[Traindude]

A while back I had a proposal for incorporating fuel stops in timetable mode, and establishing the fuel levels for a locomotive at the start of a run. I have since refined some of the details and I am hoping this can be included in the future.

Attached File(s)

•  ortsfuel2.pdf (73.23K)
  Number of downloads: 171

[Weter]

Outstanding project!

[joe_star]

roeter, on 29 January 2023 - 09:18 AM, said:

Perhaps this might work - I checked all my own turntable pool files, and found that I always define the access path before the storage paths.
Could you try if that works?
Also, is there anything in the log-file which might give a clue?

Regards,
Rob Roeterdink

Hello Rob, thanks for the tip, that was the issue here. Access path needs to be defined before storage path in the pool.

The regular pools work the other way around though.

[joe_star]

Having started dabbling in timetable mode lately, I am convinced that for anything more than a simple point to point activity, timetable is the better way to define it! (Can't comment on freight activities as in mostly do passenger ones)

Only wishes I would have is ability to change trains on the fly via alt-F9, and autopilot, both which are not available to my knowledge in timetable mode

[Weter]

Yes, these two features are not accessible currently.
For freight traffic definition, the rework of TDB per route most likely will be required:
For defining sidings as timetable locations, where trains can stop or receive (update) their instructions - every siding of the route MUST HAVE UNIQUE NAME.
But route builders usually didn't care for that, due to no use in MSTS.
This operation is very easy to do with TSRE: in Navi window, there is drop-down list, where You can chose sidings to show.
They will be sorted by alphabet. So, You can select them one by one, use Jump button of the same navi window for instantly getting there on map, then - select siding marker by mouse and rename it, using left menu bar of editor.
Since You'll done that - timetables will be much more complete, involving more of freight operation's elements.
So good luck!

[Traindude]

While investigating my timetable-mode fuel-stop proposal, I realized something in regard to AI pool operations. In terms of AI trains, ORTS will select whichever locomotive is at the front of the pool queue, regardless of what is defined in the "consist" row of the timetable file.

This may create potential problems if a pool has a mixture of say, steam and diesel power. If the timetable specifies a steam locomotive be assigned to a train, as shown in the "consist" row of the timetable, but the AI algorith chooses a diesel locomotive that happens to be first in the queue instead, then this becomes a potential problem. I'm hoping this is something that can be addressed by someone else...

[Traindude]

Weter, on 04 February 2023 - 08:28 PM, said:

Hello.
Yes. And there was a warning in manual about that: use similar-purpose stock in the same pool, because it's unpredictable, what and when will be taken from there.
What if trying to define every single storage track as separate pool and direct different traction type stock to "own" pool-tracks then?

That is one possibility. However, keep in mind that during the early days of the "transition period", when railways (anywhere in the world) were still mostly steam-operated and were just starting to dieselize, steam and diesel locomotives often shared facilities such as sheds, fueling facilities and engine terminals. Once the fleet was a 50/50 mix of steam and diesel (or close to it), then the railways started building new facilities exclusively for diesel power. So, in the case of a route set in the very beginning or very end of the steam-to-diesel transition period, it would be nice to let ORTS' AI know that, for example, a train would "normally" be powered by a steam engine, but if a diesel must be substituted, only ones with on-board steam heating boilers are to be used.

You guys get the idea, right?

[Weter]

Definitely, yes.
For that, either AI should re-place all stock for taking diesel, standing behind three streamers, then put these three somewhere again, or (what would be more plausible) - the author should use - using provided functionality - pool displacement plan for all timetable day: what stock to put where, and to take when and for.
Though, stop! We have now "stable" dispose mode!
Would You read aboutm and try its abilities - may be that's quite enough for Your aims?
P.S.
And for initial state/conditions, we have create /ahead<train's name> syntax.

[Traindude]

Weter, on 05 February 2023 - 02:53 AM, said:

Definitely, yes.
For that, either AI should re-place all stock for taking diesel, standing behind three streamers, then put these three somewhere again, or (what would be more plausible) - the author should use - using provided functionality - pool displacement plan for all timetable day: what stock to put where, and to take when and for.
Though, stop! We have now "stable" dispose mode!
Would You read aboutm and try its abilities - may be that's quite enough for Your aims?
P.S.
And for initial state/conditions, we have create /ahead<train's name> syntax.

I looked on the Open Rails manual and unfortunately it doesn't really seem to be of much help--the stabling commands seem to have no provisions for uncoupling a locomotive from a consist, turntable use, and so forth.

I just don't like the idea of having to specify fuel parameters for BOTH steam AND diesel power for EVERY train just because the AI pool algorithm indiscriminately chooses the next available locomotive from any random track. It'd be nice to have some control over what the AI does--for example: "If you (the AI) choose a diesel for this train that does not have an on-board steam heat boiler, add a boiler car before coupling on to the coaches."--to allow more flexibility. I just want more flexibility within the same pool, without having the pools and/or storage tracks "segregated" between steam and diesel power, and/or boiler- and non-boiler equipped diesels.

Also, keep in mind that in the real world, motive power substitutions are often random and unavoidable, so railway staff must always be flexible in this regard. ORTS' current pool system does not allow for this type of flexibility.

Let me give you a hypothetical situation:
=================================================
A train is scheduled to have its locomotive pull out of a pool. This pool contains a mixture of both steam and diesel locomotives. The "consist" row for that train in the timetable file specifies a steam locomotive, and as such, the fuel-related parameters give details on where the "ordinarily assigned" locomotive is to take on coal and water. This includes filling up with coal and water when leaving the pool, refilling upon returning to the pool, and en-route water stops.

However, since the AI pool algorithm ignores the "consist" row in the case of AI trains, it picks a random storage track and then picks the first available locomotive in the queue on that track. Let's say the first locomotive on the storage track that the AI picks is a diesel locomotive. The diesel locomotive pulls out of the pool like it ordinarily would, but since the column for its assigned train has no fuel parameters for diesel (only coal and water), then the AI has no way of knowing where the diesel it has chosen is to take on fuel. Thus the game session is spolied.
=================================================

See what I mean?

[Aldarion]

right now my immediate request to Rob would be a very needed function for two or three particular stations in my route, and that would be, the ability to define an entry point to a pool diferent from the exit point, as opposed to the current one point bi-direcional access. Would it be a simple coding, making two accesses, one in and one out of the pool?
Regards