1. Home
  2. Library
  3. Data

Upcoming Games

(UTC times)

Full list
Add a game

Upcoming Events

No events to display

Who's Online

Person82, waucott, Hap, Meld, Galatea45699, Kage, Djennison (7 users seen recently)

Great new SimSig

You are here: Home > Forum > Simulations > Released > Central Scotland > Great new SimSig

Page 1 of 1

Great new SimSig 19/03/2010 at 11:41 #898
moonraker
Avatar
370 posts 		Wow !!. Great addition to SimSig. Along with Edinburgh and NE Scotland. I like the semaphore signalling around the Stirling area. That makes things just that bit more challenging. Thanks everyone
Log in to reply
Great new SimSig 19/03/2010 at 11:41 #7431
moonraker
Avatar
370 posts 		Wow !!. Great addition to SimSig. Along with Edinburgh and NE Scotland. I like the semaphore signalling around the Stirling area. That makes things just that bit more challenging. Thanks everyone
Log in to reply
Great new SimSig 21/03/2010 at 13:31 #7557
UKTrainMan
Avatar
1803 posts 		CScot is fast becoming my new favourite SimSig simulation.

Why?

Well it's a nice, easy simulation with some interesting features (LEVER FRAMES!!! - oops got a bit excited there) and should be a pleasure both on solo and multiplayer.

It's almost as if each of the three simulations each have different skill levels...almost like this;

CScot - Easy
NEScot - Medium (?)
Edinburgh - Hard (?)

(?) = Not sure.

I even got a bit of CScot action in on the train on the way home....but that was after I scared half of the passengers by making them think I was signalling our train :lol:

A huge thanks to Peter et al for all his/their hard work on these top notch simulations - the standard certainly hasn't dropped!
Any views and / or opinions expressed by myself are from me personally and do not represent those of any company I either work for or am a consultant for.
Log in to reply
Great new SimSig 11/04/2010 at 20:28 #8412
Adrian the Rock
Avatar
111 posts 		Yes, it's a fantastic sim. Apologies for having been quiet for a bit, but I've only had the chance to play it on and off over the last two or three weeks (and haven't even had time to get started at all with Edinboro yet).

One or two observations or comments - which I think (from a rapid read through the recent postings by email) may not yet have been mentioned (I have been playing the sim in non-easy mode with the new SAK layout):

  • Whenever I send a train up the Gartcosh single line to Gartsherrie, the TD berth on the nearby siding gets filled with '****' after the train passes onto the single line.

  • At Queen St, the ACI puts the new train numbers into the rear berths rather than the departure ones. Causes a bit of extra effort if, like me, you like to put departure times in the rear ones.

  • I have had one or two intermittent ACI oddities, at various locations but most noticeably Dunblane and Cumbernauld. Sometimes the ACI didn't put up the new code at all, even where the train had a straightforward Next Train action on its arrival, and one one or two occasions (mainly at Cumbernald) a wrong new reporting number was put in. Apologies for not having made save files for examples of this - if it happens again I will.

  • One one occasion I looped a train in the UGL at Larbert, and on approaching the signal it cleared ... to a green aspect and an illuminated 'cats-eye'! save file attached

  • Are the normal/reverse positions of the switch diamond ends at Carmuirs E really protoypical? It's really baffling to have to work out that the two ends work separately with the west end of the diamond being Normal towards Larbert but the east end Normal towards the West junction. Surely the real box doesn't/didn't have four separate levers for a traditional double junction with a switch diamond?

  • Related to the above point, the conventions for point operation at each corner of the Carmuirs triangle seem a bit more inconsistent than can be accounted for purely by differences of layout and lever operation. I appreciate this is to some extent down to questions of how to simulate the mechanical boxes, but at the West Jn I can set a trailing route from Larbert without having to set the facing points towards there - I'd be very surprised if the actual interlocking allows that. At Larbert Jn, reversing either the crossover part of the trailing double-lead junction from Carmuirs E or the point in the up line also drives the facing points reverse, but normalising the latter doesn't then normalise the points for the trailing move. I'd have thought it more sensible either to (a) enforce locking as on the lever frame, so points cannot be changed if others need setting correctly first, or (b) make it consistently work so that changing a point one way causes all other required points to move in step.

  • At Dunblane, Line Clear can be "given" to Greenloaning with a train standing in P1, but Greenloaning's section signal doesn't clear until that TC clears.

But don't get me wrong, all of that said I have had enormous fun with this sim and it's great to see the effort that's gone into providng a better simulation of AB signalling.
Log in to reply
Great new SimSig 11/04/2010 at 21:19 #8414
Jsun
Avatar
212 posts 		From what I saw NEScot looks the hardest, especially if you're attempting to run the AB sections honestly.
Log in to reply
Great new SimSig 11/04/2010 at 21:59 #8418
Peter Bennet
Avatar
5402 posts 		Adrian the Rock said:

  • Whenever I send a train up the Gartcosh single line to Gartsherrie, the TD berth on the nearby siding gets filled with '****' after the train passes onto the single line.

Now fixed

Quote:
  • At Queen St, the ACI puts the new train numbers into the rear berths rather than the departure ones. Causes a bit of extra effort if, like me, you like to put departure times in the rear ones.

    • It's not the comprehensive ACI you get with ARS- I did try interposing at the alternative berth but it was unsatisfactory so gave up as not material to Sim- noted and may revisit.

    Quote:
  • I have had one or two intermittent ACI oddities, at various locations but most noticeably Dunblane and Cumbernauld. Sometimes the ACI didn't put up the new code at all, even where the train had a straightforward Next Train action on its arrival, and one one or two occasions (mainly at Cumbernald) a wrong new reporting number was put in. Apologies for not having made save files for examples of this - if it happens again I will.

    • Can't explain that

    Quote:
  • One one occasion I looped a train in the UGL at Larbert, and on approaching the signal it cleared ... to a green aspect and an illuminated 'cats-eye'! save file attached

    • Looks like I've fixed that

    Quote:
  • Are the normal/reverse positions of the switch diamond ends at Carmuirs E really protoypical? It's really baffling to have to work out that the two ends work separately with the west end of the diamond being Normal towards Larbert but the east end Normal towards the West junction. Surely the real box doesn't/didn't have four separate levers for a traditional double junction with a switch diamond?

    • Interesting question how it is laid out as the start is how it is drawn in the box diagram- tried to upload but it's too big. But if you have a train traveling from CEJ15 to LJ14 it will cross Points 12A, 12B and 4B in that order with 4A being between CEJ9 to CEJ10.

    Quote:
  • Related to the above point, the conventions for point operation at each corner of the Carmuirs triangle seem a bit more inconsistent than can be accounted for purely by differences of layout and lever operation. I appreciate this is to some extent down to questions of how to simulate the mechanical boxes, but at the West Jn I can set a trailing route from Larbert without having to set the facing points towards there - I'd be very surprised if the actual interlocking allows that. At Larbert Jn, reversing either the crossover part of the trailing double-lead junction from Carmuirs E or the point in the up line also drives the facing points reverse, but normalising the latter doesn't then normalise the points for the trailing move. I'd have thought it more sensible either to (a) enforce locking as on the lever frame, so points cannot be changed if others need setting correctly first, or (b) make it consistently work so that changing a point one way causes all other required points to move in step.

    • I'll need to analyse this comment further.

    Quote:
  • At Dunblane, Line Clear can be "given" to Greenloaning with a train standing in P1, but Greenloaning's section signal doesn't clear until that TC clears.

    • Noted and will be looked into.

    Thanks

    Peter
    I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs!
    Log in to reply
    Great new SimSig 12/04/2010 at 18:54 #8442
    Adrian the Rock
    Avatar
    111 posts     		Peter Bennet said:
    " said:
    Are the normal/reverse positions of the switch diamond ends at Carmuirs E really protoypical? It's really baffling to have to work out that the two ends work separately with the west end of the diamond being Normal towards Larbert but the east end Normal towards the West junction. Surely the real box doesn't/didn't have four separate levers for a traditional double junction with a switch diamond?

    Interesting question how it is laid out as the start is how it is drawn in the box diagram- tried to upload but it's too big. But if you have a train traveling from CEJ15 to LJ14 it will cross Points 12A, 12B and 4B in that order with 4A being between CEJ9 to CEJ10.

    I assume 12B and 4B are therefore the switch diamond ends, as there appears to be no disagreement that the junction is a standard double junction rather than a double lead as at Larbert N.

    But, in mechanical signalling, numbering like 12A/12B means that both ends are worked from the same lever - in this case no 12. On a sim, therefore, when the signaller left- or right-clicks either end of such a pair of points, the other end should move in tandem. This also means that the western ends of the diamond move in tandem with the trailing points 4A (both operated from lever 4), which is also logical. But, again, these two ends should work in tandem on the sim.

    It's not uncommon, at traditional double junctions, for the normal positions of the two points to correspond to the 'outermost' running lines, as here where 12 is normal towards Glasgow and 4 normal from Larbert, rather than both levers normal leaving the points set for the same direction.

    But the levers would certainly be interlocked to ensure flank protection so that (in this case) reversing lever 4 locks 12 normal, and vice versa. This should also be enforced by the sim.

    From the above, therefore - and picking up on the comment I made subsequently - the sim should really offer one or other of the following behaviours (Carmuirs E details used for simplicity) if you try to reverse 4 points with 12 points also reverse (or vice versa):
    1. refuse to do so and optionally beep or display an error in the message window, OR

    2. normalise 12 (or 4) as well.


    (Maybe even (1) could apply in 'hard' mode and (2) in easy.)

    Incidentally, I meant to add in my previous message that I worked in Scotland and stayed in Falkirk - very near Grahamston - in 1996, and in Glasgow in 1999-2001 so this sim brings back many fond memories! Thanks again for all your hard work in building it.
    Log in to reply
    Great new SimSig 12/04/2010 at 20:02 #8450
    Peter Bennet
    Avatar
    5402 posts     		Ok that seems to be an omission on my part.

    Peter
    I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs!
    Log in to reply
    Great new SimSig 13/04/2010 at 08:28 #8460
    Peter Bennet
    Avatar
    5402 posts     		Ok I think we are talking about two different things here now I look at it. There was an omission on the co-acting at CEJ but the other two do have locking in place but it is dependent on routes being set. What I'd not thought about, and now that I have it seems like a good idea, is to actually make the route setting conditional on the point position in (say) hard mode so you have to set the points before you can set the route.

    That falls into the future development tray I think- so may not happen for a while but may appear in NEScot.

    Peter
    I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs!
    Log in to reply
    Great new SimSig 13/04/2010 at 14:11 #8467
    Firefly
    Avatar
    521 posts     		Peter

    I've been locking at this. At Larbert Junction there is was triple ended set of points. 10A/10B/10C (based on the era that you've modelled). Therefore it's not possible for LJ13 shunt to route over the nearest crossover (because it's was not a crossover it was a set of switch diamonds in this era). LJ13 routes over 22A/22B points which is the crossover closer to Lambert North.

    As Adrian has said it is most likely that the mechanical locking was as followed.

    To move 10 points N to R - 7 points must be R.
    7 points are then locked reverse until such time as 10 points are returned to Normal

    As far as CEJ goes you've already seen that it's 12A/B and 4A/B.

    To move 12 points N to R - 4 points must be N.
    4 points are then locked normal until such time as 12 points are returned to Normal

    To be honest the above is only a mechanical interlocking trait. Although some areas did provide "point to point interlocking" on their NX panels it was not common and it's not been done since the 80's. On NX panels flank locking is generally applied by route setting and not point to point interlocking.
    Log in to reply
    Great new SimSig 13/04/2010 at 20:37 #8474
    Adrian the Rock
    Avatar
    111 posts     		Peter Bennet said:
    Ok I think we are talking about two different things here now I look at it....

    Indeed, and the co-acting was one of these...
    Firefly said:
    I've been locking at this. At Larbert Junction there is was triple ended set of points. 10A/10B/10C (based on the era that you've modelled)....

    That would make sense, these presumably being the points in the trailing connection from Carmuirs E? Currently on the sim the two ends of the crossover part co-act, but from the sound of this, shouldn't the southernmost point in the line towards Carmuirs W co-act with them too?

    On the second point, which concerns interlocking:
    Quote:
    To be honest the above is only a mechanical interlocking trait. Although some areas did provide "point to point interlocking" on their NX panels it was not common and it's not been done since the 80's. On NX panels flank locking is generally applied by route setting and not point to point interlocking

    Thanks, I'm nowhere near as au fair with panel interlocking methods as I am with mechanical. If that's the case then the present behaviour of the sim is a credible alternative to the two I listed earlier, and only slightly less realistic in terms of simulating what was there in real life.
    Log in to reply
    Back