[edwardk]

If you run Seligman's 2.0 Main Foaming activity, you will find that even though you are not driving a train, the crossing gates are active and holding up traffic. For the most part this may not be too much of a big deal, but the never ending clanging of the bells will drive you nuts. Following in the footsteps of Carlo who released the ability of AI trains to sound their horn at the crossing, I will be releasing a feature that will allow people to deactivate the crossing if they are trainspotting near a crossing. Vehicles will continue crossing until an AI train approaches. Still in the process of testing, but everything is looking good. I still have to submit a blueprint to submit this.

Note: The entries below are from the activity file and the new entry which is the last entry should only be used if you are setting up a train spotting activity within the operating range of a crossing.


NextActivityObjectUID ( 32768 )
ORTSAIHornAtCrossings ( 1 )
ORTSSpotterDeactivateCrossing ( 1 )


Edward K.

[edwardk]

Currently, the logic for the level crossing is based on any train being within the parameters used for the crossing operation. In actual operation, I have noticed crossings not operating when a train is parked at some point before the crossing. Would this type of operation be welcomed?

Edward K.

[James Ross]

edwardk, on 23 January 2016 - 07:48 PM, said:

If you run Seligman's 2.0 Main Foaming activity, you will find that even though you are not driving a train, the crossing gates are active and holding up traffic. For the most part this may not be too much of a big deal, but the never ending clanging of the bells will drive you nuts. Following in the footsteps of Carlo who released the ability of AI trains to sound their horn at the crossing, I will be releasing a feature that will allow people to deactivate the crossing if they are trainspotting near a crossing. Vehicles will continue crossing until an AI train approaches. Still in the process of testing, but everything is looking good. I still have to submit a blueprint to submit this.

Before you do anything, why is the crossing being triggered? Is the invisible train too close to it or what? I'm not going to approve new parameters without understanding the actual problem. :)

edwardk, on 23 January 2016 - 10:54 PM, said:

Currently, the logic for the level crossing is based on any train being within the parameters used for the crossing operation. In actual operation, I have noticed crossings not operating when a train is parked at some point before the crossing. Would this type of operation be welcomed?

Level crossings, as defined by MSTS's data, is that they should be closing/closed if:

• A train is anywhere within the minimum activation distance.
  
• A train is moving such that it will be within the minimum activation distance in less time than the warning time.

OR has extended this slightly so that if the train's track reservation runs out before the crossing, the train no longer activates it (this allows you to pull up to a red platform light without activating the crossing just the other side).

What exactly are you proposing to change about this, Edward?

[edwardk]

James Ross, on 24 January 2016 - 02:43 AM, said:

Before you do anything, why is the crossing being triggered? Is the invisible train too close to it or what? I'm not going to approve new parameters without understanding the actual problem. :)


Level crossings, as defined by MSTS's data, is that they should be closing/closed if:

• A train is anywhere within the minimum activation distance.
  
• A train is moving such that it will be within the minimum activation distance in less time than the warning time.

OR has extended this slightly so that if the train's track reservation runs out before the crossing, the train no longer activates it (this allows you to pull up to a red platform light without activating the crossing just the other side).

What exactly are you proposing to change about this, Edward?

As you know right now, the crossings operate based on both player and AI train being within proximity of the crossing. This issue stood out the most running a trainspotting activity. The invisible player train in this situation is sitting off a siding as a spotter with the the gates activated. Unfortunately, I did not have the complete picture of how the crossings are operating when I first posted since my first post indicated possible changes concerning an entry into the activity file. The only operation that I am looking into changing is the gates being activated when sitting just before the crossing and not moving. Crossings under MSTS operate as they should and do not display the same issues indicated above.

Note: Although I can't rule out the first change that I first posted about yet, I will only use it if I have to.


Edward K.

[James Ross]

edwardk, on 24 January 2016 - 09:44 AM, said:

The only operation that I am looking into changing is the gates being activated when sitting just before the crossing and not moving. Crossings under MSTS operate as they should and do not display the same issues indicated above.

Okay, but we still need to figure out why it is different to MSTS first IMHO. The questions below may be easy or hard to answer, but without doing so we will be just as likely to make things worse overall as we are to make things better. Changing our understanding of data needs to be carefully done. :)

Is the train placed the same in OR and MSTS? If the train is within the minimum activation distance, why does it not trigger in MSTS? If the train is not within the minimum activation distance, why does it trigger in OR?

[vince]

I seem to recall there were some add-on level crossing intertactives, at least the flashing lights and bell that operated continuously.

regards,
vince

[edwardk]

James Ross, on 24 January 2016 - 10:55 AM, said:

Okay, but we still need to figure out why it is different to MSTS first IMHO. The questions below may be easy or hard to answer, but without doing so we will be just as likely to make things worse overall as we are to make things better. Changing our understanding of data needs to be carefully done. :)

Is the train placed the same in OR and MSTS? If the train is within the minimum activation distance, why does it not trigger in MSTS? If the train is not within the minimum activation distance, why does it trigger in OR?

James,

For starters the way the crossings are operating under MSTS is correct. If the crossing sensors do not detect movement within a period of time, the crossing operation is cancelled. This little fact was evidently forgotten in OR. The level crossing operation in OR is using the MinimumDistance value and the WarningTime value from the level crossing property. Regular operation appears to be fine.

Note: Key tests are performed within the Update portion of the code. It is here where the train is added to the crossing list which means the gates are activated or removed from the crossing list which would deactivate the crossing.


Edward K.

[edwardk]

Just to let everybody know that my progress is looking good. Currently working on train movements around crossings. Turns out my initial post is a bit premature so there will be no entries needed in the activity file.

Edward K.

[James Ross]

edwardk, on 25 January 2016 - 11:29 AM, said:

Just to let everybody know that my progress is looking good. Currently working on train movements around crossings. Turns out my initial post is a bit premature so there will be no entries needed in the activity file.

Please remember to explain what the behavioural changes are before asking for approval, as I currently have no idea what is getting changed. :)

[pmoser]

Maybe I can shed some light on this for James. Edward is right in that MSTS would deactivate the crossing gates if a train came to a stop before reaching the crossing. Open Rails used to do this as well before it was removed long before version 1.0 and probably before version 0.8. Since I don't know how to look for changes before version 1.0, I can't search for when this had occurred. At least in the U.S., modern crossings that us AC track circuits will deactivate after a while if an approaching train has slowed down significantly or has stopped before the crossing. The crossing will reactivate once movement is detected and the minimum warning time is reached. Of course, MSTS has a flaw in that the crossing will not reactivate until you were almost in the crossing instead of activating once movement was detected and the minimum warning time (set in the level crossing properties) had been reached. The current behavior in OR is irritating if you are running a passenger train and your stopped at a station waiting on time and the gates stay down on the road crossing in front of you causing a massive traffic backup at the crossing.

Phil