[Klaus]

Hallo Carlos and Rob!
That's the solution! Two statements in the tsection.dat for one switchtype (A1tYPnt10d.s) ???!!! and not a corrupt signal !!!

@Rob: Thank you for the tip NOT to eliminate the critical signals. It saved me much time.

@Carlos:
I hope I am not to curious: Whats the function of the two added statements "MainRoute ( 0 )"?
Is it to define the default way through the switch? Is this statement obligatory for each switch declaration? Is this an error in the original tsection.dat of MSTS (and also in my adapted version), corrected in XTracks?

Again thank you very much!
Klaus

[eugenR]

Klaus, on 05 September 2020 - 03:27 AM, said:

Hallo Carlos and Rob!
That's the solution! Two statements in the tsection.dat for one switchtype (A1tYPnt10d.s) ???!!! and not a corrupt signal !!!

@Rob: Thank you for the tip NOT to eliminate the critical signals. It saved me much time.

@Carlos:
I hope I am not to curious: Whats the function of the two added statements "MainRoute ( 0 )"?
Is it to define the default way through the switch? Is this statement obligatory for each switch declaration? Is this an error in the original tsection.dat of MSTS (and also in my adapted version), corrected in XTracks?

Again thank you very much!
Klaus

Hi Klaus,
This statement "MainRoute ( 0 )" define the default Position of the switch.
The path's count clockwise, so at a left-switch the mainpath is usualy MainRoute ( 1 )
In my Original MSTS tsection.dat this statements are also missing in A1tYPnt10d.s and A1tYPnt10dMnl.s
In the Xtracks Built 0038 i have found in all switch-entry's with this statement
and I have found there the following lines:

_Skip (
The following switches (all Y-Points) were missing the MainRoute() option. 
In build 34 of the tsection I am correcting the entries to include the missing line. 
The switches default to the first SectionIdx line and the correction (MainRoute ( 0 ) ) 
should not affect existing routes. 
However, if there is a problem with a route suddenly not working with the new tsection, 
check to see if it uses any of the sections listed below. 
If it does email me at tsection@train-sim.com and I will remove this 'fix'.

Section	Name
74		A1tYPnt10d.s
217		A1tYPnt10dMnl.s
34074		eb_1tYPnt10d.s
34217		eb_1tYPnt10dMnl.s
…..
…..

So perhaps only OR is missing this statements? And MSTS has defined Path (0) as default if the statement was missing?
But that should by tested

Regards
EugenR

[Csantucci]

Thanks to Klaus and Eugen for their findings. It wasn't clear to me that the 2 missing MainRoute lines weren't present in the original tsection.dat, and were then added with XTracks. I thought that the problem was in home-made tsction.dat files.
A missing MainRoute statement is not a problem for the official OR, neither for the older releases of OR NewYear MG, as MainRoute is defaulted to 0 in this case.
However in the newer releases of OR NewYear MG the presence of such line is used as the fastest way to identify a tsection.dat entry as a switch; this is used for the feature allowing to change track gauge in a route.
Now that I know that all tsection.dat files without XTracks may miss those lines in two entries, I will study how to adapt OR NewYear MG.

[Csantucci]

Rev. 74.1 of OR NewYear MG accepts now also tsection.dat files with missing MainRoute entries.

[Klaus]

Hello,
it's always good to be able to isolate errors and learn from them. Again: thank you for your help and your explanations.
Best regards
Klaus