It has become fashionable to blame the inadequacies of MSTS when referring to the ability or inability to obtain prototypical operation of signalling, but, very often it is the incorrect application of what is available that is the cause of problems.

Examination of the signal data files for the default Settle and Carlisle route shows that only two types of signal were considered, a stop and a distant, yet within a month or so of the release of MSTS a freeware kit of semaphore signals in prototypical configurations had been released, and similarly a freeware kit of multiple-aspect colour-light signals for the UK was released. The semaphore signal kit signal data files contained six types of signal and eighteen shapes, whilst those of the multiple-aspect signal kit contained seven types and thirteen shapes.

Further freeware semaphore kits such as the BR/LMS and LSWR, and multiple-aspect kits were developed, further increasing the types available. Later, at the request of at least two route builders, a kit of GWR signals was produced, further increasing the number of types with two sizes of main arm, 5ft and 4ft. Problems with loose-coupled freights triggering game over with ground signals occurred on one of the routes and a way of getting round this was found. Similarly a problem with Distants remaining on permanently was discovered on another route, and again, a method of overcoming this was found, with the result that the follow-up to that route no longer has that problem, and the route has special-to-type signals in certain locations.

A kit of Banner Repeaters, Route Indicators, Theatreboxes and Clackboxes has also been developed and released, not without some ingenuity on the part of the author to get them to work, but work they do. Calling on signals and suchlike still have a problem but have been used by at least one commercial developer. The signalling on a route released by Blue Arrow contains colour-light signals with integrated theatre indicators, yet Microsoft/Kuju stated, in their Tech Docs, that it could not be done, and the same add-on has automatic semaphore signalling for high speed running as per the original on which it is based.

There is still a problem with stand-offs on single-line routes, but, having said that, all of the foregoing has been achieved with what Microsoft/Kuju gave us in the first place.

Except where a route builder has used track and signal box layouts, quite successfully in most cases given the limitations of MSTS, there seems to be a misunderstanding of the use of signals, particularly semaphore types. The most obvious error, if I may call it that, is with the stop/distant combination. At very large stations many of these could be seen, many on signal bridges, because there were at least two signal boxes in close proximity, ie, less than the braking distance of a train apart. In each case the stop signal is controlled from the box in the rear and the distant signal is controlled from the box in advance.

At smaller stations, with only one signal box controlling movements, a single distant is placed some 1000 yards to the rear of the home signal, to inform the driver of a train that one or more of the stop signals at the station ahead is ON. This is why in MSTS the "number clear ahead" in the sigcfg.dat file is generally set at ( 3 ), eg, a home, a starter and an outer starter, if any one of those is ON, the distant is also ON. The signals ahead are normally single stop arms, sometimes have a co-acting arm, and are only in combination where the conditions stated in the previous paragraph pertain.

Another error in route building is to site ground signals here there and everywhere within station limits. Generally they were used to control reverse movements over trailing crossovers and the entrance to sidings from main running lines (usually reverse movements to traffic flow) and sometimes entrance to main running lines from sidings. Within sidings the points (switches) were manually controlled by the 'shunter' (a railway employee, not a locomotive) when shunting was taking place, or one of the footplate crew with light engine movements. All the other points were controlled from the signal box hence the use of ground signals, or shunting signals. The railway companies each had their own preferences, semaphore arms with circles, eg, were used by both the GWR and SR, the former to control exit from and the latter to control entrance to sidings, whereas the LMS favoured several smaller arms mounted above one another for entrance to more than one siding.

Recently (2007), there seems to have been an increase in new members to the MSTS fraternity, who said it was dead? To you who are, or are contemplating, route building, please think about the signalling of your route and, in any event, have a read of the tutorial available on UKTS.