UK Signals

[neyland]

I notice that whoever is programming the signals for OR. Is persisting with the incorrect depiction of every platform start signal being set to on in the case of semaphores and showing red for colour lights.

Whenever a train is scheduled to stop at that station platform.

This is INCORRECT and needs to be amended to show off or green, when the next section ahead is clear.

Regardless of the trains timetable.

[lindsayts]

I notice that whoever is programming the signals for OR. Is persisting with the incorrect depiction of every platform start signal being set to on in the case of semaphores and showing red for colour lights.

Whenever a train is scheduled to stop at that station platform.

This is INCORRECT and needs to be amended to show off or green, when the next section ahead is clear.

Regardless of the trains timetable.

This is not a programming omision or error but the result of deliberate discusion and decision of the developers. I believe the expalnation given was to ensure drivers kept to the time table. I find it a total pain as in Victoria, Australia the locomotive or the head of a train of a pass will overshoot the platform on a regular basis to allow the rear cars (where the conductor is) to access the platfroms.
This is announced on the train, including at the station of origin that only the rear cars will have platfrom access at some stations.

Lindsay

[neyland]

If it is a deliberate decision Lindsay, then they need to change that decision.

There are enough train games around already, where the realism takes a back seat to game playing.

Same as your experience here in West Wales, longer mainline trains very often used to have to run passed the platform starter signal.

Too accommodate the train, particularly if there was a guards brake or parcel vehicle at the rear end.

[lindsayts]

If it is a deliberate decision Lindsay, then they need to change that decision.

There are enough train games around already, where the realism takes a back seat to game playing.

Same as your experience here in West Wales, longer mainline trains very often used to have to run passed the platform starter signal.

Too accommodate the train, particularly if there was a guards brake or parcel vehicle at the rear end.

I asked the OR devs (on elvastower) about this not long after the change was made I am just repeating the answer they gave then.
As you seem to say I cannot under stand why a group intent on doing an "accurate" railsim would do something so obviously against what is done in real life.
They do read these forums so may be they will change there mind.

In Victoria it not only was done but is still being done, an obvious example is the Melbourne Seymour service which uses "Sprinters". Over half the intermediate stations have platforms to short for peak hour trains. The drivers stop with the rear of the train in the platform as that is where the conductor resides. The driver and conductor not being allowed to travel in the same vehicle on a multi unit train.

[neyland]

I posted quite a few bug reports on their site.

Some in regard the incorrect signalling practices.

All ignored or dismissed out of hand.

So i gave up long ago.

[mnjrr]

I posted quite a few bug reports on their site.

Some in regard the incorrect signalling practices.

All ignored or dismissed out of hand.

So i gave up long ago.

Hello,

The members of the OR team do read and appreciate feedback from OR users. Please do not equate that just because we might not respond to a particular request that we are ignoring the request. It will take time to process requests. In regards to the matter of alleged "incorrect" signaling in OR, the current signaling system in the sim might not be appropriate for the signaling in specific locations, such as Wales. However, the system might be appropriate for other locations in the world. Railroad and railway signaling systems are different throughout the world. Bearing that important distinction in mind, the OR programmers have discussed eventually giving OR users the option to have signaling systems appropriate for the routes they run through plugin models.

[neyland]

With respect mnjrr it is not correct for anywhere in the UK as it stands.

Particularly in regards semaphore signal operation.

In regards Wales and i realise you are from the Eastern Seaboard of the USA.

Wales is an integrated part of the UK railway system and has been for over a hundred years.

[baldwin]

It seems to me that this signal behaviour is a blanket arrangement that affects everyone everywhere and is probably not correct for just about anywhere in the world. It is not peculiar to UK systems. I also feel that it is high time that the signal system got a complete overhaul, but the problem is, do we have anyone actually working on the signal system.

[twpol]

It seems to me that this signal behaviour is a blanket arrangement that affects everyone everywhere and is probably not correct for just about anywhere in the world. It is not peculiar to UK systems. I also feel that it is high time that the signal system got a complete overhaul, but the problem is, do we have anyone actually working on the signal system.

We have people working on the signalling system, but it's not that simple (is it ever?). The signalling got a massive rewrite quite recently, so please be a little more circumspect about requesting an overhaul.

This particular issue of platform signals being kept red until 2 minutes prior to departure is (IIRC) specifically to enable better functioning of passing and AI traffic coming the other way (e.g. on single tracks) but it is a compromise. OR cannot possibly know what the route convention is for this, since that information was not provided for MSTS, so it uses 2 minutes. I am well aware this is not prototypical behaviour in various places, but compromises need to be made sometimes and until a better solution is suggested it will be staying.

[slipperman]

Hi,
I have great respect for the Open Rails programming team, they are doing a great job. But the subject of this thread has got me baffled!
Why 2 minutes? Why not 3 or 1? What happens if the station waiting time is less than 2 minutes? Surely if there is an AI train coming the other way on a single line section, the signal will be at danger, but if not, it should be clear. If it's a case of the player being required to wait until an AI train has passed it, in the same direction, and, ultimately, using the same track, wouldn't a better method be to use a priority system (implemented when creating an activity) where the higher priority train, Player or AI, gets the path first?
I know MSTS doesn't have this system, but I wonder if there are any redundant parameters within its current activity file layout which could be used.

Cheers,
Ged

[baldwin]

We have people working on the signalling system, but it's not that simple (is it ever?). The signalling got a massive rewrite quite recently, so please be a little more circumspect about requesting an overhaul.

.

I know about the signalling rewrite, and I do sometimes fetch a mallet to a walnut, but it has the desired result on occasion. I think the information now provided is sufficient to answer the fact that it is not unique to UK signals.

[baldwin]

This is going to continue as a problem until we have activity and route editors for OR. The initial aim of OR is to be MSTS compatible or better. The problem with trying to achieve this is a lack of documentation on the inner workings of MSTS and so compromise has to be the name of the game in certain areas. I do however think that in this case the outcome should have been path based, in that if there is no conflicting path for x number of signals ahead, the signal should be green, or at caution which can also be passed without causing emergency brakes to be applied.

[csantucci]

In my country starting signals worked as in OR up to some years ago, and work as in the UK since some year... In fact a checkbox in the OR Menu to select type of operation would be welcome.

[twpol]

But the subject of this thread has got me baffled!
Why 2 minutes? Why not 3 or 1? What happens if the station waiting time is less than 2 minutes?

If the waiting time is <2 minutes, the signal is red until you stop and is then it is cleared immediately.

Honestly, I don't understand why it is needed, and I disagree with it, but the signalling is not my area.

[roeter]

One of the most frustrating inadequacies of MSTS is that it is not possible to set up a timetable such that a train can be overtaken during a station stop - either by a train which also stops, or by a train which passes through. It does not matter which is player train or which is AI - it just can't be done, for the exit signal will clear for the first train as soon as it approaches, thus blocking the path for any other train.

All comments above ignore this aspect - and it happens in all countries.

In the UK, for instance, it happens (or at least happened for many years) at Haslemere, where the slow Waterloo to Portsmouth train was held to be overtaken by the fast train. Another location where the signal is frequently held at danger until departure is at Welwyn Garden City. And there are other such locations and situations all over the place.
So, to enable proper overtaking by using booked timetable timings the feature of 'holding' signal was introduced.
With all definitions still firmly based on MSTS files, there was no possibility of making this optional in any way. At the time the signalling was build, adding new parameters to MST files was not yet considered.
So, the choice was clear : either making booked overtaking a real possibility, with the drawback that it had to be applied to all stops, or facing the same frustration as with MSTS.
With the much improved ability for AI train timings - which now also keep to timetables, someting MSTS never could manage - the advantages of having this facility outweighed the drawback.

As for 2 minutes - that is indeed quite arbitrary, seems a fair value, though.

As for clearing only when the train stops - that is a technical matter. The train timings for the player train are processed by the activity processing, the signal processing has no access to these details. The activity processing is set up in such a way that it only calculates the required station stop time the moment the train is actually stopped. Only then can it send a message to the signal processing as to when the signal can be cleared. So, if anyone disagrees with this - you have my invitation to rewrite the activity processing so this can be changed.

So, this is how it is now. But I can give you hope - quite a fair bit, actually.
In the planned Activity Editor, this feature will become optional - to be set per station and/or per individual train as required.
Now, if I had a team of, say, 20 high-level software specialists, I could promise to have this done by Christmas. But I haven't.
So, you have to wait a bit longer. How long - I don't know. But it is planned, and I do hope to get going on it, hopefully early next year. But there is a lot of other work to be done still as well, so I'm afraid you will have to be patient for some time to come.

Regards,
Rob Roeterdink