Since we know that the Acela is coming to Boston-Providence, I would like to list necessary improvements to the route. ATC/ACSES improvements Also, I would like to see Type B speeds for non Acela trains. Currently all the speed limits are for the Acela.
I've been pretty vocal recently about pushing signal fixes to DTG for review. I'm nearly complete with the fixes (just some polishing to do over the course of the holidays) and then I'll submit everything to source control for them to comb over. The list of things resolved includes: Corrected signal progressions. The real-life progression throughout most of the route is Clear 150 -> Clear 125 -> Cab Speed 80 (track circuit) -> Approach Limited/Advance Approach -> Approach Medium 45 (track circuit) -> Approach -> Restricting (track circuit) -> Stop/Restricting/Stop and Proceed. Example: You're heading toward Boston and there is a stop signal at Canton Junction due to a Stoughton line train merging onto the NEC. You'll have Clear 150 on the ADU until the block signal before Sharon. Passing this Clear signal will drop the cab signal to Clear 125. Once you pass Sharon station and cross into the next block at the track circuit, the cab signal will drop to Cab Speed 80. At the next block signal before the curve, you'll encounter an Advance Approach signal. At the track circuit afterwards, the cab signals will remain at Approach Medium 45. At the distant signal for Junction after the dead section, you'll encounter an Approach signal. At the track circuit near the viaduct, the cab signals will drop to Restricting. Then you'll come up on the stop signal at Junction. Signal Classification. Part of my signal fixes included classifying each signal's type. During route development, the signaler chooses what role the signal plays in the network. The valid types are: Home Signal, Distant Signal, Block Signal, Code Change Point, and Interlocking Exit. The choice made plays a huge part in correct signal aspect determinations. Signal Messages. A big part of Train Sim Classic signaling is sending messages up and down the line to convey information. Since this is my first time doing TSW signaling, I wanted to find a way to do something similar. Whenever a signal decides its aspect, it may send additional information to the signal behind it. Examples of such information includes (but is not limited to): This block occupied Next home signal is at Stop Cab Speed 80 Slowdown These messages help the overall determination of signal aspects. Please note that these messages aren't constantly being sent up and down the line, it's just a single variable that gets set for each signal. The previous signal simply reads the value of the variable. Pulse Codes. Each signal now sets variables for inside and outside pulse codes at both 100Hz and 250Hz carrier frequencies whenever it decides its signal aspect. The purpose of these pulse codes is so the train's Automatic Train Control (ATC) apparatus can interrogate the signal, find the pulse codes, and set the cab signal accordingly. The problem is that the train's ATC/ACSES blueprint needs to be modified significantly in order to read the pulse codes and set the correct cab signal aspect. I have it working on a copy of the ACS-64 I've modified locally but will have to work with DTG separately to implement them on the public versions of the trains. Until that happens, the existing behavior of ATC will persist which is looking at the aspect of the next signal and making a "best guess" of what the cab signal should be. The pulse codes also allow for the differentiation between Clear 150 and Clear 125 cab aspects when properly implemented into the locomotive. Custom Logic. Whenever a signal determines its aspect and pulse codes, the route developer can choose to override the decision and force something else. A common example I use is the interlocking just outside of Boston South Station (Tower 1). The entirety of Tower 1 has no pulse coding, which means the cab signal will always be at Restricting. However, if you play the current route, you'll see that you can get things like Clear, Approach Medium, or Approach on the ADU when in Tower 1. I'm using custom logic on a per-signal basis to force pulse codes to be at Restricting in that area. There are several other examples of custom logic such as the forced Cab Speed 80 drop near South Attleboro when heading toward Providence. Other There are several other things I've done such as redoing a lot of the signals around Southampton Street Yard, adding additional track circuitry, and putting actual Stop signals at the end of the Boston platforms (right now they're just models showing stop instead of an actual signal). Future Considerations Boston to Providence is purely Rule 261 territory, meaning that movement of trains is done between physical wayside signals. Once you get a bit west of Providence, rule 562 territory starts getting introduced. Right now there is no need for me to implement the distinction between Rule 261 and Rule 562 territory, so everything is programmed as if it's Rule 261. EDIT: Stoughton branch is rule 562 territory so I'll get something working for that section Let me know if you have any questions! Happy to answer them if I'm able. -Brandon
Wow you have been very thorough. Thank you for pushing the signal fixes, if they work I'm sure Boston Sprinter will be played a LOT more! Thanks for all the hard work you've put in!
This is great. Hope this will also be implemented on the next NEC section of the yet to be officially announced US route
As far as needs, clearly the signals need work, as we have seen, and is well-known in any case. I would also add that cab signals no longer work for the final signal permitting entrance into South Station. And as mentioned, the speed limits are also not accurately applied. Then there are the wants. Putting aside route extensions, and working just with what is already available, I would list a few improvements. 1) Let's finally correct the impossible scenario where you have to drive through a building 2) How about fixing up Forest Hills so that it does not look abandoned? You could also have Newton trains stop there, providing more timetable variety. 3) The unfinished walkway at Route 128 has always looked especially bad to me 4) Any further variety of MBTA rolling stock or locos would be appreciated 5) Some freight services sure would be nice... this would involve not only a freight loco with cab signals, but probably having to detail the sad yard at Mansfield a little better as well.
Lots of interesting stuff here. Really hope these signal fixes and corresponding ATC fixes make it in for the Acela launch. It's a day-1 purchase for me if so. Boston is SO CLOSE to being a great route but the current state of the safety systems is really dire. West of Providence, is different operating rules, hmmmmmm a fascinating little detail.
Oh wow. I don’t really have the first clue what all you’ve written means, but it certainly comes across as some very significant changes. Hopefully DTG prioritises implementing these fixes before releasing the Acela.
Hopefully they’ll add the Hsp46 locomotive and extend service to foxborough were the New England patriots play.
This is great news. I picked up Boston Rush Hour a while ago but barely have any time on the route because I was getting frustrated with some of the signal bugs. Can't wait to dive back in! Another almost game-breaking bug on the route is how sometimes the doors on the Amfleet cars don't shut. In my experience, being an hour or so into a timetable and then suddenly you have to end the scenario due to not being able to close the doors after a stop made me not want to play the route anymore. Is there any fix for this being worked on?
I've never seen this happen personally. It may have been fixed and you just don't know it since you haven't played in a while? Not sure.
It's better to make it for a new mbta route and then layer onto Boston providence so you get more gameplay and value out of it.
I believe this only occurs if the coaches move while the doors are open. As long as you keep the ENTIRE train completely still this shouldn't occur.
I think a lot of us just assumed nothing was updated. The signalling bugs were the main issues since release.
If any of the route has been rebuilt to facilitate lighting improvements - I hope they’ve added in the missing abandoned station. Can’t remember what it is called.
Probably you are thinking about Pawtucket - Central Falls. I certainly would not be opposed to its inclusion. I do personally want them to fix assets that are already there, but wrong or incomplete, first. It has always felt a little strange to drive past that area and see no evidence of a station at all.
This really is a necessary update if DTG intend to continue to produce contemporary US content- since all passenger routes and Class 1 mainlines in America now have ACS/ACSES installed, and running without them is as unrealistic as running a German route without PZB.
Ah the old Amtrak 66 ECS. Obviously there's the workaround of shunting via the far end of the depot, which you can then enter without collision/derailing. However the depot also needs a rework as the 3D model has no interior faces or texturing so you just see through to the outside world. Even approaching from the other end you are pushing the train through a closed shutter door. This really needs animating with either a proximity trigger or an interactive point on the building the driver can trigger.
Turns out I was slightly wrong about there being no Rule 562 territory on the route. While it's true that the entire Amtrak mainline from Boston to Providence is Rule 261, the Stoughton branch from Canton Center to Stoughton is 562. I only found this out now because I saved the Stoughton branch for last. So with the final few days I have to work on this, I'll start implementing that and get something working.
261 territory is an area where signaling is done between physical wayside signals. So let's say you have two consecutive wayside signals: an Approach Limited and then an Approach. Then take those same two signals and add 3 track circuit signaling points (code change point) between them. The presence of those additional signal blocks between the wayside signals won't change the signal progression. It's 261 territory, so movement is still done between the wayside signals. The first will still display Approach Limited and the second will still display Approach. Now if this were 562 territory, each of those track circuit signaling points (code change points) would become part of the overall signal progression for the locomotive's cab signals. It could look something like this: Clear 150 (wayside), Clear 125 (track circuit), Cab Speed 80 (track circuit), Approach Medium 45 (track circuit), Approach (wayside). 562 territory in a nutshell is an area of track that is governed by cab signals only, without the presence of wayside signals. Let me know if you need further clarification. Happy to answer. I had to do a bit of research and came up with this track chart for the Stoughton branch. They don't use traditional impedance bonds for track circuitry, so I had to do a bit of guesswork regarding where the circuits are. Should work out nicely though for a 4-aspect progression.
The timetable definitely needs reworking now. Just done service #66 with the ACS-64 and although I got into Boston on time (and got a gold medal), I was late departing Providence and at each of the intermediate stops. Not sure how the signalling is meant to work, but I was seemingly slowed right down on a number of occasions, sometimes with nothing obvious in front of me, which contributed to the lateness. I was also kept at 120mph on part of the route when the cab was telling me Clear 125. Quite enjoyed the run though.
