Elvas Tower: Two comments - Elvas Tower

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Two comments Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   dforrest 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Status: Contributing Member
  • Posts: 973
  • Joined: 12-January 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. Vincent (formally UK)
  • Simulator:MSTS, Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 23 February 2018 - 07:53 AM

I have now moved almost totally over to OR for running activities and have two comments:

1. The lack of collisions being animated (and I am NOT requesting that they are) means that one can drive through another train almost without realizing it. Could not the animation be stopped and a message displayed before this happens?

2. Very similar to this is passing a signal at danger. Again, would it be possible for a stop and a message in a similar manner?

#2 User is offline   vince 

  • Superintendant
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 1,312
  • Joined: 18-June 14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West of the Contental Divide
  • Simulator:ORTS_Running MSTS_Editing
  • Country:

Posted 23 February 2018 - 11:38 AM

Quote

1. The lack of collisions being animated (and I am NOT requesting that they are) means that one can drive through another train almost without realizing it. Could not the animation be stopped and a message displayed before this happens?


Hi David,
Are you saying if you 'collide' with another train it does not stop the Sim running?
That does not make sense to me. Any time I collide with another train, or end of track or a track buffer the train simply stops. The behavior you describe (run through another train) I have never seen in Open Rails.

Quote

2. Very similar to this is passing a signal at danger. Again, would it be possible for a stop and a message in a similar manner?

Are you saying you pass a red signal and you don't get an emergency stop?
Well that's another new one on me too. If you pass a red signal the train goes into emergency and stops.
No message which would be a waste of resources anyway.
I believe the SPAD will be recorded in the log if logging is enabled.

regards,
vince

#3 User is offline   dforrest 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Status: Contributing Member
  • Posts: 973
  • Joined: 12-January 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. Vincent (formally UK)
  • Simulator:MSTS, Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 23 February 2018 - 11:44 AM

View Postvince, on 23 February 2018 - 11:38 AM, said:

Hi David,
Are you saying if you 'collide' with another train it does not stop the Sim running?
That does not make sense to me. Any time I collide with another train, or end of track or a track buffer the train simply stops. The behavior you describe (run through another train) I have never seen in Open Rails. Yes I am, particularly at un-signaled crossovers.


Are you saying you pass a red signal and you don't get an emergency stop?
Well that's another new one on me too. If you pass a red signal the train goes into emergency and stops.
No message which would be a waste of resources anyway.
I believe the SPAD will be recorded in the log if logging is enabled. I will do some more experimentation. Had anyone else had such a problem?

regards,
vince


#4 User is offline   markyisri 

  • Apprentice
  • Group: Status: Dispatcher
  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: 10-November 17
  • Gender:Male
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 23 February 2018 - 12:30 PM

Quote

Hi David,
Are you saying if you 'collide' with another train it does not stop the Sim running?
That does not make sense to me. Any time I collide with another train, or end of track or a track buffer the train simply stops. The behavior you describe (run through another train) I have never seen in Open Rails. Yes I am, particularly at un-signaled crossovers.


I can vouch for the behavior David is seeing as well. If an AI train in OR approaches another at very fast speed, it will go through it rather than stopping and coupling. I have also been able to make a player train go through a static one by uncoupling it and then immediately running it back through the other one. It couples once it reaches the last car on the other end, and the train is flipped around.

#5 User is offline   vince 

  • Superintendant
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 1,312
  • Joined: 18-June 14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West of the Contental Divide
  • Simulator:ORTS_Running MSTS_Editing
  • Country:

Posted 23 February 2018 - 08:05 PM

I was pretty sure the sim stopped at collision with other trains. I do know for sure my train just stops no matter what speed I ram a track buffer.

Thing is I don't collide trains much at all and not by design. Coulda' sworn that I had to decrease the size of a loos consist in one of the LIRR activities because it was fouling a switch and I collided with it in the activity.

But I could be wrong so I will check out collision at crossovers & switches. Funny thing is I released the LIRR with 12 activities and they all run with AI and NO signals at all! (no collisions either)

Just had a thought: Why does it matter at all? I mean what shortcoming does this cause in the Sim?

regards,
vince

edit:add
Humble apology David. . . . Drove inside an AI freight just now.
I do think this is a very good way to discourage the weenies that like to crash trains. No drama at all. Perfect!
vince
regards,

#6 User is offline   Csantucci 

  • Member, Board of Directors
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 6,986
  • Joined: 31-December 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 24 February 2018 - 12:56 AM

With the exception of the case of the uncoupled car, trains passing one through each other usually occurs when the activity has been built badly, that is one of the two trains (AI or player) has been created too near to the other one, so that the latter already has signals cleared to enter the sections where the former is.
However x.4038 should have been solved at least some ot these cases in activity mode (not the one of the uncoupled car), so I'm asking whether the problems occur only with stable release 1.2 or also with actual experimental versions.

The case of trains passing one through the other at crossovers occurs only when the crossover is badly built or laid down in the route; this can be seen in the MSTS AE. If the crossover hasn't the dot at the middle of it, it is not recognized as such and OR can't solve this. By the way MSTS has the same problem. If instead the dot is present, trains don't pass one through the other.

#7 User is offline   vince 

  • Superintendant
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 1,312
  • Joined: 18-June 14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West of the Contental Divide
  • Simulator:ORTS_Running MSTS_Editing
  • Country:

Posted 24 February 2018 - 10:00 AM

View PostCsantucci, on 24 February 2018 - 12:56 AM, said:

With the exception of the case of the uncoupled car, trains passing one through each other usually occurs when the activity has been built badly, that is one of the two trains (AI or player) has been created too near to the other one, so that the latter already has signals cleared to enter the sections where the former is.
However x.4038 should have been solved at least some ot these cases in activity mode (not the one of the uncoupled car), so I'm asking whether the problems occur only with stable release 1.2 or also with actual experimental versions.

The case of trains passing one through the other at crossovers occurs only when the crossover is badly built or laid down in the route; this can be seen in the MSTS AE. If the crossover hasn't the dot at the middle of it, it is not recognized as such and OR can't solve this. By the way MSTS has the same problem. If instead the dot is present, trains don't pass one through the other.

Good Morning Carlo,
It wasn't a badly constructed activity.
It was ME deliberately driving my player train into a train that occupies the track in front of me.
In MSTS this situation caused a derailment if at any speed >5 mph but here I drove into and through a passing AI (I'm supposed to wait here for the track to clear) and INTO the train running on the track in fron of me. No Bounding Box collision as there is in MSTS.

The activity runs perfectly in autopilot mode, holding until the AI train clears. There are no signals.
OR version X4076

regards,
vince

#8 User is offline   dforrest 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Status: Contributing Member
  • Posts: 973
  • Joined: 12-January 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. Vincent (formally UK)
  • Simulator:MSTS, Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 25 February 2018 - 05:40 AM

View Postvince, on 23 February 2018 - 11:38 AM, said:




Are you saying you pass a red signal and you don't get an emergency stop?
Well that's another new one on me too. If you pass a red signal the train goes into emergency and stops.
No message which would be a waste of resources anyway.
I believe the SPAD will be recorded in the log if logging is enabled.

regards,
vince


What happens when the loco has no emergency brake?

#9 User is offline   vince 

  • Superintendant
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 1,312
  • Joined: 18-June 14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West of the Contental Divide
  • Simulator:ORTS_Running MSTS_Editing
  • Country:

Posted 25 February 2018 - 09:22 AM

No emergency brake? You're kidding right? Trains don't 'have or don't have Emergency Brakes. They have brakes!
They may not be equipped with HAND BRAKES but no emergency brake . . . .Never heard of a loco without brakes. Have you?.

They all have brakes.They 'go into emergency'. either driver initiated or loco controls. You know that. (I thought)
What are you trying to do here with the word play if I may politely ask? http://www.elvastower.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/derisive.gif

Yes, I should have said "The brakes go into emergency" to make it clear to you but but I guess I overestimated your knowledge.

vince

<admin comment>

I need to remove that .gif... cool off a bit Vince, you may be reading too much into things. When in doubt ask and wait for the reply. All too often people ask and then immediately write something based on their assumption of what the answer is. Wrong assumption and the discussion augers in (to the ground) pretty quickly.

10-4 !
vince


#10 User is offline   darwins 

  • Superintendant
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 1,222
  • Joined: 25-September 17
  • Gender:Male
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 25 February 2018 - 02:22 PM

Firstly if there is no form of TPWS then in real life there would be no brake application.

So this is definitely authentic.

I have just driven several locos through several red signals on different routes and can confirm David's observation.

What does happen is that on the track monitor the situation is correctly shown as SPAD train out of control.

At this point I do not see any problem.

On the other hand if the loco has some kind of TPWS then I would expect that to apply the brakes.

In the distant future that might be something to ask for in OR - even if the loco is fitted with such a device - it can only function on sections of the route that are so equipped. So SPAD on a main line and the brakes go on - but do so on a branch line without the necessary equipment and nothing should happen. Perhaps the presence or absence of such a system should be part of each signal.

Interesting here to see how the older British ATC or AWS would work. Since these do not take action if you pass a 'home' signal at danger.

If you pass a distant signal or MAS at caution you get a warning. If the warning is not acknowledged the brakes are applied. If the warning is acknowledged you can continue to drive - including driving through a signal at danger without the system making a brake application. (You can pass MAS at danger as long as the warning is acknowledged.)

Darwin

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users