[Csantucci]

In most of the locos (the single-voltage locos) cab files for cab 1 and cab 2 are identical. Would be different if doing like you propose.

[QJ-6811]

Csantucci, on 21 November 2020 - 01:25 PM, said:

In most of the locos (the single-voltage locos) cab files for cab 1 and cab 2 are identical. Would be different if doing like you propose.

That is my problem now, cab 1 and cab 2 can no longer be the same with a multi-voltage locos or a locos with one Panto.

Explanation:
If one panto (= Animation 1) is defined, it works well forwards, not backwards. So you are going to drive with a Panto that has not risen ... (OK, you should now know that you now have to use Shift-P in cab - 2)

Especially for multi-voltage locos, definitions of panto-1 and 2 (or 3 and 4) can be used in the .cvf file for cab control or display. This can be the "panto switch", but also the switching on / off of, for example, the French SNCF or Swiss SBB cabin signaling, which catenary voltage, etc. Or in the sound .sms file the corresponding sounds for "Vigilance alarm", " Cab radio ", etc, so depending on the country where you are driving, so linked which panto is activated.

To sum it all up, this still works fine in itself, only the wrong Panto (Animation) is active when 'driving backwards'. (also with EMU with both side cab -1 ....)
(Or the right panto with the wrong cab and sounds ...)

If the new definitions like "panto-1 = Animation 1 or Animation 2, depending on direction of travel" stays as it works now, my question is:
is it possible somewhere (in the .s file?) to define the following:
1) Panto 1 is always Animation 1, Panto 2 is always Animation 2, Panto 3 is always Animation 3, Panto 4 is always Animation 4.
or
2) Panto 1 and 2 is Animation 1, Panto 3 and 4 is Animation 2.

I will also try something out later ...

[Csantucci]

What may discussed is whether the exchange should affect only Panto1 and Panto2, and not Panto3 and Panto4.

[QJ-6811]

Csantucci, on 22 November 2020 - 01:52 PM, said:

What may discussed is whether the exchange should affect only Panto1 and Panto2, and not Panto3 and Panto4.

Humm, interesting item.

Did some short tests.
If the last car / locomotive in the consistency is turned over [Flip ()] then it is fine, if 'the rear' has cab-1. :)
So an EMU, a 'twin-locomotive' or two coupled locomotives, everything with one in the consist as Flip ()) it works so that you like for example Key_P = Panto-1 = animation-1, independent of the direction of travel.
Remains the situation with one locomotive or if the last wagon / locomotive has not been turned over. (then you have the change of the animation per direction of travel).


My opinion for the "discussion".

Making Panto-1 and 2 work as it currently works (Animation 1 or 2 depending on direction of travel) accounts for at least 90-95% of the locomotives. (single-voltage locomotives)
Panto-3 and panto-4 always permanently connected to animation 3 or 4 certainly has the advantage that you have more freedom to "fix" this for some locomotives. (as with multi-voltage locomotives).
[ Now I think someone would respond, there are also 2 voltage locomotives with 4 pantographs, (2 per voltage system) that I want to work as it works now ..... :( ]

Maybe just an idea? If you let it work as it works now, is there no way to fix the "Panto-x with animation-x", for example in the .ENG file? (override default settings)
Then you only have to optimize / change the "desired locomotive". No idea whether this is 'simple' possible in OR? :unknw: