Something I've noticed that's mildly infuriating me in 1920s Vienna :-/
The metros will 'decide' to wait for incoming passengers far too easily, when the passengers are too far away. This means that once a metro station reaches a threshold of incoming passenger-flow, the trains will never leave empty, because there's no gaps in the passenger-flow big enough to let the train decide to leave. So the train only leaves when it's full. Which means it a) is holding up all the trains behind it and b) can't pick up more than a handful of the 120 passengers waiting at the next stop. Adding more metros doesn't help, because they just join the back of the queue.
I'd like to suggest that when there's a vehicle (any type) loading passengers at a stop, and another vehicle on the same route arrives behind it and has to wait, the second vehicle sends a 'push' signal to the first vehicle. This would make the first vehicle stop loading passengers, even if there's more coming, and leave the stop, letting the second vehicle pick up the remaining passengers.
I'm a bus driver, and this is more-or-less what happens if I'm running late and I see another bus behind me (not necessarily same route, as long as it serves all the same stops as I serve). I won't wait for running passengers, I won't stop to pick people up if none of my passengers have rung the bell to get off, I'll just leave them for the bus behind and try to regain headway!
Also, it would be FANTASTIC if, when creating a Metro line, as well as being able to select a specific platform, there was a third option to send the train to either platform. This would be useful for terminus stations, so two trains can load/unload at once. If a line is using this option, the passengers would wait in the middle of the platform and go to whichever side the train arrives on.
I've found a workaround for the situation where metros are ALWAYS too full to pick up from a certain station. I have a north-south metro, with four stops (let's call the A, B, C, D) in 1923 Vienna that runs through the city centre to the south railway terminus. Stop A, next to the railway terminus, always has enough people coming down the stairs that the train can't leave until it's completely full. Because hardly anyone gets off the train at Stop B, B ends up with a crowd of angry people that can never go away.
My workaround is to break the line in two. One line runs between B, C and D, and the second line runs between A and B. This means only one train wastes time waiting for dawdling people streaming down the steps at A. The two lines don't cross over so the AB trains don't conflict with the BCD trains. Passengers going from A-C or A-D (or vice versa) just cross the platform at B, and pay for another ticket. I think this makes A-C/D journeys less attractive because I'm not getting 35 of each 40 passengers going past stop B like I was before.
Here's stop B. Stop A is to the right, stops C and D are to the top-left.
The metros will 'decide' to wait for incoming passengers far too easily, when the passengers are too far away. This means that once a metro station reaches a threshold of incoming passenger-flow, the trains will never leave empty, because there's no gaps in the passenger-flow big enough to let the train decide to leave. So the train only leaves when it's full. Which means it a) is holding up all the trains behind it and b) can't pick up more than a handful of the 120 passengers waiting at the next stop. Adding more metros doesn't help, because they just join the back of the queue.
I'd like to suggest that when there's a vehicle (any type) loading passengers at a stop, and another vehicle on the same route arrives behind it and has to wait, the second vehicle sends a 'push' signal to the first vehicle. This would make the first vehicle stop loading passengers, even if there's more coming, and leave the stop, letting the second vehicle pick up the remaining passengers.
I'm a bus driver, and this is more-or-less what happens if I'm running late and I see another bus behind me (not necessarily same route, as long as it serves all the same stops as I serve). I won't wait for running passengers, I won't stop to pick people up if none of my passengers have rung the bell to get off, I'll just leave them for the bus behind and try to regain headway!
Also, it would be FANTASTIC if, when creating a Metro line, as well as being able to select a specific platform, there was a third option to send the train to either platform. This would be useful for terminus stations, so two trains can load/unload at once. If a line is using this option, the passengers would wait in the middle of the platform and go to whichever side the train arrives on.
I've found a workaround for the situation where metros are ALWAYS too full to pick up from a certain station. I have a north-south metro, with four stops (let's call the A, B, C, D) in 1923 Vienna that runs through the city centre to the south railway terminus. Stop A, next to the railway terminus, always has enough people coming down the stairs that the train can't leave until it's completely full. Because hardly anyone gets off the train at Stop B, B ends up with a crowd of angry people that can never go away.
My workaround is to break the line in two. One line runs between B, C and D, and the second line runs between A and B. This means only one train wastes time waiting for dawdling people streaming down the steps at A. The two lines don't cross over so the AB trains don't conflict with the BCD trains. Passengers going from A-C or A-D (or vice versa) just cross the platform at B, and pay for another ticket. I think this makes A-C/D journeys less attractive because I'm not getting 35 of each 40 passengers going past stop B like I was before.
Here's stop B. Stop A is to the right, stops C and D are to the top-left.
Last edited: