[James Ross]

atsf37l, on 15 August 2015 - 12:17 PM, said:

Steve, that is the ultimate which many of us have been asking for since OR was first revealed to the masses. I think all of this, as effective as it is, is a "workaround" to try to get close to that functionality given the current software.

It's not that hard but it's obviously better to get the most important (core) bit working first, which is the actual switching. It's less a "workaround" and more of a "stepping stone". Now that we've got the switching itself working, we can look in to interface ideas.

[Csantucci]

The proposals of Eldorado.Railroad in effect shouldn't be so difficult to implement (although I never programmed mouse pointing in a graphical image), but now I'm busy on braking.
When I will reach a reasonable state, I have the intention to study what to do on train switching. I see that there are many requests; I'm sure that with a bit of fantasy very much can be done already with what is available now.

[R H Steele]

James Ross, on 16 August 2015 - 03:51 AM, said:

It's not that hard but it's obviously better to get the most important (core) bit working first, which is the actual switching. It's less a "workaround" and more of a "stepping stone". Now that we've got the switching itself working, we can look in to interface ideas.

James, a cogent point, one usually overlooked by us (the unwashed masses of non-coders :rolleyes: ) that without a solid core to build on, everything will eventually collapse. Plus, the core being solid and well documented and debugged will withstand the rigors of future building. Enough of the construction metaphors!!

OR is just a grand simulator.

[atsf37l]

James Ross, on 16 August 2015 - 03:51 AM, said:

It's not that hard but it's obviously better to get the most important (core) bit working first, which is the actual switching. It's less a "workaround" and more of a "stepping stone". Now that we've got the switching itself working, we can look in to interface ideas.

Concur. This is a much better way of stating the case. The "stepping stone" nature of this process offers hope for future iterations of the loco swapping process. I like it. :)

I love OR and you guys just keep making it better! :bigboss:

[Rohit]

Will there be any chance to implement the switching of control over to static trains such as idle locomotives in the shed so that the locomotive of the existing player train can be changed to the new one in case of change of traction???

[Csantucci]

I'm working on this...

[atsf37l]

Csantucci, on 20 October 2015 - 10:27 PM, said:

I'm working on this...

Bless you, my son. :bigboss:

[jared2982]

Looking for a bit of guidance Carlos. Refering to the picture above. When I started this run 489 was the road engine and 491 the helper. After cutting off both engines and running back for coal and water I brought 489 back and coupled into the first cut of cars. I then jumped to 491, filled with coal and water and placed it on the second cut of cars as shown above. Now I need to jump back to 489, pull ahead with the cut and couple back into 491 and continue on my way. Everytime I try to jump back to 489 I get an error: "Warning - To return to static train speed must be = 0". Obvisously both trains are stopped. Any ideas why this will not work?

Cheers,

[atsf37l]

I'll jump in Jared since I discovered the fix for this. Your locomotive may have the engine brake on full but the cars are imperceptibly moving around if the air isn't set. If you have hooked up your air hoses put on a light set on the train and you should be able to switch. If not, set the handbrakes and make the jump. Everything has to be motionless before you can change engines. And "zero zero" may not actually be zero.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the day when you can make the switch from a moving train, thereby making it an AI. That way we can cut off a helper and start running it down the hill ahead of the train, then back to the train and follow the helper, switching back and forth as necessary to complete the downhill side of the run. Maybe someday. :rolleyes: :bigboss:

[jared2982]

It would seem like a slight bit of motion could be allowed by the code if that is the case. I'll try it with the brakes set. Thanks