Page 1 of 2
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 05/06/2017 at 18:07 #95679 | |
StephenD
13 posts |
Although I’ve been thoroughly enjoying running the Peterborough simulation (.exe version), since I found this site some 6 weeks ago, I have struggled with the 1985 v7.21 timetable. Several of my problems have been due to inexperience but some have been the result of ‘invalid timetable data’ (as reported by the in-built analysis tool). I have been able to resolve many of these by making what I considered to be appropriate timetable changes. I do, however, have some outstanding issues, for which I am seeking help. ISSUE 1: 5S35 should enter from Peterborough Yard and consist of a Class 08 and 2 parcels coaches to be attached to the rear of 1S351 (Parcels service from Kings X to Edinburgh) in platform 3. The extended train should continue north as 1S352, leaving the Class 08 (now 0Z02) to return light loco to the yard. What actually happens is that 1S351 arrives ok (if a little early) but 5S35 doesn’t appear, so the join doesn’t happen and 1S351 remains in platform 3, resisting all my attempts to get it to move. Not surprisingly, the analysis tool reports that 5S35 has invalid timetable data and that 1S351’s joining train, i.e. 5S35, ‘got lost’! It also reports that 0Z02 is never used. I suspect that the invalid data on 5S35 may be the reference to ‘platform’ UT (based on similar problems with the Goods and Flyash lines), but I have no idea where it should be routed to. Obviously, after exiting the yard, the train has to pass through the station and stop at a location from where it can reverse into platform 3 and join to 1S351. Then presumably, 1S352 will depart leaving 0Z02 in the platform. I would be grateful if someone can suggest how to achieve this in a prototypical fashion. ISSUE 2: The following scheduled moves are conflicting, insofar as they all require to use the Goods Line: 6M253 (Tallington – Mountsorrel) is due to arrive at 15:53 and depart at 17:55* 7R471 (Peterborough East – Ripple Lane West) is due to arrive at 17:13 and depart at 17:28* 8E59 (Derby – Whitemoor) is due to arrive at 17:30 and depart at 17:45 * The locos from both of these trains run round to facilitate a reversing movement. Clearly, all three trains can’t be accommodated on the Goods Line, in accordance with the timetable. Is it possible that they only run on certain days or that 6M253 uses another location to run round? (The Working Timetable for freight services between May and September 1986 shows 6M25 as a Wednesday only service arriving at Peterborough West Sidings at 15:55 and departing at 16:20, the loco having run round in the meantime). ISSUE 3: Similarly, the following scheduled moves are conflicting, insofar as they all require to use platform 5: 7R431 (Kilnhurst West – Ripple Lane) is due to arrive at 17:31 and depart at 17:52 2K26 (Cambridge – Doncaster) is due to arrive at 17:32 and depart at 17:39 0H05 (York – March) is due to arrive at 17:42 and depart at 17:45 I realise that these last two issues may be calling into question the validity of the supplied timetable but I really can’t see how all of these movements can be accommodated. Hopefully, someone will be able to enlighten me. Many thanks in advance. Stephen Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 03:07 #95684 | |
BarryM
2158 posts |
This 1985 timetable is not valid for the current System files. Peterborough.exe has been updated to Peterborough.sim requiring the Loader to run it and is available in the Download/Official software/ (Donationware). You need the sim to be able to update the timetable (WTT) and validate it correctly. ISSUE 1: 5S35 tt missing its 2nd line, insert location Peterborough S UF UF. The now 3rd line needs an activity to detach 0Z02 at rear end. Insert it between J: 1S351 and N:1S352. To be continued Barry Barry, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Last edited: 06/06/2017 at 05:15 by BarryM Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 11:19 #95686 | |
58050
2659 posts |
If your that interested in playing a Peterborough 1985 timetable I'm currently working on one for the new Peterborough scrolly sim which will also chasin to the King's Cross summer 1985 timetable I've already released. Yes when Kurt did these 1985 timetables way back when they were good, but the ones I'm writing will be far more accurate as I'm not convinced by any means that he had all the relevant data to produce an accurate represenattion of trin formations & platforms used judging by the number of differences I spotted in the Jing's Cross 1985 timetable compared with the actual station working book for that period. All being well Peterborough 1985 tt could be released within about a month from now.
Log in to reply The following users said thank you: KymriskaDraken, BarryM |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 13:16 #95687 | |
|
StephenD
13 posts |
Thank you Barry. I was aware that the .exe version is superseded by the Loader version but I didn’t think the latter would allow me to run the 1985 timetable. I’ve added the new 2nd line and it validates ok. I’m surprised because I was focused on the so-called platform ‘UT’, which I thought was causing the problem. I also added the detach activity, but this resulted in a couple of extra warnings, because this activity is already defined in the timetable entries for 1S352 (the extended train). I’ve yet to run with these changes but it looks, so far, like you’ve resolved this particular issue for me. Many thanks. Stephen Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 13:18 #95688 | |
|
StephenD
13 posts |
Yes 58050, my particular interest is in the 1985 timetable, because I’m interested in building a model railway layout based on Peterborough in the mid-1980s. I was researching the signalling around the station when I stumbled on this site. I figured that here was an opportunity to get a more accurate timetable, as I had previously only been able to piece together information from the following Working Timetables: Passenger & Parcels traffic from May 1984 to May 1985 and Freight traffic from May to Sept 1986. As these lacked full platform and routing information, I had to resort to guessing, so I was also hoping to get more details that would enable me to run trains in a prototypical manner. With that objective in mind, your new 1985 timetable will be eagerly awaited. Stephen Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 14:58 #95689 | |
|
58050
2659 posts |
Well I've got WTTHitchin Stockyards for the 1980s & some for the 1990s both passenger, parcels & freight. Furthermore I've got some trip notices for 1982/1983 & 1988 that cover Peterbough depot & they include the pilot(Cl.08) locos booked work. Trip services don#t appear in WTTs due to the nature of how they operate. I was based at WhitSemoor TOPS offive in 1988 after coming off the footplate & we covered Peterborough area from that office. There is a myriad of trip services to & from Peterborough including trips to Hitchin Stockyard, Connington South tip sdgs, Tallington Dowmac & Chesterton Junction. These services would vary on a daily basis, plus the GUS trains that ran between Peterborough & Doncaster which ran via Spalding. The Whitemoor - Toton - Whitemoor GUS was usually worked by Cl.20x2. There was 3 pairs of Cl.20s booked at March TMD to cover booked work/ but when they were requiired back at Toton TD for planned/unplanned maintenance the change over for a fresh pair of Cl.20s was done via this service.
Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 14:58 #95690 | |
|
58050
2659 posts |
Well I've got WTTHitchin Stockyards for the 1980s & some for the 1990s both passenger, parcels & freight. Furthermore I've got some trip notices for 1982/1983 & 1988 that cover Peterbough depot & they include the pilot(Cl.08) locos booked work. Trip services don#t appear in WTTs due to the nature of how they operate. I was based at WhitSemoor TOPS offive in 1988 after coming off the footplate & we covered Peterborough area from that office. There is a myriad of trip services to & from Peterborough including trips to Hitchin Stockyard, Connington South tip sdgs, Tallington Dowmac & Chesterton Junction. These services would vary on a daily basis, plus the GUS trains that ran between Peterborough & Doncaster which ran via Spalding. The Whitemoor - Toton - Whitemoor GUS was usually worked by Cl.20x2. There was 3 pairs of Cl.20s booked at March TMD to cover booked work/ but when they were requiired back at Toton TD for planned/unplanned maintenance the change over for a fresh pair of Cl.20s was done via this service.
Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 15:03 #95691 | |
|
58050
2659 posts |
Apologise for the mis-spellings. I'll re-edit that last post when I get home. I'm plugged into a kidney dialysis machine at hospital & trying to type using one hand & balance my la[top with one hand is easier said than done as I can't move my left arm very much until this procedure has ended. So bear with me here.
Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 15:22 #95692 | |
|
MarkC
1105 posts |
Sounds like that would be fun, to signal
Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 21:38 #95697 | |
|
StephenD
13 posts |
Sorry to hear of your health problem, 58050. I had a recent brush with the big C, so not sure what the future holds. Still, I’m determined to be positive and keep reminding myself that health problems at my age are much better than the alternative! Your misspellings are not a problem but, as a railwayman, you’re obviously much more familiar with the operation of train services and the terminology than I would be. I believe that trip workings would be run as required, so I wouldn’t want to include too many of those. Bear in mind that I have a limited amount of storage and a limited budget to buy locos and rolling stock. My plan is to model the area from the River Nene in the south to Spital Bridge in the north. This would rule out any workings that do not come south of Spital Bridge, including those to/from Peterborough Yard and destinations in the north. I was also intending to restrict operations to the period between midday and 18:00 (approximately), which will further limit the number of freight workings. According to my 1986 WTT, the only train from Toton to Whitemoor that passes Peterborough within my time frame is 9E40, which is listed as a vacuum-braked Departmental service. This is obviously the same train that appears in the SimSig timetable as 8E40. At this stage, I haven’t any further details, but perhaps this is the train you’re referring to, which suggests that I’m going to have to acquire 2 Class 20s, if I’m to model it authentically. As far as I’m aware, the only GUS trains that I need to model are the flyash trains, of which I’m hoping eventually to have two. Nonetheless, I’m interested in the detail you’ve provided and I’m looking forward to getting even more valuable information from the new timetable, which you’re working on. Stephen Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 21:45 #95698 | |
|
StephenD
13 posts |
Mark265, I'm not sure who your comment is aimed at but I personally think that Peterborough is a very interesting location operationally. With trains coming from north, south, east and west, the station area can be very busy and it's a challenge to keep everything moving. That's partly why I chose it for my planned model railway layout. Stephen Last edited: 06/06/2017 at 21:47 by StephenD Reason: typo Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 22:00 #95699 | |
|
MarkC
1105 posts |
StephenD in post 95698 said:Mark265, I'm not sure who your comment is aimed at but I personally think that Peterborough is a very interesting location operationally. With trains coming from north, south, east and west, the station area can be very busy and it's a challenge to keep everything moving.Its was in response to 58050 talk of the trains running in the peterborough area Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 06/06/2017 at 22:12 #95700 | |
|
58050
2659 posts |
Stephen I suspect Mark's comments were aimed at me as I was trying myy best to type a message to post on the forum with my right hand as my left arm was connected to the dialysis machine & I was resting the laptop against my knees. Easier said than done as when I pressed post & the message appeared on the screen half of it was lost in transit & as a result wouldn't have made much sense. Let me correct you on a few thigs. The GUS service or General Utility Service used to conbey all sorts of rubbish yards wanted to get rid of. At Whitemoor in the late 1980s we had a GUS service to Norwich/Ipswich/Cambridge/Peterborough & Toton. I've got photos of condemned DMU trailer vehicles going to Mayer Newman scrapyard at Snailwell which came in on the Toton - Whitemoor GUS. I also vividly remember seeing a vacuum braked 2 axle tank wagon being marshalled onto a Whitemoor - Toton GUS service, but what was remarkable about this wagon was that stamped in blck paint on the side was written 'NOT TO BE MOVED FROM TINSLEY YARD, HYDRAULIC OIL FOR DOWTY RETARDERS'. So god knows how that ended up back at Whitemoor unless the Dowty retarders were still in use at Whitemoor after they became redundant at Tinsley. I don't think you are correct with regards to the flyash trains as they are COY (Company Owned trains & in my Eastern Region WTTs they are shown as COY. Trip workings is what makes a timetable more interesting. The orders were issued by the ACE(Area Civil Engineers) department on a daily basis with the orders for each loco to carry out. The only variation to this are MGR trains as they are all listed as Trip with the exception of WTT MGR services such as those running from the East Midlands & West Midlands coalfiields to Didcot Power Station & other services such as Silverhill - Northfleet & Oxcroft - Ridham Dock. I appreciate what you say about model railways as I had a 12ft square OO guage model railway when I was at my parents with a view of modelling Trent Junction as I'm a midland man, but you never have enough rolling stock. That is one reason I've never bothered with having a model railway now because SimSig takes up less space & the track & signal as accurate & I can create proper length trains. Peterborough had quite a few Cl.08 pilots floating around the station & yards carrying out various duties so you'd probably need at 4 on the layout to make it look accurate. One for the C&W shops, another was the parcels pilot, there was another in the carriage sdgs at Nene CS & there used to be a couple parked up in the dead end next to the station. I've got quite alot of photos taken around Peterborough during 1987. Anyway I wish you all the best with your modelling. Hopefully when I release the 1985 Peterborough timetable you'll no doubt see quite a variety of traction & rollingstock to boot. Oh forgot to say Stepehn best wishes with your treatment.
Last edited: 06/06/2017 at 22:14 by 58050 Reason: Added some text Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 07/06/2017 at 12:31 #95722 | |
|
StephenD
13 posts |
When I was trying to find out what a GUS train was, I checked the WTT and thought I saw that the flyash trains were denoted as GUS services. Obviously, a senior moment! Actually, I would have thought that they would be classified as MGR trains, but of course you’re right about them being shown as COY. Thanks for the info on the Class 08s. I might just put one in the dead end and run it to the fiddle yard when I need to collect the 2 parcels coaches for attaching to 1S351. Based on what you’ve said, I could do with a second 08 sitting in the carriage sidings, though I don’t know what it was used for. I wasn’t intending to model the C&W sidings - as far as I can recall, they were on the west side of the station and would make the layout too wide. I did occur to me that I could become so absorbed in SimSIg, I might be less inclined to go to the trouble of creating a physical model, but SWMBO might throw a hissy fit if I tell her that the conversion of the attic was a waste of time and money! And then there’s all that money spent on rolling stock. Thanks for your good wishes. Stephen Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 07/06/2017 at 16:59 #95727 | |
|
58050
2659 posts |
The Obviously traffic patterns change over time & trip services also change. Here are extracts of the 1982 Cl.08 pilot workings for the BR Eastern Region for 1982-1983 in respect of Peterborough:- No.1 Passenger/Freight pilot Cl.08 runs as T.56 No.7 West Yard Pilot Cl.08DB runs as T.62 No.2 Passenger Pilot Cl.08DB runs as T.57 Fletton Pilot (Sugar Beet branch only) Cl.08DB runs as T.59 No.5 Pilot shunts station Sdgs & CS Cl.08DB runs as T.60 Now compare that with the Peterborough Depot Trip Notice 1988:- T.02 Cl.08DB (SPEEDLINK PILOT)Worlks between Construction depot & Crescent Sdgs. T.03 Cl.08DB Shunts Peterborough station & Nene CS. T.04 Cl.08DB (SPEEDLINK Pilot) Shunts West Yard, Construction Depot & Nene CS T.05 Cl.08DB (Sugar Beet SPEEDLINK PIlot) runs seasonally October - January works trips as required between Fletton & Peterborough West Yard as req'd. T.06 Cl.08DB DEPARTMENTAL Pilot works between West Yard & Spital Yard as req'd. T.07 Cl.08DB SPEEDLINK PIlot shunts continuously in West Yard T.03 Cl.08DB PARCELS PIlot shunts continuously between Peterborough station & Nene CS. So you can see between 1982/83 & 1988 how the workings have changed just for the pilot locos at Peterborough. This happened all over the country, that's why when creating a timetable you need a whole lot more than just WTTs, subject of course to how accuarte you want your timetable to be. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: BarryM |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 08/06/2017 at 12:51 #95743 | |
|
StephenD
13 posts |
Clearly, there was a lot of workings not covered by the WTTs and I can see from your post how much changed in that short period of 5 or 6 years. Though it’s interesting to get this insight, I don’t believe I could possibly represent many of these trip workings. While I’m looking for accuracy, I have to be practical and that may mean adopting only a subset of the timetable you’re working on. I always assumed that there would be very little need for shunting on my proposed layout, only being aware of the manoeuver previously described with the 2 parcels coaches, though I didn’t realise that this happened in platform 3. I was planning to operate the layout with some trains already made up in Nene CS (given that my start time is about noon) and I didn’t anticipate any further shunting would be required there. Stephen Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 08/06/2017 at 20:53 #95752 | |
|
58050
2659 posts |
Well the afternoon parcels frpm King's Cross departed from P3 ads I've got some photos of it there. Another thing you need to take into account is that if your timetable is based on pre-electrification to Peterborough you had 3 loco hauled services from King's Cross to Peterborough & likewise in the mornings during the rush hour periods. The DOWN trains in the evening usually terminated in P5 & the whole train set back into Nene CS for overnight stabling & the loco returned to the loco holding sdgs. Also if it is pre October, 1988 you also had the newwspaper trains to deal with as well & there was some splitting & joining of vans carried out for those trains in addition to the prcels services. During 1987-1988 there were a whole ensemble of empty NPCCS trains running to Cambridge T&RSMD as that became responsible for maintenance of the parcels van flet & Peterborough was a postal hub wth trains coming from all quarters of the country. If you want me to go into more detail can I suggest you PM me Stephen.
Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 08/06/2017 at 22:30 #95755 | |
|
clive
2789 posts |
In 1987 I spent a few months commuting from Huntingdon to Barbican. Though there were EMUs operating, there was an HST in the morning that I tried to get on because it was non-stop. In the evening there was an 89-hauled set with an HST power car on the back out of platform 1 that went like greased lightning.
Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 08/06/2017 at 22:45 #95756 | |
Steamer
3985 posts |
clive in post 95755 said:In 1987 I spent a few months commuting from Huntingdon to Barbican. Though there were EMUs operating, there was an HST in the morning that I tried to get on because it was non-stop. In the evening there was an 89-hauled set with an HST power car on the back out of platform 1 that went like greased lightning.Definitely 'The Badger' and not a 91? "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 |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 09/06/2017 at 18:18 #95775 | |
|
58050
2659 posts |
Yeah I'd agree The Cl.89 is a top machine & definately a much better loco than the Cl.91s. British Rail set up a batch of drivers from various depots to see which loco they thought was the best. IIRC the end result was around a 70-30 split in favour of the Cl.89, but it was a political decision that the Cl.91s became the sucessful candidate for the ECML. I remember when I was on the loco control at Doncaster the nickname given to Cl.91s by us was Dung Beattles cos 'they were always in the S**t'. Even if you rode on the 1st Cl.91 services from King's Cross in the morning heading north going through Copenhagen Tunnel & the driver opens the power you can feel the set snatching when the wheels slip under the power the driver is requesting from the traction unit, but becaause of the loco being a Bo-Bo the wheels pick up. That would be very much reduced or non existant if these trains were worked by Cl.89s.Certainly in 1987 there were loco hauled trains running between Peterborough - King's Cross - Peterborough with rakes of Mk.1 coaches. I remember vividly standing on P5 at Peterborough when 47474 came in on a terminating service from Ki8ng's Cross. When everyone had got off & the guard & checked that the train was empty it reversed into Nene CS. The loco hauled services on the Cambridge/Norwich - Birmingham corridor ended in 1988 when they went over to 2 car Cl.156 units. As Clive ssays there was an HST that also ran between Between Peterborough & King's Cross in the morning peak. That kind of variety no longer exists in todays railway unfortunately.
Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 10/06/2017 at 23:47 #95791 | |
|
clive
2789 posts |
Steamer in post 95756 said:clive in post 95755 said:Definitely Avocet hauling Mk.1s. But for the HST power car bit, I may be mixing it up with the early 91 workings that didn't have a DVT for some reason and had a 43 instead. Those definitely accelerated like nothing else on the line.In 1987 I spent a few months commuting from Huntingdon to Barbican. Though there were EMUs operating, there was an HST in the morning that I tried to get on because it was non-stop. In the evening there was an 89-hauled set with an HST power car on the back out of platform 1 that went like greased lightning.Definitely 'The Badger' and not a 91? Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 10/06/2017 at 23:49 #95792 | |
|
clive
2789 posts |
58050 in post 95775 said:The Cl.89 is a top machine & definately a much better loco than the Cl.91s.I vaguely remember a story of the 89 being tested on Shap. They'd stuck a large number of loaded wagons behind it and then stopped it at the steepest point of the climb. The driver pushed the lever and off it went with no trouble. He thought it was so much fun that he stopped it so that he could do it again. Meanwhile everyone else was panicking that they were about to block the entire WCML with a collection of wagons pulling their loco back down the hill. Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 11/06/2017 at 00:23 #95793 | |
postal
5265 posts |
clive in post 95791 said:. . . the early 91 workings that didn't have a DVT for some reason and had a 43 instead.Late delivery of the DVTs but the arrival of the Cl. 91/Mk. 4 sets sans DVTs allowed some of the HST sets to be replaced by the electrics with the redundant HST power cars acting in lieu of the DVTs. At a tangent, I got tipped the wink in about early 1991 that an HST set had failed so a Cl. 91 set was being used as an emergency measure on a passenger service to Newcastle. This was very much ad hoc and was the first time one had been used in service north of York. I managed to pick the train up at York for the last 80 miles of the journey. There was confusion at Newcastle; the understanding was that the electrics were authorised to run to Newcastle but no one knew whether they were then authorised for the ECS move to Heaton. The train had to go somewhere because of platform occupation so the bullet was eventually bitten and the train sent forward. No doubt the paperwork caught up in due course. “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 Log in to reply The following user said thank you: BarryM |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 11/06/2017 at 11:26 #95798 | |
|
58050
2659 posts |
The HST power cars that were used in testing the Cl.89 & Cl.91s were DVTs. IIRC the diesel power units in those vehicles were defective & couldn't be started for whatever reason. They were waiting for going into Works for power unit swap overs that's why they remained with the HST power car numbers. Also they were testing the DVT control equiptment. The Cl.89 also ended up working a regualr diagram between King's Cross - York - King's Cross during the early 1990s. Avocet would have been an excellent mixed traffic loco, Co-Co being a much better traffive effort set up over a Bo-Bo. That said some lines die to axle weight restrictions are only available to be worked by Bo-Bo locos such as the line to Aberystwth & that area. Cl.37/0s are permitted as there axle weight isn't as heavy for a Co-Co loco being only 105 tonnes in weight. I can't evem say I've ever seen a Cl.91 working with the blunt end leading which when built was supposed to be used when working freight! Can't I've ever seen a Cl.91 on a freight working, whether anyone else on here has I don't know but that would have been exceptionally rare.
Log in to reply |
| Problems with 1985 v7.21 Timetable 11/06/2017 at 12:40 #95799 | |
|
Jan
906 posts |
clive in post 95791 said:But for the HST power car bit, I may be mixing it up with the early 91 workings that didn't have a DVT for some reason and had a 43 instead. Those definitely accelerated like nothing else on the line.Dave Coxon's page has more on this (and other fascinating stuff). Two million people attempt to use Birmingham's magnificent rail network every year, with just over a million of them managing to get further than Smethwick. Last edited: 11/06/2017 at 12:40 by Jan Reason: None given Log in to reply |