run simulations where they've simulated extra situations, such as fires near the railway, train faults, etc. They add a great amount of complexity to a sim, and they require novel solutions or interaction with the sim you wouldn't have in "normal" circumstances. They pop up now and then so keep an eye out. (I agree with SimSig's policy about SPADs - they're not just a flippant occurrence; the resulting impact on people (whether or not there's a collision etc) can be significant. A relative of mine had a signal protecting a junction go back on him with a couple of thousand tons up his rear, he said it was one of the scariest experiences of his career) Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 14:20 #94184 | |
|
joshuapopelewis
55 posts |
Yes I understand that in other games & movies yes this occurs, but considering some of our user base is actual signallers then it wouldn't be best practise I guess. You are right, SimSig is great! "There's a right way, a wrong way and the 'railway'" Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Tange |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 14:30 #94185 | |
jc92
3690 posts |
You can make a train SPAD via the F11 screen, including the option for the driver to call and report (unless its been removed. Im not in front of the game right now)
"We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 14:51 #94186 | |
|
joshuapopelewis
55 posts |
You can authorise a Train to go past a red signal, this is used for times were there is (for example) track-circuit failures, so he can go and inspect. Or even more likely, failed signal, when they revert to red and wont change aspect. This feature should be used where and when required, signallers can authorise a train past a red signal, other examples: - Train going to rescue a broken-down train. - Engineering Train within a possession. - Piloting moves (If you are in a yard etc.) "There's a right way, a wrong way and the 'railway'" Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 15:30 #94188 | |
|
Tange
9 posts |
I'm not really set on SPADs, just thinking that the most interesting bits of flight SIMs are reacting to failures (otherwise the autopilot just does everything for you). I do like the failures of equipment and was thinking of other ways to enhance this. Obviously there are cool scenarios etc, and SIMSIM is MUCH better than the official train simulation game on Steam. On that, you literally just run on greens at all times, doing basically nothing except stopping at stations.
Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 15:47 #94189 | |
Steamer
3985 posts |
Tange in post 94188 said:Obviously there are cool scenarios etc, and SIMSIM is MUCH better than the official train simulation game on Steam. On that, you literally just run on greens at all times, doing basically nothing except stopping at stations.Sounds like you need to download some community content for it. Never made the jump to Railworks/Train Simulator 20xx, but certainly for MSTS the community-created content is far better than what's supplied by default. "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 |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 16:56 #94190 | |
Mikehax
32 posts |
joshuapopelewis in post 94186 said:You can authorise a Train to go past a red signal, this is used for times were there is (for example) track-circuit failures, so he can go and inspect. Or even more likely, failed signal, when they revert to red and wont change aspect.Joshua Just a quick point of 'rulebook'. A signaller cannot authorise a engineering train past a red signal WITHIN a possession. That is strictly the domain of the PICOP. The signaller can only after obtaining permission from the PICOP, authorise a train past a red signal to enter the T3. Mike Signaller - Speke Junction Log in to reply The following users said thank you: headshot119, joshuapopelewis |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 28/03/2017 at 17:40 #94193 | |
|
joshuapopelewis
55 posts |
Good spot, didn't remember that! Yes forgot about PICOP land rules, apologies!
"There's a right way, a wrong way and the 'railway'" Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 29/03/2017 at 15:05 #94206 | |
|
clive
2789 posts |
Tange in post 94182 said:Cambridge has bridge strikes (I can still recall the indignation the first time a user had one) and pilotman working. Edinburgh has airport trip wires. Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 29/03/2017 at 20:41 #94213 | |
|
GW43125
495 posts |
Out of interest, would it be possible to add buttons to the right click menus on the trainlist to simulate emergency and controlled stops? Would be useful to help simulate incidents, breakdowns etc.
Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 30/03/2017 at 05:15 #94218 | |
|
Hawk777
386 posts |
GW43125 in post 94213 said:Out of interest, would it be possible to add buttons to the right click menus on the trainlist to simulate emergency and controlled stops? Would be useful to help simulate incidents, breakdowns etc.It’s already available. In the Incident Control Panel, on the Trains tab, tick Pause Train. Log in to reply |
| SGRC's plus driver emergencies 30/03/2017 at 14:59 #94223 | |
|
GW43125
495 posts |
Hawk777 in post 94218 said:GW43125 in post 94213 said:"Pause" and "stop" are not the same thing. Pause just pauses it as-is, so when I'm trying to simulate a breakdown once it's fixed it's immediately doing a ton.Out of interest, would it be possible to add buttons to the right click menus on the trainlist to simulate emergency and controlled stops? Would be useful to help simulate incidents, breakdowns etc.It’s already available. In the Incident Control Panel, on the Trains tab, tick Pause Train. I meant "stop" as in decelerate to zero at a given rate then pause, so they have to accelerate again once done. Changing the max speed of the train takes ages to come down Log in to reply |