[Weter]

I think, single control for switching between 32/64 would be enough.
Year back, Engmod advised to me never use LAA in my w7-32 with 2GB

[cjakeman]

Weter, on 05 January 2022 - 09:54 AM, said:

I think, single control for switching between 32/64 would be enough.
Year back, Engmod advised to me never use LAA in my w7-32 with 2GB

It would be nice to have this entirely automatic, with a single Any-CPU executable so a 32-bit OS runs the executable in 32-bit mode and a 64-bit OS runs it in 64-bit mode.

[cjakeman]

Weter, on 05 January 2022 - 11:03 AM, said:

This might mean "auto-detect"?

Yes.

However, it's not Open Rails but the 64-bit O/S that checks whether an executable can be run in a 64-bit mode. If not, then the O/S runs it in a 32-bit mode.

[cjakeman]

The next control on the General Tab is:





and the Manual entry is:




I don't think the General Tab is the best location for this control, which has to do with the behavior of the train.


Currently this behavior is always applied for cars which have the appropriate parameters in the WAG file and the control turns the behavior on using default values for the other cars.

What I find interesting about this control how it fits with James' recent post about compatibility.

James Ross, on 05 January 2022 - 04:05 PM, said:

So there are three possible states for a given feature when using default values in a piece of content:

• Operational: The default values are good enough and the feature runs well
• Degraded: The default values are deliberately unrealistic but the feature is still active (and can still affect gameplay)
• Disabled: The feature is turned off entirely because no useful default values exist

According to this guideline, the control should be always on and the code should be changed to implement the most appropriate choice from the 3 above - Operational, Degraded, Disabled.

[gpz]

I think the purpose of this oprion is to save people from adding the corresponding setting to all their wag files. The option is correctly off by default, because the missing setting from the wag normally means that the car is not equipped with a retainer valve.

[Weter]

I think, this causes different styles of train brake's behavior, but more exact - modes for plain/mountain operation.
Maybe it's checkbox is misplaced, but obviously needed.
We can't switch this mode for every car now (as we can do it with a bleed valves, for instance) so let it be.

[cjakeman]

gpz, on 06 January 2022 - 01:37 PM, said:

I think the purpose of this oprion is to save people from adding the corresponding setting to all their wag files.

I'm sure you are right about that, though I am less sure that it's a good idea.

But isn't this a different kind of situation from, say the Derailment feature? That feature applies to all wagons because they are all liable to derail and the extra parameters are there to guide the derailment calculation.

In the case of retainers, we might be simulating a real train which consists of a mix of fitted and unfitted wagons, or am I misunderstanding the realities of freight operation?

[Weter]

Some USA freight cars have separate devices with 3 or 4 steps, other-don't: some other cars have combined "distributors" (not, what meant as ECP brakes in MSTS), which combine triple valve, retainer and load compensator, so they have two levers: Plain/Mountain mode (almost same as USA retainer) and Empty/Loaded modes. Other have autocompensation for the weight of load (autoregime).

[steamer_ctn]

cjakeman, on 06 January 2022 - 02:27 PM, said:

In the case of retainers, we might be simulating a real train which consists of a mix of fitted and unfitted wagons, or am I misunderstanding the realities of freight operation?

I believe that the retainer is fitted on a car by car basis, so as you suggest there could be some cars in the train that would not have them.

My personal preference would be to see this option removed, and then applied on a car by car basis as it would most likely be in a real world situation.

[Genma Saotome]

My understanding is the function of retainers in North America is pretty much equal in its effect to turning the brake wheel and fixing it in place. It provides a basic level of applied braking so when the engineer feels the need to set the brakes it is "on top" of what he retainers are doing. Perhaps this has something to do with helping the engineer keep the air pressure up.

AFAIK it was the only thing that could be done before all cars had safety brakes and being an extremely conservative industry* the practice lingered for a very long time. I have no idea if or when it was phased out.

I will ask some people I know who may be able to provide more useful information. I'll gfet back to you with what they tell me.

* Many roads were still using a straight pin to "staple" multiple sheets of paper together into the 1960's because that's the way it was always done.

[cjakeman]

 steamer_ctn, on 06 January 2022 - 04:57 PM, said:

My personal preference would be to see this option removed, and then applied on a car by car basis as it would most likely be in a real world situation.

Mine too.

Although I've suggested ways to notify and prompt users, I can't think up a way to notify/prompt users that this is a feature they could benefit from. Unlike some other extra WAG file parameters, the absence of the parameter does not indicate a missed opportunity.


The next control on the General Tab is:




and the Manual reads:



The Manual also states "This option should be unchecked, except for compatibility problems with old MSTS stock."

It would be much better if Open Rails could detect automatically that the user's content is "old MSTS stock". Does anyone know what might be different about "old MSTS stock" in this instance?

[Weter]

Tag ORTS-Ready, for instance.
This is better example to remove, than retainers.

[cesarbl]

 cjakeman, on 07 January 2022 - 12:25 PM, said:

It would be much better if Open Rails could detect automatically that the user's content is "old MSTS stock". Does anyone know what might be different about "old MSTS stock" in this instance?

I believe this option can be removed. It is no longer required, as graduated release can be configured with appropriate .eng and .wag parameters. This option could be used for passenger cars with badly configured braking parameters (which lead to unrealistic release times), but I don't think there is a way to detect it, as the same configuration could be valid for a freight wagon, for example.

[steamer_ctn]

 cjakeman, on 07 January 2022 - 12:25 PM, said:

Although I've suggested ways to notify and prompt users, I can't think up a way to notify/prompt users that this is a feature they could benefit from. Unlike some other extra WAG file parameters, the absence of the parameter does not indicate a missed opportunity.

I am not 100% sure what you mean by this? Are you suggesting that OR should advise users if they are not using a possible feature?

 cjakeman, on 07 January 2022 - 12:25 PM, said:

It would be much better if Open Rails could detect automatically that the user's content is "old MSTS stock". Does anyone know what might be different about "old MSTS stock" in this instance?

I would suggest that a check of all cars is done at startup, and if the train has a mix of retained and non-retained cars then a message is displayed in the log file indicating this. This message should be able to be turned on/off with the "Verbose Message" option. Cars with retainers fitted will be able to be identified because they will have "Retainer_4_Position" or "Retainer_3_Position" in the BrakeEquipmentType statement. Thus it is possible to differentiate between cars with and without it the retainer.

Once notified, the user can then make appropriate adjustments if required to their stock.

 cjakeman, on 07 January 2022 - 12:25 PM, said:

Graduated Brakes - It would be much better if Open Rails could detect automatically that the user's content is "old MSTS stock". Does anyone know what might be different about "old MSTS stock" in this instance?

This could be be set up with a similar notification system as above, ie where the train has a mix of graduated and non graduated cars then it could make a notification. It uses the "graduated_release_triple_valve" token so this could be used to check for cars with/without it.

For this feature, given that there are also a number of brake control tokens, such as "TrainBrakesControllerGraduatedSelfLapLimitedHoldingStart", possibly an information message could be provided to the user if they are running a locomotive with this type of token, and no cars with graduation triple valves fitted.

[darwins]

The odd one out is triple_valve - this is the one out without graduated release when using air_single_pipe or air_twin_pipe systems.

Anything else such as graduated_release_triple_valve or distributor, and any other brake system such as EP, SMEE, vacuum, and straight_vacuum has graduated release.

A message is a good idea where there is a mixture of stock. For goods trains in Europe it is not unusual for there to be a mixture in real life, and depending on the country the loco may well have a graduated release brake valve. So a message should be all that is needed.