I have a set of signals operating through Train Controller Silver. I am able to set up the signals to operate properly in one direction. If the train is running in the opposite direction the signal pattern makes no sense. Is there a way to make the signals direction sensitive so that an eastbound train would have one pattern of signals, stop, proceed with caution, go and a westbound train would turn the same signals to stop the whole time the westbound train approaches the signal from the back side? I would appreciate any help? Thanks, Jim.
Controlling physical signals with traincontroller
- Thread starter jhfvandy
- Start date
ModelRailroadForums.com is a free Model Railroad Discussion Forum and photo gallery. We cover all scales and sizes of model railroads. Online since 2002, it's one of the oldest and largest model railroad forums on the web. Whether you're a master model railroader or just getting started, you'll find something of interest here.
Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)
diesel
Weedy Liver
I believe, unfortunately, it's necessary to reference real life signalling and ask, what real life signalling system are you emulating? Because "operate properly in one direction" really has dozens of different implementations on different railroads, in different countries. "Proper" ABS for example, has no fixed direction and just responds blindly to block occupancy (all signals permissive in the absence of trains). "Knock down" systems allow a centralized controller to set a direction for a series of blocks (all signals are usually restrictive in the absence of trains), lights will go green in one direction only, and "knock down" to red after the train has passed. Is that the one you mean? I'm confused about your example because if trains meet on the same track, one faces a "stop and proceed" and the other faces a "stop", the result will still be a stall, even though no head on crash. Why ARE they trains on the same track in different directions? Are there turnouts in play that you haven't mentioned?
Are you familiar with the concept of an "interlocking"? This is, in its simplest form, a track junction where the signal aspect depends on factors above and beyond block occupancy. For example, a signalled turnout or diamond. A series of knock down mode ABS type signals terminates with an interlocking at each end; this is because it is where the stop that propogated all the way down the blocks, ends and other types of signalling begin (the point where the first set up "proceed" begins, and the place at the other end where the last set up block ends).
You say it "doesn't make sense" but what I am saying is, the sense depends a lot on the signalling conventions that you have decided to use.
The setting of a set of knock downs corresponds roughly to a train order. Generally, it would be actually paired with an actual train order, usually communicated on the radio these days. Never would a train trigger a knock down series of blocks automatically just by entering the first block. That is an executive function of the Railroad Traffic Controller. To imagine why this might not work, consider what might happen if two trains entered the block sequence from both ends at the same time.
Another subtlety of knock down blocks - in some but not all systems, if the destination (after last) block is occupied, the circuit is prevented from setting up "clear" signals all the way up to the origin - the departing train would see a "stop" at the departure point, because the destination interlocking is occupied. In other words, first signal mirrors the state of the final signal.
Are you familiar with the concept of an "interlocking"? This is, in its simplest form, a track junction where the signal aspect depends on factors above and beyond block occupancy. For example, a signalled turnout or diamond. A series of knock down mode ABS type signals terminates with an interlocking at each end; this is because it is where the stop that propogated all the way down the blocks, ends and other types of signalling begin (the point where the first set up "proceed" begins, and the place at the other end where the last set up block ends).
You say it "doesn't make sense" but what I am saying is, the sense depends a lot on the signalling conventions that you have decided to use.
The setting of a set of knock downs corresponds roughly to a train order. Generally, it would be actually paired with an actual train order, usually communicated on the radio these days. Never would a train trigger a knock down series of blocks automatically just by entering the first block. That is an executive function of the Railroad Traffic Controller. To imagine why this might not work, consider what might happen if two trains entered the block sequence from both ends at the same time.
Another subtlety of knock down blocks - in some but not all systems, if the destination (after last) block is occupied, the circuit is prevented from setting up "clear" signals all the way up to the origin - the departing train would see a "stop" at the departure point, because the destination interlocking is occupied. In other words, first signal mirrors the state of the final signal.
Last edited:
I am using Pennsylvania railroad signal lights. When a train approaches the signal, it shows three vertical lights for go. As the train passes the signal, it shows three horizontal lights for stop. By using upper and lower signals you then indicate approach-slow, approach-medium and go as the train moves down the track. If a train is approaching from the other direction shouldn't the signal show three horizontal lights for stop the whole time the train is approaching the signal from the back side. I have dual mainline tracks. The stop signal would warn a train not to crossover into the path of the oncoming train. Is there a way to set up traincontroller to detect direction to operate the signals properly. Thanks for your reply.
diesel
Weedy Liver
I'm not familiar with Pennsy signalling aspects. But the mechanics should be the same as 3-colour. A crossover is an interlocking, from the signalling point of view. So the turnout has to provide feedback to the signalling system (if I understand correctly, centrally controlled in your case). That is so the special conditions of a crossover can protect train movements. Firstly, the system has to signal a stop, when facing points that are set against it. Secondly, the system must convey forward, the occupancy state of the track that is selected by the crossover, not the other one. So before going on, are your crossovers wired to transmit their position to the control software? Or, are they wired directly to local signal controllers that do that job?
To address your second question, again, train direction never controls anything in a functioning railroad signalling system. Train direction is always determined by written or transmitted official Train Orders, and/or by an operator in a CTC control center. It is then the train crew's responsibility to obey the direction and limits set forth in the order. Your request to make it automatic isn't prototypical, and is probably why the control system you have doesn't implement or allow it.
But, I suppose you could. The main thing to look at is how operation between multiple trains is scheduled. If real time, then you have to sort out conflicting movements like grabbing the same track. So, what are the default signal indications? You're saying that the system shows a clear signal in the opposite direction facing a train? That's not typical, logically it should be a stop.
I also wonder, if you are running software layout control, if it has ways of defining the signals vs track paths. Also I'm sorry that I don't have hands on experience with Train Controller Silver, no doubt someone who does would know more specifics.
To address your second question, again, train direction never controls anything in a functioning railroad signalling system. Train direction is always determined by written or transmitted official Train Orders, and/or by an operator in a CTC control center. It is then the train crew's responsibility to obey the direction and limits set forth in the order. Your request to make it automatic isn't prototypical, and is probably why the control system you have doesn't implement or allow it.
But, I suppose you could. The main thing to look at is how operation between multiple trains is scheduled. If real time, then you have to sort out conflicting movements like grabbing the same track. So, what are the default signal indications? You're saying that the system shows a clear signal in the opposite direction facing a train? That's not typical, logically it should be a stop.
I also wonder, if you are running software layout control, if it has ways of defining the signals vs track paths. Also I'm sorry that I don't have hands on experience with Train Controller Silver, no doubt someone who does would know more specifics.
Last edited:
Thanks for responding. You said you did not have any experience with Traincontroller Silver. Do you operate traincontroller gold or bronze? My questions are traincontroller specific and can't be answered if you don't have any traincontroller experience. Thanks for showing interest.
RhB Michael
RhB Lokführer
You willl be more likely to find an answer about Train Controller software here: Stummis MoBaForum
The site is in German but they are very knowledgeable over there about TC. You will not likely get a response if written in English though. It's not that they don't understand English, it's more like, 'when in Rome...'
The site is in German but they are very knowledgeable over there about TC. You will not likely get a response if written in English though. It's not that they don't understand English, it's more like, 'when in Rome...'
Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)