[scottb613]

Hi Andre,

Not a peep from Paul...

It's Rich's Cumberland - modified - I've been venturing out of my comfort zone in the Northeast... While I've had it for years and barely touched it after I bought it - lately it's growing on me...
:)

Hi Carlo,

If you want to test a locomotive with an issue - this is the one I am using - it's Free... Actually - there are three in the pack and I tried making consists of just each type - yes - even the "B" unit - all three drove right through my LC...

http://www.valleypas...les/L&NFree.htm

Regards,
Scott

[Csantucci]

Hi Scott,
only to say you that your analysis was very useful to me, and that I could reproduce the problem using the L&N free locos. Up to now I discovered that the problem is not due to the coupling action; it is instead generated by the preceding uncoupling action. In fact, if you try a direct coupling to the static consist, without uncoupling first, it works.
Digging goes on...

[scottb613]

Hi Carlo,

Thanks - I hope I saved you a little time - you guys do sooo much for the community - happy to help...

I'm also happy you were able to recreate the problem - when troubleshooting - I kept second guessing myself thinking I may have screwed something up...
:jawdrop2:

Yeah - it's strange that only certain locomotives have this problem... I thought maybe the fact that one was reversed caused it but I tried facing them the same way as well... No luck...

Regards,
Scott

[Eldorado.Railroad]

Csantucci, on 01 March 2015 - 08:44 AM, said:

Hi Scott,
only to say you that your analysis was very useful to me, and that I could reproduce the problem using the L&N free locos. Up to now I discovered that the problem is not due to the coupling action; it is instead generated by the preceding uncoupling action. In fact, if you try a direct coupling to the static consist, without uncoupling first, it works.
Digging goes on...

Molto bene...mi auguro che la risposta non è difficile da trovare. Grazie Capitano per tutti i vostri sforzi. Questa caratteristica è molto interessante utilizzare.

Ciao y molto gracie,

Steve

[Csantucci]

Thanks and grazie, Scott and Steve.
I should have solved this in release 2907. Pls. try.
Maybe this solves also Steve's melting (the signal however must still be opened with the Dispatcher Window).

[scottb613]

Hi Carlo,

Thanks so much - I'll try it when I get home tonight and provide feedback...
:ireful2:

Just curious - any idea as to why it only affected some locomotives and not others ??? I spent hours comparing ENG files looking for what might have been different between the working and non-working locomotive...

Regards,
Scott

[Csantucci]

My answer to this is that I did not find the answer. Maybe something related to braking parameters.
There was however a glitch in the software.

[scottb613]

Hi Carlo,

LOL - ok - thanks again...
:ireful2:

Regards,
Scott

[scottb613]

Hi Carlo,

I think you've fixed it - I didn't see any problems in x2907... It may be my imagination - but - the coupling seemed smoother too... It really is an amazing little feature - you can setup so many realistic movements - you don't even have to run trains anymore - just sit back and watch the AI trains go about their work...

Thanks so much for your efforts...
:)

Regards,
Scott

[Eldorado.Railroad]

Csantucci, on 02 March 2015 - 04:22 AM, said:

My answer to this is that I did not find the answer. Maybe something related to braking parameters.
There was however a glitch in the software.

Testing is such a thankless job...now I will have to go back and invent some other test that breaks AI Shunting...again.
(Just kidding!!!!)

Thank you Carlo for fixing this, and thank you Scott for seconding what I found in perhaps a better test.

Steve