Page 1 of 2
| Oxford August 9th 2018 11/11/2018 at 11:46 #113236 | |
Chrisrail
384 posts |
Timetable submitted awaiting approval for Oxford Simulation. Based on the workings of August 9th 2018 Log in to reply The following user said thank you: BarryM |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 11/11/2018 at 14:16 #113239 | |
mfloyd
189 posts |
4v40 is duplicated as is another earlier freight which I forgot to make a note of
Ripley, Derbyshire Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 12/11/2018 at 23:30 #113256 | |
|
Chrisrail
384 posts |
Thanks for that
Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 12/11/2018 at 23:36 #113257 | |
|
Chrisrail
384 posts |
Thanks for that
Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 15/11/2018 at 13:50 #113298 | |
Banners88
112 posts |
Could empty stock, frieght workings etc have dwell times changed to reflect they can leave at any time eg when there is a margin to run them rather than waiting for a fictitious booked departure time? EG 6X25 showing as 07/23 vice 07:23? Last edited: 15/11/2018 at 13:51 by Banners88 Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 15/11/2018 at 14:18 #113299 | |
postal
5265 posts 
|
Banners88 in post 113298 said:Could empty stock, frieght workings etc have dwell times changed to reflect they can leave at any time eg when there is a margin to run them rather than waiting for a fictitious booked departure time?IIRC the TT is applied differently to different classes of train. Unless there is a specific dwell time or rule applied (or the "must wait for departure time" box is checked) only Class 0/1/2/3/5 trains are forced to wait for scheduled time. Classes 4/6/7/8 may or may not depart early depending on what mood the core code is in so they shouldn't need any editing. Can't remember about Class 9 as that may cover freight or passenger. That doesn't solve your problem completely for this TT as the ECS workings may require the set-down only box checked but the freight services should not need any action. If you are really desperate to get something moving, use F2 to abandon the train's TT, then once the train is rolling reinstate the TT. However, bear in mind that sometimes trains will wait until due time due to things like fitters' attention, driver needing a PNB etc. so it would not be prototypical to have everything departing early even though most might. “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 |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 21/11/2018 at 21:26 #113469 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
The timetable of 0A02 appears to be one hour late as a whole, also the order of the timetable is in reverse. (Also, you can use Kennington Goods Loop as a timing point and specify near end, otherwise the loco will drive to the end of the loop in order to reverse. EDIT: scrap that, the train doesn't properly reverse that way.) AJP in games Last edited: 21/11/2018 at 21:37 by Albert Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 21/11/2018 at 22:08 #113470 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
5V82 needs a 'thru line stop' ticked, or will otherwise call for wrong route when entering Oxford station on the through line.
AJP in games Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 21/11/2018 at 22:51 #113472 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
5L13 and 1Y12 conflict, as they both depart at 07:17 and their routes cross each other.
AJP in games Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 22/11/2018 at 07:44 #113473 | |
wellgroomed
110 posts |
Re: 1Y12/5L13. That exists in real life, it's not a TT bug.
Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 24/11/2018 at 18:18 #113508 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
I see. 5L17 is scheduled to leave the siding too early, 2E92 and 1O04 need to use platform 3 in-between arrival of 5L17 and departure of 2L17. Edit: 5L19 has the same problem. AJP in games Last edited: 24/11/2018 at 18:48 by Albert Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 24/11/2018 at 18:59 #113511 | |
|
postal
5265 posts
|
I think we ought to remember that SimSig strives to be as authentic as possible. This applies not only to the signalling technology but also to the timetables that many contributors write. In such cases the conflicts in the TT are often a direct copy of the conflicts in the real TT from which the base data was drawn. In those cases, the SimSig user is faced with the same problems as the real-life signaller and has to try and regulate things to produce the best result possible. All TT writers welcome reports of bugs, conflicts and inaccuracies in their work but in many cases these are a result of data inaccuracies in the base information. While the reports are welcome, they are not necessarily an indication that the TT writer has been careless, incompetent or worse. “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: Meld, whatlep |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 26/11/2018 at 11:35 #113581 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
@ postal: thanks for the comment, I understand. Albert in post 113470 said: 5V82 needs a 'thru line stop' ticked, or will otherwise call for wrong route when entering Oxford station on the through line.6C58 and 4M71 have the same issue. AJP in games Last edited: 26/11/2018 at 18:58 by Albert Reason: None given Log in to reply The following user said thank you: postal |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 26/11/2018 at 22:51 #113616 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
1Y62 is too long for its platform.
AJP in games Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 27/11/2018 at 07:15 #113624 | |
Meld
1111 posts |
postal in post 113511 said:I think we ought to remember that SimSig strives to be as authentic as possible. This applies not only to the signalling technology but also to the timetables that many contributors write. In such cases the conflicts in the TT are often a direct copy of the conflicts in the real TT from which the base data was drawn. In those cases, the SimSig user is faced with the same problems as the real-life signaller and has to try and regulate things to produce the best result possible.Reiterating Postals comment - most modern timetables (since approx 2012) are created from Network Rail data - warts and all, thats authenticity. It never is perfect, conflicts do happen and as such is what real life signallers have to deal with daily. Yes they do create work rounds and modify things to make the job run smoothly at times, but they are local solutions, after all we all like to take the easiest/simplest option. This raises the question should a TT writer actually be doing the signallers job for him ???? After all Milton Keynes don't. I believe that a timetable should contain the warts and all, as it makes for a more interesting operating experience. If you want a perfect TT thats rarely going to happen, feel free to edit your local copy how you like, after all different people may have their own solutions. Not Oxford related but I'm currently working on a New Street April 2015 TT and hopefully this one TT will cover 2 scenarios. On the date in question Platform 2 was closed and hopefully Geoff will add a scenario for this. Now you will be able to run the TT with P2 open as a normal type day. If you have P2 closed you will have to replatform as appropriate, I will NOT be doing any of the replatforming in the TT whatsoever. People like a challenge, hopefully this TT will give them one. Passed the age to be doing 'Spoon Feeding' !!! Log in to reply The following user said thank you: postal |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 27/11/2018 at 08:53 #113628 | |
|
kbarber
1743 posts |
Second that. Going back a bit further, there was a period in the late 1970s when the West Anglia timetable was - shall we say - not easy to operate. I had a chance to try when I used to 'visit' Hackney Downs box. I don't recall all the details, but it did include the fast Stortfords running Southbury/Seven Sisters. Were I to repeat a later Area Manager's description of that timetable, I would earn a ban for bad language. The signalmen just got on with it as best they could, minimising the damage wherever they were able. By the time I was Station Manager on that section, things had changed for the better, with the Stortfords running Lea Valley and the Hertfords following them up from Broxbourne and down from Liverpool Street; with a 1/2 hour interval that made for perfect connections at Broxbourne (Hertford into the loop, Stortford signalled in and out of the main platform the moment the Hertford was clear and Hertford signalled out as soon as the Stortford departed). Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 28/11/2018 at 20:39 #113694 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
Excuse me if I had wrong expectations of a TT based on real life data. I come from a country where planned conflicts in TTs are absolutely forbidden, a rule which was introduced to reduce the number of signals passed at danger (quite stupidly, people say, because it imposes quite some restrictions to TT writing). I understand that real life TTs have issues, but the real world signaller would out of experience be aware of them. In SimSig we have to do it with the notes passed to the signaller in the TT description! In the case of a train coming out of the siding too early, it is visible in the TT when the next working will leave & I can work with that, but I don't expect from SimSig players that they manually check the length of all trains using the short platforms 1/2. If there were a note about that train, I'd have rerouted 1T41 before discovering 'the hard way' that it was too long. (And, needing to tick a thru line stop on trains timetabled on the through line, is IMHO a sim bug. The workaround for TT writers is trivial, though.) Another recommendation I'd make is to tick the 'set down only' box in TTs of run-round locos. It makes no sense for a run-round loco to wait for its scheduled time before running around when the train is early. In the case of 4A41/0A41, the train is scheduled to depart right at the moment the loco comes back. In real life this would work because locos can run around faster than 0A41's TT specifies. AJP in games Last edited: 28/11/2018 at 21:04 by Albert Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 29/11/2018 at 08:21 #113698 | |
|
JamesN
1608 posts |
I’d need to confirm the dates involved, but shouldn’t August 9th be the new layout at Oxford? If so certain clashes are resolved by additional crossovers at the north end. It also explains the bay platforms being too short; they were lengthened in the resignalling.
Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 29/11/2018 at 13:45 #113706 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
That makes sense - I wasn't aware platforms had been lengthened. And if there's additional crossovers at the north end, you can perhaps just let an overlength train overhang the points without blocking through traffic on P3... (The train's departure time out of Oxford clashes with other traffic in both P3 and P4, so it's a rather weird train anyway in this layout even if you allow for signaller's creativity.) Unrelated to platforming: if you want to run this TT with delays on, I'd tick either the 'passing time' or 'set down only' box at the scheduled stops at Oxford North Jn for freights. I found, that early trains sometimes randomly await their scheduled departure time at that location instead of having a quick stop. I believe there are no crew changes at that location, or other reasons why freights must stop there even when there's a path available ahead? AJP in games Last edited: 29/11/2018 at 13:45 by Albert Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 30/11/2018 at 12:56 #113722 | |
|
wellgroomed
110 posts |
JamesN in post 113698 said:I’d need to confirm the dates involved, but shouldn’t August 9th be the new layout at Oxford? If so certain clashes are resolved by additional crossovers at the north end. It also explains the bay platforms being too short; they were lengthened in the resignalling.The Bays were extended prior to resignalling, so the timetable concerned should be compliant. Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 30/11/2018 at 13:01 #113723 | |
|
wellgroomed
110 posts |
Albert in post 113616 said:1Y62 is too long for its platform.Not sure of the timetable settings, but 1T41/1Y62 should be a 4-car 165 (95 metres) and should fit in the Bay platforms. Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 30/11/2018 at 13:06 #113724 | |
|
wellgroomed
110 posts |
Albert in post 113706 said:I believe there are no crew changes at that location, or other reasons why freights must stop there even when there's a path available ahead?Any freight train crew changes are made in the platforms, but IIRC there aren't many services that do have train crew relief at Oxford station. Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 30/11/2018 at 14:25 #113726 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
Okay, so the stops at North Jn are just there for pathing reasons and not for crew changes. When running with delays most of them are either early or late, and especially when the northbound XC is (very) late there is little point in holding a freight at the junction. Hence my suggestion to have an arrival & passing time there, as used in other TTs for loops that can be skipped. @ wellgroomed: Thanks for checking. 1T41 is 188 metres in the TT, but its description states "165002 165005" which is 4-car. AJP in games Last edited: 30/11/2018 at 14:31 by Albert Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 30/11/2018 at 18:28 #113736 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
6X28 wants to leave the Hinksey reception line #2 at the south end instead of reversing. I think this happens because it is too short to fit between signal 193 and the stop board, but lacking documentation I am not sure whether this really explains it, or the sim simply doesn't automatically reverse trains that enter from the south end of the yard. (The distance between the hand points and P215 seems to be roughly 450m on aerial imagery, and the train is 350m; I don't know how much overlap the stop board and shunt signals have.) AJP in games Log in to reply |
| Oxford August 9th 2018 30/11/2018 at 20:02 #113739 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
There are some more train length issues: a number of trains are only 20 metres. This applies at least to the Worcester line services which don't run with a class 800, which is 27 trains as far as I see (1P25, 1P27, 1P29, 1P31, 1P33, 1P36, 1P37, 1P39, 1P40, 1P44, 1P47, 1P49, 1W01, 1W02, 1W03, 1W04, 1W19, 1W23, 1W25, 1W27, 1W29, 1W31, 1W32, 1W33, 1W36, 1W39, and 1W42.) Some are HSTs, others class 165, neither of which is a one-coach vehicle. If it were about a class 153 or Pacer, it were perhaps not far from the truth, but those don't run into Paddington. Also most of the Banbury-Didcot services are 20 metres long: 2M30, 2M40, 2M48, 2M54, 2M60, 2M68, 2M72, 2V35, 2V45, 2V55, 2V59, 2V65, and 2V71 which should all be a class 165? Also 5C99 and 5P99 are 20m but I can't judge whether that is correct. AJP in games Last edited: 30/11/2018 at 20:07 by Albert Reason: None given Log in to reply |