Elvas Tower: SPAD - Elvas Tower

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

SPAD Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   dforrest 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Status: Contributing Member
  • Posts: 856
  • Joined: 12-January 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. Vincent (formally UK)
  • Simulator:MSTS, Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 23 May 2015 - 04:56 AM

In the UK a "SPAD" is a "signal passed at danger".

In MSTS this causes the termination of an Activity. In Open Rails it does not. Is there any reason for this incompatibility?

#2 User is online   James Ross 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 5,238
  • Joined: 30-June 10
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 23 May 2015 - 05:00 AM

It seems unnecessarily harsh to forcibly end an activity IMHO. I prefer that OR aims to penalise people in terms of completing the activity well (with a good score or smooth journey, etc.) instead of completing the activity at all.

#3 User is offline   copperpen 

  • Vice President
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 2,998
  • Joined: 08-August 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Simulator:MSTS & OR
  • Country:

Posted 23 May 2015 - 05:00 AM

I would not call it an incompatibility, more a well needed advancement in game management. After all, in the real world, if you SPAD you are not removed from the map and shut down.

#4 User is offline   Csantucci 

  • Member, Board of Directors
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 5,659
  • Joined: 31-December 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 23 May 2015 - 05:07 AM

Yes. OR is not committed to follow moot features of MSTS. As in reality a train does not disappear when performing a Spad, but may recover in some way this anomaly, the same occurs in OR.

Edit: saw only after committing the post tha someone else preceded me in the answer.

#5 User is offline   dforrest 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Status: Contributing Member
  • Posts: 856
  • Joined: 12-January 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. Vincent (formally UK)
  • Simulator:MSTS, Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 23 May 2015 - 05:09 AM

View PostJames Ross, on 23 May 2015 - 05:00 AM, said:

It seems unnecessarily harsh to forcibly end an activity IMHO. I prefer that OR aims to penalise people in terms of completing the activity well (with a good score or smooth journey, etc.) instead of completing the activity at all.


Understood James, but often a signal at danger is used to hold a player consist until the path ahead is clear for it to proceed, when the signal will have changed.

#6 User is online   James Ross 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 5,238
  • Joined: 30-June 10
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 23 May 2015 - 08:46 AM

View Postdforrest, on 23 May 2015 - 05:09 AM, said:

Understood James, but often a signal at danger is used to hold a player consist until the path ahead is clear for it to proceed, when the signal will have changed.

I don't see how this is relevant. Passing any signal at danger is bad but it should not be activity-ending bad. It may be tricky to know when it's safe to proceed after you've done it, I guess, but that's a real-life problem too. The track monitor will show points set against you (as end of authority I think) and trains ahead of you, so it should be survivable.

#7 User is offline   dforrest 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Status: Contributing Member
  • Posts: 856
  • Joined: 12-January 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. Vincent (formally UK)
  • Simulator:MSTS, Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 23 May 2015 - 09:16 AM

It is not survivability which concerns me but whether the intent of the activity author can be maintained.

#8 User is offline   dennisat 

  • Conductor
  • Group: Status: Active Member
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 16-February 13
  • Gender:Male
  • Simulator:Open Rails & MSTS
  • Country:

Posted 23 May 2015 - 09:37 AM

I am very pleased that SPADs do not permanently end an activity. In the majority of cases my SPADS are caused by overshooting a signal by only a few yards, having misjudged the braking. It is so frustrating in MSTS to have to go back to the previous save and re-run perhaps 15 - 20 minutes of the activity. With OR, going in and out of Manual signalling can be used nearly every time to reset the activity to Auto signalling and continue with the activity. If there is a train in the section into which you have overshot, wait for the train ahead to move out of the section and the activity can continue on its pre-defined course. If you have overrun switches and crossings which are shortly to take a conflicting movement, you can often reverse back out of the way.

If you've fallen asleep (which I sometimes have) and wake to find your train in a field somewhere then you've really no choice but to go back to the previous save!

Dennis

#9 User is offline   Lindsayts 

  • Superintendant
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 1,849
  • Joined: 25-November 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 23 May 2015 - 11:45 AM

View PostJames Ross, on 23 May 2015 - 08:46 AM, said:

I don't see how this is relevant. Passing any signal at danger is bad but it should not be activity-ending bad. It may be tricky to know when it's safe to proceed after you've done it, I guess, but that's a real-life problem too. The track monitor will show points set against you (as end of authority I think) and trains ahead of you, so it should be survivable.


In Victoria, Australia, if a driver does a SPAD he/she is NOT ALLOWED to move at all (Note 1) until given clearance by the controlers, may be it could be arrainged in OR that if one does a SPAD it is required to hit the request to proceed key (I thinks it the tab key) BEFORE one can move at all.

Note 1: You are PARTICULARLY NOT allowed to back up as they may be another service immediately behind you. This (backing up after a SPAD) is an immediate sacking offence.

Note 2: In some circumstances a driver is allowed to pass a signal at danger but the driver is extremely restricted on what he/she can do, Note these rules differ between states even within Australia.
For instance in Victoria on the Melbourne Metro network one is allowed to pass a SAD (signal at danger) as long as you proceed slowly and can stop quickly, in ARTC controlled railways (federal governmnet railways) you are I believe not allowed to proceed past a SAD at all with out writen authority.

Lindsay

#10 User is offline   vince 

  • Superintendant
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 1,253
  • Joined: 18-June 14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West of the Contental Divide
  • Simulator:ORTS_Running MSTS_Editing
  • Country:

Posted 23 May 2015 - 03:13 PM

View Postdforrest, on 23 May 2015 - 09:16 AM, said:

It is not survivability which concerns me but whether the intent of the activity author can be maintained.

I'm curious as to how you determine the activity authors 'intent' other than the obvious intent for a user to complete the activity?

For the record I regard the 'dump-you-from-the-Sim' as really silly, right up there with the same thing if you don't whistle for a grade crossing with it's properties set with a collision possibility. That's just nuts!
It's a simulation and throwing you out is not real world operation.
The general OR rule is good. Emergency set and you have to go through a procedure to recover.:ireful2:

best,
vince

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users