Page 1 of 2
| Instructions to Signalmen... 11/03/2014 at 15:24 #56825 | |
kbarber
1742 posts |
One of the issues that keeps coming up is how to do things that turn out to be described in the manual. There seem to be two distinct views about what should be covered in the wiki, and how. Some people would like absolutely every wrinkle and variation to be described in detail, so that they can always read their way out of any situation. Others suggest that too much information leads to a manual no-one will read - just too much to plough through. I can see the merits in both points of view. But what I want to do is offer some thoughts about how the real railway does it, at least here in the UK. What I'm talking about is the Signalbox Special Instructions or SBSIs. On the Western they used to be known (possibly still are) as the 'footnotes'; on the London Midland I've heard them referred to as the 'Block Card'. I'm sure there are other terms. Every signalbox in the country has, somewhere, a document headed 'INSTRUCTIONS TO SIGNALMEN AT [X] SIGNALBOX'. Sometimes it's just a single sheet of A4, sometimes it's a veritable epistle. Sometimes it's pasted to a stout piece of board, sometimes it's just paper pinned to the noticeboard and sometimes it's a crudely bound booklet. It informs the signalmen what regulations apply and any special authorities or local instructions. I understand there used to be a signalbox somewhere in East Anglia where the total content of the SBSI's was 'The Absolute Block Regulations apply on the up and down lines between [A] box and this box and [C] box and this box.' I believe that lasted unchanged into the early years of the present century. More common would be to find details of local authorisations such as (the old) Regulation 5 (the Warning Arrangement, for accepting trains without the full clearing point), either at the box concerned or at boxes on either side. At St Albans South that went as far as specifying Reg 5 authorised at Elstree (the third box away), for those occasions when both Napsbury and Radlett were switched out. There might be a list of codes to be rung on the platform bell. The SBSIs were to be read in conjunction with all the Rules & Regulations that any signalman would have learned before getting in to the box. Briefly, those would consist of the Rule Book, the General Appendix and the Regulations for Train Signalling (AKA the Block Regs). (They would also be expected to familiarise themselves with the relevant parts of the Sectional Appendix, albeit that might be part of their learning of the box if they'd come from elsewhere.) That meant the SBSI's could be stripped right down. Consider this snippet from St Albans South: 'Regulation 7 The provisions of regulation 7(A) must be carried out on the up slow line before No. 4 points are reversed.' (typed verbatim). What this says is that the 'Blocking Back Inside Home Signal' bell signal (2 pause 4) must be sent to Harpenden Junction, Harpenden Junction must acknowledge it and the up slow block indicator must be set to 'Train on Line' before the facing crossover from the down slow can be reversed to let a down train into the up slow platform. Typical SBSI's would have several of these very abbreviated entries. Sometimes there would be local instructions authorising things which would otherwise be a contravention of the regulations. Apparently Exeter Middle had authority to accept a train on one of the up platform lines under (the old) Regulation 4 when the line was clear to the centre of the box; that gave a clearing point (the AB equivalent of an overlap) of something like 50 or 100 yards rather the 1/4 mile beyond the home signal that Reg 4 normally demanded. Sometimes there would be instructions for movements that simply weren't addressed anywhere in the Rules & Regs. At Kensington Olympia, in the days when there were two boxes (and a lot more track than there is now), there were instructions for shunting between the boxes. (Technically, of course, the northern part of the station was the block section - South Main's up homes and down starters were in the middle of the platforms - except that for up direction moves on the (reversible) down platform South Main's home was at the south end of the platform, so in that case the block section was the whole length of the station. So at North main the station wasn't within the station limits, while at South Main half the station was outside station limits except when none of the station was in station limits! Phew!!! A signalman would be expected to know that, or at least to know the regs well enough to work it out as soon as they got into the box.) There were special bell signals for shunting at the advance end of the section and at the rear end of the section, with the SBSI's stipulating that shunting must not take place at both ends simultaneously. There was a third special bell signal for 'Train or Vehicles drawn back clear of section'. But of course that applied to whatever was being shunted, not to the train as a whole, so the SBSI's also specified that the 'Train out of Section' signal should be sent '...when it can be seen that the section is clear throughout'. Thankfully there were track circuits and those through the platforms were indicated in both boxes, so that requirement could be complied with even in fog. As most shunting took place in the aforementioned down platform - that was where up Motorail trains arrived and that was also where the 'Kensington Belle' terminated in the down direction - you needed to know which way the train had entered in order to know whether your shunt was at the advance or rear end. (Having said which, the Kenny Belle rarely proceeded beyond South Main starter so it wasn't put on the block and putting the engine on the rear was therefore done within station limits, hence no need for the special shunting bells.) For a decent sized powerbox, the SBSI's were correspondingly longer. They might well go beyond the usual R&R though. My father's papers include a set of 'Instructions to Signalmen' prepared for the opening of West Hampstead Powerbox, that includes a description of the operation of NX routesetting and a very detailed set of instructions for working the train describer; of course the target audience would be signalmen who'd worked all their lives in manual boxes and for whom switches that could be moved even if the function they worked was locked was completely alien. It runs to over 100 pages of foolscap! But I don't think it includes the kind of peculiarities (like advice on the best way to avoid locking yourself up) that is included in the wiki. As I see it, the wiki is trying to do three things. Firstly, it's trying to cover the basic R&R knowledge someone would have before even starting to learn a box as a fully-fledged signalman (though they work them under supervision during training). Fortunately it doesn't need to cover the whole range, as Simsig doesn't present us with every detail of what can happen (so nothing on handsignals, or on the Train Register entries for an Engineers' Possession - nothing on possessions at all, in fact). But that's still a pretty extensive knowledge base, Secondly, it's giving the content of the SBSIs (authorities, restrictions and special instructions that can be considered to be an extension of the R&R). Given that Simsig users may not have the detailed R&R knowledge of their railway counterparts, that can't be conveyed in the very abbreviated form of SBSIs, referring to Rule Book clauses or particular Block Regs; it has to be written out in full. Finally, it's offering (at least some of) the local knowledge a signalman will build up (for the most part anyway) while learning the box. Again, it can't assume the kind of underpinning knowledge a trained signalman would have so it has to write much more than even a book of signalman's hints & tips could get away with. Given all that, it's not surprising it's difficult to pitch the wiki at the right level for all (or indeed any!) users. Nor that newbies sometimes struggle to get hold of what's going on. (I imagine that might particularly be so for people who know something of other signalling systems. Each country has its own peculiarities and the UK is certainly no exception in that regard. As a former UK bobby (signalman) I can see how features of our earlier systems have been rolled forward into modern signalling principles - and I'm sure I've bored many of you rigid writing about them! If you know a different way of doing things and don't have a feel for our particular history, some of what Simsig does will seem very strange indeed. As indeed it is - I can't think anyone would design a signalling system quite like ours if they were given a blank sheet of paper!) I don't know if any of this helps make sense of some of the difficulties? (A thought strikes me that some of it might do well as part of a preamble to the wiki, though I don't think all the examples would really belong there. Anyone any thoughts on that? Or quite where in a preamble it might go?) But I hope it gives an idea what anyone trying to make the wiki really useful is up against. Log in to reply The following users said thank you: postal, KymriskaDraken, BarryM, MikeW, maxand |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 02:36 #56843 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
Well said! Quote: I s'pect I growed. Don't think nobody never made me.- Topsy, Uncle Tom's Cabin (Harriet Beecher Stowe) Quote: If you know a different way of doing things and don't have a feel for our particular history, some of what Simsig does will seem very strange indeed. As indeed it is - I can't think anyone would design a signalling system quite like ours if they were given a blank sheet of paper!)That should be the first paragraph on the first page of the Wiki. Local exceptions to the rules are usually made for reasons of efficiency. And you are right, Keith, general principles of UK signalling are difficult enough to comprehend for the uninitiated without contending with local variations. But it's not really that difficult to master, as I am discovering. What newcomers must find annoying is the high level of jargon used in the forum and particularly the Wiki in the tacit assumption that the beginner will understand. A catch-22 if ever there was one. There are so many levels of jargon in all this. At the very top are the local colloquialisms for accepted terms (e.g., 'Sleep & Tea'). Next come the official rules and regs, legally binding and thus often incomprehensible tomes to which everyone from professionals to novices are constantly referred. Below them are "simplified" explanations by Wiki writers who for one reason or another exhibit a lamentable tendency to relapse into jargon. And so on down the jargon chain. Right at the bottom comes the "cat sat on the mat" level, derisively referred to by some forum members as "spoon feeding". There is a place for all of them. Shakespeare's plays and Chaucer's Canterbury Tales demand commentaries to totally appreciate them. And so it should be in the Wiki. The best people to write them are those who have only recently comprehended how things work and thus less likely to use jargon in their descriptions, not hardened professionals who naturally find spoon feeding boring. On they other hand, they with the broader view are needed to vet these outpourings of pabulum for unintentional errors. My views on writing for the Wiki are straightforward: 1) There is no harm in writing wordy explanations for topics, though they should be separated from shorter and simpler definitions and linked adequately. 2) I make no apology for including redundancy in explanations (e.g., substituting the original term for 'it'  to leave absolutely no doubt in the reader's mind as to the exact meaning. This actually results in faster progress.3) Since one picture may be worth a thousand words, a series of screenshots accompanied by explanations may be better than a paragraph of opaque text. Naturally this takes somewhat longer to prepare. Unfortunately, though it is possible to replace an unsatisfactory image with another by uploading it and changing the link, there seems no way to actually delete the original image from the Wiki database without emailing GeoffM directly with the details. 4) I accept that many signalling professionals are less expert when it comes to grammar and syntax, so constant revision will finally lead to clarity. 5) As the Wiki grows it should be progressively reorganized so its broad structure remains logical. Since it grows like Topsy above, this becomes progressively more difficult but is achievable. Yes, this is crystal-clear spoonfeeding. Last edited: 12/03/2014 at 02:45 by maxand Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 04:28 #56845 | |
GeoffM
6376 posts 
|
On the one hand you have the people who take one look and say "the graphics are rubbish" (despite being almost pixel perfect to IECC graphics) who, I suspect, watch too many movies. Yes it has been said more than once by passing visitors. On the other hand you have signallers who use the real thing 35 hours a week and know it's pretty good. The difficulty is writing documentation that fits both ends of the spectrum and everything in between, not to mention our international friends - a rather difficult task. Some of the glossary entries I've written contain a brief sentence describing the subject at hand, then a separate, longer paragraph explaining the subject in more detail. Those relatively familiar with signalling/SimSig may understand the first sentence without needing to read the following paragraph; those less experienced would hopefully "get it" from that second paragraph. 3. Screenshots should be used more, I agree. 5. We do need another reorganisation. People have tried to add additional sections but those have stalled. Ideally it needs an independent technical author to sit with me for a while and reorganise and rewrite whole sections. Anybody have any experience of such processes - how long, what to expect, etc? A week? SimSig Boss Log in to reply The following user said thank you: welwyn |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 06:57 #56847 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
An independent technical author who understands UK railway signalling? :whistle: Maybe offering payware sims for free might act as an incentive to the right forum member. :woohoo: Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 08:07 #56848 | |
|
Noisynoel
989 posts |
" said:An independent technical author who understands UK railway signalling? :whistle:Or may be the right forum member would be willing to do it for nothing for the better of the community and then if any reward it would be a bonus. Like so many others of us forum members do! Noisynoel Log in to reply The following users said thank you: postal, sloppyjag, DriverCurran, Steamer |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 09:35 #56849 | |
|
kbarber
1742 posts |
" said:Well said! Sorry, that's me engaging in a bit of traditional railway banter. S&T = Signal and Telecommunications (for us dinosaurs 'Signal & Telegraph'). We (the signalmen) always ragged them. And of course they always ragged us for breaking it when they came out to fix a fault. Then I put the kettle on and we settled down to a cup of tea and a natter. It probably still happens... Log in to reply The following user said thank you: maxand |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 10:26 #56851 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
Noisynoel wrote: Quote: Or may be the right forum member would be willing to do it for nothing for the better of the community and then if any reward it would be a bonusAny person or persons who take this on will need to deal with those who feel they can improve on the improvements. After all, a Wiki by its very nature is democratically open to all who can see room for improvement. Giving it a new direction should be no more difficult than herding cats. By the time a new editor reaches the back end of the Wiki, the improvers, bless 'em, will have scrambled the front end, making cleaning the Augean stables appear simple by comparison. Restructuring the Wiki will require a lot of time, so there should be some recompense. Communism didn't work the way they expected it to. This leads me to wonder seriously whether the Wiki should become a semi-closed shop like the sim development team. The advantages include:
Disadvantages might include:
Last edited: 12/03/2014 at 10:39 by maxand Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 10:41 #56852 | |
|
Firefly
521 posts |
Quote:(for us dinosaurs 'Signal & Telegraph')or Lineman Yes as Keith has said, he means the Signal and Telecom department. It's a job that has changed somewhat over the years but we still get involved in all sorts. In semaphore areas the 'sick and tired' will do anything from oiling and greasing rod runs, repairing and splicing signal wires to fault finding train describers, track circuits and block systems. On the most modern areas they can be fault finding the ARS or IECC one minute and next minute they could have the spanners out adjusting a set of points, or changing a hydraulic hose. The job covers absolutely everything from mechanical, hydraulics, electrics, electronics and computer based interlockings. Of course, with the newer stuff theres a lot of plug and play where as fault finding relay interlockings was much more fun. Sugar and Tea department probably came from the fact that we'd go from box to box doing a bit of maintenance and drinking a lot of tea. Best job on the railway IMO (once you get to a level that you can avoid going out in the cold and wet) FF Log in to reply The following user said thank you: maxand |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 11:01 #56854 | |
|
Hooverman
306 posts |
The poor lowest of the low (S&T) technician at our ASC is often referred to as the "lamp fairy", as in they get the boring job of going up the top of the ladder and replacing all of the defective lamps/LEDs that are not working on our diagram. :cheer:
Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 11:04 #56855 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
On re-reading my previous post (#7) I'm more and more convinced that Wiki restructuring and further editing is an ongoing task which should be handled by a small committee rather than left to one person, but it need not be a closed committee, more an open one similar to the current situation where there seems to be an ad hoc group of people whom we all know who do their best to keep it tidy and up to date. Maybe, just as in other forums, the ones prepared to do this should be named, and Wiki editing left to them. They could have their own private subforum. The more there are (say no more than half a dozen to make it workable), the less onerous the burden, and the easier it is to cover for someone who might be away. They might have the power to vote on new members. I still think there should be some tangible reward above and beyond the honour of being on such a committee, but distributed among the members there would be less reason to be jealous. What do others think? Last edited: 12/03/2014 at 11:07 by maxand Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 16:40 #56869 | |
|
GeoffM
6376 posts
|
" said:An independent technical author who understands UK railway signalling? :whistle:No, independent as in not related to SimSig or signalling in general. I accept I didn't make that clear enough :lol: . SimSig Boss Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 17:54 #56871 | |
Steamer
3984 posts |
I think there's a danger in trying to reduce something to (essentially) an algorithm. For example, regulation: the rule of regulation is "Signal trains in a way which causes the least possible delay". However, because there are so many variables, it's practically impossible to come up with an algorithm to cover all eventualities (turn delays up and see how well ARS copes). I think it's better to give general guidance, and let the user work out their own particular 'style'. I had no experience or signalling knowledge prior to playing SimSig, however over the last few years I've learned to operate even the largest simulations. To use a driving analogy, a bit of general advice 'brake a bit earlier, it's more comfortable' is better than drilling down braking points for every junction. Taking an example of ground frames. In my opinion, the Ground Frames page on the Wiki should contain a general outline of what they do and how to operate them. Simulation manuals should cover significantly different methods of operation. I honestly don't see the point in writing a walkthrough for each ground frame on each simulation- a bit of trial and error may be necessary, but as long as the basics are covered, the problem can be solved. I'm happy to be corrected, but I don't think many people get hung up on minor display differences. maxand said: But it's not really that difficult to master, as I am discovering. What newcomers must find annoying is the high level of jargon used in the forum and particularly the Wiki in the tacit assumption that the beginner will understand. A catch-22 if ever there was one.Jargon is used on the Wiki, however an explanation is only a search away, and links to glossary entries are often provided (although there's room for improvement). Again, I wonder if a huge manual is more likely to be ignored, and if it might actively scare people away from SimSig. EDIT: I forgot to mention- simulation manuals should contain details of where local features deviate significantly from standard practice. Also, I don't think the Wiki is perfect, just that its general approach is good. "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) Last edited: 12/03/2014 at 22:35 by Steamer Log in to reply The following user said thank you: maxand |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 18:31 #56872 | |
|
John
884 posts |
Of course we're all well aware that the "right way" is the "Max way", but perhaps before we embark on a possibly needless complete overhaul of the manual writing process, we should get feedback from some other members who are relatively new to Simsig, as thus far it's only Max that's championing this.
Last edited: 12/03/2014 at 18:43 by John Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 18:58 #56873 | |
|
Late Turn
699 posts
|
" said:I think it's better to give general guidance, and let the user work out their own particular 'style'. That's about the most sensible summary of my own thoughts that I could find, although the addition of some local instructions - as Keith suggests - would be useful to highlight subtleties in the method of working peculiar to a given location or area. Continuing the example of ground frames: the general manual should explain the principle of ground frames and outline the usual method of operation (with screenshots for Max), being roughly equivalent to the knowledge gained at signalling school in reality. That then needs to be supplemented by location-specific information - such as a brief description of the ground frame and what it controls, any peculiarities (such as the route set by the panel in the Woodborough example recently discussed) and any specific restrictions or relaxations that must be observed (for example, moves to occupied running lines, or the provision of a 'shut inside' facility). There's certainly no need to talk users, step-by-step, through the operation of each ground frame individually though - that'll achieve nothing, other than frustrating the user who knows how to deal with ground frames but is just seeking the local knowledge. All that said - isn't it pretty similar to how the Wiki works already? Tom Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 12/03/2014 at 19:36 #56878 | |
KymriskaDraken
963 posts |
" said:" said:I agree with Tom - the General Manual should be like the Rule Book and Block Regulations, and then the manuals for individual sims should be more like the "Footnotes", and go on tp describe detail differences from location to location.I think it's better to give general guidance, and let the user work out their own particular 'style'. This is pretty much what happens now, but it could probably be better. I'd be happy to assist in wiki rewrites - as an ex-Signalman I have some tech knowledge, but I think I can write in layman's terms as well. How about if one or two of us get together and "rewrite" the manual for one of the simpler sims to see if the idea is feasible or not. Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 13/03/2014 at 07:40 #56884 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
John wrote: Quote: Of course we're all well aware that the "right way" is the "Max way", but perhaps before we embark on a possibly needless complete overhaul of the manual writing process, we should get feedback from some other members who are relatively new to Simsig, as thus far it's only Max that's championing this. Thanks for the accolade, but a restructuring of the manual was actually GeoffM's idea and all I did was to make some recommendations. Quote: How about if one or two of us get together and "rewrite" the manual for one of the simpler sims to see if the idea is feasible or not.Hmmm. Now that I've played some of the simpler sims I must say that in most cases the existing manual is sufficient, indeed, more than sufficient. Simply rewriting one or two manuals without some top-down overall scheme runs the risk of duplicating advice, which may conflict with similar advice given in other sim manuals, not to mention verbose repetition (I know, I advocated something similar a few posts back, but bear with me.). On the other hand, if you wish to try out rewriting something, you could start with this priceless piece of prose from the Lancing manual, obviously close to the author's heart (my comments in italics within parentheses). Route Description Our journey through the Lancing simulation starts at Worthing, located at the top right (actually the top left, how's that for a start?). With the up and down Brighton and the up loop in the station area. (Brighton station? And where's the verb in that sentence?) You have a choice of three entry points here with the entry from platform 3 only being for trains that have terminated at Worthing and are re-starting in the up direction. All signals in the station are controlled automatically by the simulation and as such are not part of your control (you forgot to mention they don't even light up, so are essentially useless). Working east (Is that up, down or sideways?) the train passes through East Worthing (ok, so east now means to one's right on the view) , which is little more than a halt to arrive at Lancing (to arrive = before arriving) . Here the first of many CCTV crossings is encountered. As you pass over the crossing (Am I the signalman or the driver?) you pass the box on the up side of the line.(Yes, I can see something resembling Ned Kelly's helmet painted by Sidney Nolan. I wonder what the box contains?) Between Lancing and Shoreham-by-Sea (only Shoreham and Shoreham East are marked) you pass the flight path of the airfield at Shoreham to cross over the river Adur. (How scenic! Only problem - neither is shown on the panel. Could Adur possibly be Shoreham River?) As you cross the river bridge coming in from the left is the former line that linked Shoreham with Horsham via Beeding Cement works, the line between Beeding and Christ’s Hospital was closed in 1966 while the remaining stub between Beeding and Shoreham closing in 1980. (As fascinating as it is irrelevant.) As you enter Shoreham-by-Sea station you pass over the station level crossing, one of two CCTV crossings at Shoreham (I can find only one on the panel) to enter the station itself. Leaving towards Hove you pass over Shoreham Ground frame (Is that what the "GF" stands for? I wonder how it works - the manual doesn't refer to it again) and almost immediately pass over Shoreham East CCTV level crossing and head through the stations at Southwick and Fishersgate to pass over the last CCTV crossing at Portslade. Leaving Portslade you now head out of the control of Lancing signal box (the "box" mentioned earlier?) and pass into the control of Three Bridges Panel 6. (Why isn't this marked on the panel?) On the approach to Aldrington you pass the site of the former Devil’s Dyke branch (No sign of it on the panel, so why mention it at all?) and finally arrive at Hove. Hove station like Worthing is set up with three entry points and all the signals are worked automatically by the simulation (i.e., equally useless). Apart from Hove and Worthing all stations are two platforms and up and down lines.. (Whew.) The person anxious to begin playing this sim is really only interested in how to make the panel work. He/she would have appreciated a link to the Lever Frames section of the Wiki, advice on how to display the Ground frame by selecting Show > Lever frames, and since Shoreham East has four levers, some discussion as to what each lever does and when to apply it. Conversely, the Wiki section on Ground frames might do well to include a link to the Lancing manual as an example of a four-lever system. This "top-down" linkage (from the general to the specific) is an antidote to redundancy. Last edited: 13/03/2014 at 11:13 by maxand Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 13/03/2014 at 09:35 #56885 | |
|
sloppyjag
480 posts |
" said:When I need sarcasm, I'll ask for it. Planotransitophobic! Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 13/03/2014 at 10:10 #56887 | |
|
AndyG
1842 posts |
" said:As I see it, that paragraph is headed "Route Description" and thus intending to give an overview of the route through the area rather than an overview of the panel itself. I can only help one person a day. Today's not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look too good either. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Late Turn |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 13/03/2014 at 10:37 #56888 | |
|
Late Turn
699 posts
|
" said:How about if one or two of us get together and "rewrite" the manual for one of the simpler sims to see if the idea is feasible or not. I'd certainly be happy to assist (as long as the box computer lets me) in any way that I can! Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 13/03/2014 at 10:44 #56889 | |
dmaze
88 posts |
When I'm playing a new sim, I do actually flip through the existing wiki pages, with the goal of figuring out how is this sim different from every other sim? If there's a particularly weird feature (like the AB operation on North East Scotland) it should be called out, but otherwise the most important section is the section that lists all of the locations and how they operate strangely ("how to get into Camden Yard" on Euston, for instance). This section is kind of buried on the Motherwell sim; it tends to have things that are irrelevant to sim operation like the TIPLOC codes (...which are probably invaluable to timetable writers). A sim's manual does not need to include details on things that are very common in sims. The "new" sim manual format has a section listing out level crossings, for instance, but they're so commonplace that I'd probably skip this section in general. Ground frames aren't actually that novel and I'd similarly leave out their dedicated section. The KX manual documents standard train activities (divide, join, next working) and I'd leave that out. Actually, aside from the list-of-locations page not being a top-level page and the excessive detail there, the Motherwell documentation is pretty close to what I'd want. My professional experience with wikis is that there are naturally very few writers and very many readers. I don't think you need to declare that there is a magic closed SimSig wiki editing cabal, if you try to organize people to rewrite the manuals then you'll wind up with a small group anyways, without being exclusive. Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 13/03/2014 at 11:10 #56890 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
AndyG wrote: Quote: As I see it, that paragraph is headed "Route Description" and thus intending to give an overview of the route through the area rather than an overview of the panel itself.That's a fair comment. It's certainly interesting especially for non-UK members to get a feel for the area, so maybe each sim should include a strip map, quite separate from a potted panel view, detailing these extra features, so players can appreciate what the panel omits from real life. When I play a sim I tend to regard the panel as representing the actual geography of the area, I suspect to a far greater extent than justified. A strip map would overcome this. However, unless the sim developer creates his/her own strip map, there might be copyright difficulties if one were copied from an existing source. It also requires a little expertise with graphic editing tools, not to mention familiarity with the area itself. What is important then is to have two descriptions, a route description and a panel description, clearly distinguished. Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 13/03/2014 at 14:18 #56899 | |
|
clive
2789 posts |
" said:The equivalent document for Euston PSB (rather shorter, thankfully) is here on my web site. Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 13/03/2014 at 16:30 #56907 | |
|
GeoffM
6376 posts
|
" said:On the other hand, if you wish to try out rewriting something, you could start with this priceless piece of prose from the Lancing manual, obviously close to the author's heartWhile I accept there are errors in the text, you have gone unfairly overboard with your sarcasm and criticism. The author is describing the route as you travel, pointing out the sights along the way. Do those sights need to be on the panel? No. Do they need to be in the manual? No. But does it make the description more colourful, more lifelike, more characterful? Absolutely. You, of all people being on the other side of the world, ought to appreciate being told a little about the area in general, seeing as you've probably never been there. I don't always reply to posts but I do read the vast majority of posts on the forum and try to take on-board constructive criticism. But it is hard to take the relevant comments seriously when it's mixed in with comments that are irrelevant and unhelpful. SimSig Boss Log in to reply The following users said thank you: Steamer, sloppyjag, DriverCurran, MikeW, TimTamToe, andyb0607, Forest Pines, BarryM, mfcooper, JamesN, Danny252, John, larsht |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 14/03/2014 at 00:00 #56915 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
You're right, I've never been there. And I was hoping that the Route Description would help me make sense of the panel. I remember that the first time I read the Route Description I found myself thinking it was more confusing than helpful, as my comments show. So I reckon other newcomers would experience the same. Even though the Lancing panel is relatively small, I wasted a good deal of time trying to reconcile this description with the actual panel view, which left me quite annoyed, despite the no doubt sincere intentions of the original author. I stand by my comments and wish more authors would review what they've just written, or maybe ask someone else to vet it for them. In the absence of a panel description (see my previous post), I think the solution is for sim manual writers to prepare both a route description, as above (but to emphasize that the actual panel does not reflect them, indeed the actual names may differ), and prepare a panel description confined solely to the locations shown on the panel and their working. If the author is unwilling to put extra effort into a separate route description, I would be perfectly happy with just an accurate, detailed description of the panel. The author could supply links to tourist sites which include maps and historical facts. Last edited: 14/03/2014 at 00:04 by maxand Log in to reply |
| Instructions to Signalmen... 14/03/2014 at 06:49 #56926 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
I'm glad to see Steamer has made many corrections to the Lancing sim manual. Thanks Steamer. I decided to edit this further to add extra clarification - hope no one minds. Contrary to what I proposed earlier, I also ended up combining Route Description and Panel Description into Route and Panel Overview, which worked out well in this case and avoids having to flip between two sections. Feel free to revert to the previous version if you wish. Last edited: 14/03/2014 at 06:58 by maxand Log in to reply |