Page 2 of 2
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 08/02/2015 at 14:17 #68997 | |
kbarber
1743 posts |
" said:Ignore my comments in post #21. Late Turn's proposal in the previous post is what we should be doing. Seems this will involve some tinkering with the code to make it a surprise rather than part of the standard TT. I seem to recall that Train Dispatcher provides for this sort of thing. This is very much what I remember talking about in a long-ago thread, presumably on the old forum as I can't find any trace of it here. I don't know if mcooper can perform his magic and recall it for us? (I don't know if anyone wants another chance to read my meanderings on the subject!) But I suspect it was noted then as an extraordinarily long-term possibility, given how much work was likely to be involved, or more likely as a good(?!!) idea that wasn't likely to get any programming time because of the difficulty and the multifarious ramifications of making it happen. Log in to reply |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 08/02/2015 at 19:13 #69002 | |
|
Late Turn
699 posts |
Max, although I did put forward my thoughts as a serious suggestion, it was with the recognition that it would probably a very long term aspiration, and then only a very approximate representation of a realistic scenario. For starters, trains do have a habit of failing in awkward positions - like halfway across a busy junction - rather than handily berthed in a platform or other location specified in the sim data. It's also worth considering that, really, there's very little of interest from a Simsig signalling point of view in assisting a failed train - yes, there's the arrangements to be made to get the assisting loco onto it, and possibly recessing something else to pinch a loco (Control's decision!), but the only real highlight would be the challenge of getting that assisting loco to the scene as quickly as possible. The real interest, as far as Simsig is concerned, is in the regulation of traffic around the failure, trying to keep the rest of the job moving as effectively as possible - and that aspect can be just as well simulated on the basis that the 'failed' train will be fixed by travelling fitters and won't actually be declared a failure and require assistance. Indeed, that is much how it is now - so perhaps the only enhancements required are the ability for trains to randomly fail anywhere (although, despite my comments above, they are perhaps more likely to do so in a platform or other convenient location, if the driver's able to nurse it that far) and with perhaps a potentially longer delay whilst it's sorted (a proper train fault rather than a broken window or the wrong type of food trolley, perhaps).
Log in to reply The following user said thank you: BarryM |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 08/02/2015 at 20:04 #69003 | |
|
Hawk777
386 posts |
I agree it would be nice for trains to fail at places other than where they intentionally stop—consider “pantograph hit tree branch that was blown under the OHLE by a storm” or something of the sort, please wait for techs to get to the train and repair the pantograph (IRL maybe this would be handled by an assisting loco instead, I don’t know, but as Late TUrn pointed out, other than finally having a chance to use some of those emergency crossovers that are never timetabled, there isn”t a whole lot to do with an assisting loco, and it would be much more complicated to implement).
Log in to reply |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 08/02/2015 at 20:34 #69004 | |
postal
5265 posts |
" said:I agree it would be nice for trains to fail at places other than where they intentionally stop—consider “pantograph hit tree branch that was blown under the OHLE by a storm” or something of the sort, please wait for techs to get to the train and repair the pantograph (IRL maybe this would be handled by an assisting loco instead, I don’t know, but as Late TUrn pointed out, other than finally having a chance to use some of those emergency crossovers that are never timetabled, there isn”t a whole lot to do with an assisting loco, and it would be much more complicated to implement).And don't forget to stop everything else electric hauled which is in the vicinity as the power would be turned off even if there wasn't a total blockage in each direction due to the knitting being down. Sounds like fun. “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: 08/02/2015 at 20:35 by postal Log in to reply |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 08/02/2015 at 21:24 #69007 | |
|
AndyG
1842 posts |
Of course, this is where mplay with a switched on experienced host comes into its own, especially if the host has a prepared scenario with already TTed thunderbirds etc ready to deploy. Dazraht (aka Darren Towler) was master of that, I was on the receiving end of a couple of those, a train on fire on Filton panel, and a shopping trolley under a train at Swinton. I can only help one person a day. Today's not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look too good either. Last edited: 08/02/2015 at 21:24 by AndyG Log in to reply |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 08/02/2015 at 21:57 #69009 | |
|
peterb
452 posts |
" said:Dazraht (aka Darren Towler) was master of that, I was on the receiving end of a couple of those, a train on fire on Filton panel, and a shopping trolley under a train at Swinton.I remember these, wonder how Darren's doing these days. It must have been a good few years ago now. Good times. Log in to reply |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 08/02/2015 at 22:12 #69010 | |
|
uboat
219 posts |
Signalling Centre Software has failures.
Log in to reply |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 09/02/2015 at 09:28 #69015 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
Implementing a failure by adding more code to SimSig would certainly require more effort, etc. In that case, unless existing code precludes it, a simple solution would be to announce "ABCD train failed completely" and leave it at that, with a note in the general Wiki that if the signaller sees this he is to invoke Extreme Measures and remove the train. End of story. This could be described as one of the options at one of the higher levels of SimSig or made optional at any level via a checkbox. I guess another possibility is two have two messages linked by a variable time duration, one saying "train ABCD broken down, attended to by maintenance crew, ETD nn:nn", to be followed at that time by a second message, "train ABCD found to have failed", at which point the SimSig player removes it. Can't see why this wouldn't work as SimSig is already capable of posting follow-up messages in response to earlier messages, e.g., in reference to level crossings. Log in to reply |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 09/02/2015 at 10:07 #69016 | |
flabberdacks
636 posts |
Removing a train via Extreme Measures is a cop-out in all situations and should never be used like this. Where would the train go, in real life, and how to get it there if it cannot power itself? This is what we're trying to address.
Log in to reply The following users said thank you: sloppyjag, Temple Meads |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 09/02/2015 at 10:15 #69018 | |
headshot119
4869 posts |
" said:Removing a train via Extreme Measures is a cop-out in all situations and should never be used like this. Where would the train go, in real life, and how to get it there if it cannot power itself? This is what we're trying to address.I have to agree, I don't see why you'd want to use that measure like this. "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 The following user said thank you: sloppyjag |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 09/02/2015 at 10:31 #69019 | |
|
Danny252
1461 posts |
I'm mostly amazed that Maxand wants to add a function that creates a situation you can't get out of - I thought he got into enough of those without additional help!
Log in to reply The following user said thank you: sloppyjag |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 09/02/2015 at 12:33 #69022 | |
|
postal
5265 posts |
" said:" said:Depends whether you are playing a game with a train set or running a signalling simulation.Removing a train via Extreme Measures is a cop-out in all situations and should never be used like this. Where would the train go, in real life, and how to get it there if it cannot power itself? This is what we're trying to address.I have to agree, I don't see why you'd want to use that measure like this. “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 users said thank you: sloppyjag, headshot119 |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 10/02/2015 at 03:09 #69048 | |
|
maxand
1637 posts |
I don't know what you guys are carrying on about. Like the rest of you I hardly ever need to remove a train using Extreme Measures, and don't relish the idea of a cop-out. I only suggested this as a a way in which a sim player (in this case not acting as signaller) might remove a failed train (once a message announces the fact) if there is no other way in SimSig core code to deal with it. SimSig is a simulation for a signaller, but the person actually running the sim has more "Control" facilities (as I think Steamer put it) via the Train List if they are really required. I don't think of this as a cop-out in the way that the same person wearing his signaller's hat might.
Last edited: 10/02/2015 at 03:11 by maxand Log in to reply |
| Removal of ETD from Delayed Trains 10/02/2015 at 07:17 #69052 | |
|
kbarber
1743 posts |
" said:I don't know what you guys are carrying on about. Like the rest of you I hardly ever need to remove a train using Extreme Measures, and don't relish the idea of a cop-out. I only suggested this as a a way in which a sim player (in this case not acting as signaller) might remove a failed train (once a message announces the fact) if there is no other way in SimSig core code to deal with it. SimSig is a simulation for a signaller, but the person actually running the sim has more "Control" facilities (as I think Steamer put it) via the Train List if they are really required. I don't think of this as a cop-out in the way that the same person wearing his signaller's hat might. Max, I think the response is to your idea of having the code simulate train failures without offering the means to clear them in accordance with the rules (the safe working aspect) and with normal operating procedures (who does what to provide assistance and how it's done). If we're going to have train failures we also need the means to clear them properly and that is what becomes so complex that it's not really an option any of the programmers are considering. Which being the case, a total 'sit down and don't move until eternity' failure would be a silly thing to simulate and no-one is therefore doing so. Which, in turn, means there's no need for that kind of extreme measure anyway. But if we did have the whole thing, train removal would indeed be a cop-out, you'd call/wait for assistance and implement the rules, the meanwhile doing what you could to keep traffic moving. Log in to reply |