Page 1 of 1
| Rules referencing chained sims 29/07/2024 at 08:42 #157970 | |
kbarber
1742 posts |
Apologies if this is already possible (I'm really not at all up to speed on timetabling). jc92 in post 157949 (Doncaster 1981 Summer Weekdays) said: Cambridge - Unlikely to be done. currently insufficient information and it depends on any revised simulation including the Spalding-March which is out of scope of the PSB era. Clive replied: The revised Cambridge will cover the same area as the original one. The section between Manea and Peterborough is a very simplified one intended to provide just enough to connect it with the Peterborough sim and to allow trains to originate or terminate in the March area. If you want (say) Spalding to Ely trains over the old line, then just have them enter/leave at one of the yards. That's the best I can offer; sorry. How about rules that can reference trains running in chained sims (but won't apply when no chain in place). So an Eastern Region mega-chain that had Cambridge, Peterborough and Doncaster might have trains entering Doncaster that had run in Cambridge. If it were possible for rules in Doncaster to reference a train's exit from Cambridge, even though Ely - March - Spalding - etc weren't 'in-sim', a train delayed in Cambridge would carry a delay to its Doncaster entry. A further refinement would be to have a degree of randomness so trains making up time could be accurately simulated. (Also perhaps a degree of non-randomness so the later a train leaves Cambridge, the more delay it's likely to pick up before Doncaster to simulate the impact of lost paths, crew changes that have to be replanned as the booked crew reach the end of their shift, etc. etc.) Could be a bit burdensome for timetable writers, I accept. But the chatter on here suggest there are some writers whose quest for accuracy would grab this with both hands! Log in to reply The following user said thank you: KCRCRailway |
| Rules referencing chained sims 29/07/2024 at 09:59 #157971 | |
9pN1SEAp
1180 posts |
This is potentially tricky, as recovery actions will vary on individual circumstances and the whims of delay attribution managers! If the train is late it could be caped early, or diagrams swapped midway with a unit coming the other way, or end up being even later due to missing its path and being stuck behind slow freight! Thanks Jamie Jamie S (JAMS) Log in to reply |
| Rules referencing chained sims 30/07/2024 at 08:16 #157976 | |
|
kbarber
1742 posts |
9pN1SEAp in post 157971 said:This is potentially tricky, as recovery actions will vary on individual circumstances and the whims of delay attribution managers! So possibly even more randomness. I don't know what delay attribution managers have to do with regulating decisions. We didn't have them in my day. In some areas (GNR & GW for instance) signalmen were responsible for their own regulating, with Control offering advice and guidance when requested. Other areas (such as GER and Midland lines) you didn't blow your nose without Control say-so. But in all cases the task would be to get the service back on track and/or get trains through with minimum delay. But yes, you're right about lost paths. That's why I suggested the potential for losing even more time should rise in proportion to how late the train was when it triggered the rule. Log in to reply |
| Rules referencing chained sims 30/07/2024 at 13:09 #157977 | |
jc92
3685 posts 
|
kbarber in post 157976 said:They don't. Their job is retrospective assignment of delay. I suspect the point being made is more that sometimes companies will make a decision which costs the least in TDA. That does leak down to signalling where NR route control may well pull rank to specify X runs before Y where X is already heavily delayed with allocation likely to go against NR for example. Its not uncommon to find an early run declined by route control for example because they have concerns that the early runner could fail and cause delays which would potentially go down to NR regulation rather than the FOC/TOC of the early runner. "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply The following user said thank you: kbarber |
| Rules referencing chained sims 31/07/2024 at 08:33 #157982 | |
|
kbarber
1742 posts |
jc92 in post 157977 said:kbarber in post 157976 said:I think I'm best off out of it... how can you enjoy regulating under those circumstances?They don't. Their job is retrospective assignment of delay. I suspect the point being made is more that sometimes companies will make a decision which costs the least in TDA. That does leak down to signalling where NR route control may well pull rank to specify X runs before Y where X is already heavily delayed with allocation likely to go against NR for example. At t'other end of the scale, a story from the GN Main Line in the old days (not one of mine, I hasten to add). GN signalmen, as I said, were responsible for their own regulating. And pretty good they were at it too (though, as Gerry Fiennes said, they had to be given the layouts they had to work with). Some were bolder than others. And occasionally one would slip up, which would lead to a visit from the District Inspector and a 'suitable conversation'. So one day one of the bravest regulators down there got it badly wrong and an express got seriously hammered. The following week, he was on late turn when there was a crunch of boots on the stairs and a DI entered the box. "I suppose you know why I'm here?" was the DI's opening line. "Err, yes guv, I suppose I do." "That's OK then. Is the kettle on?" Yes, there was fun to be had in those days. Log in to reply |