[rickloader]

In ORNYMG 129 the save and resume before and after coupling work ok on my system ( ORNYMG1.4-656Rev129).
Also resume after coupling is successful In an older ORNYMG , U201911-23-0501Rev43.1
On the recent unstable version, mainstream OR, no save appears in the resume window. Nor are previous save shown.
Carlo, i regret I don`t have the MSTS default routes.
David , you misunderstand my previous post.

[dforrest]

rickloader, on 14 August 2022 - 03:53 PM, said:

In ORNYMG 129 the save and resume before and after coupling work ok on my system ( ORNYMG1.4-656Rev129).
Also resume after coupling is successful In an older ORNYMG , U201911-23-0501Rev43.1
On the recent unstable version, mainstream OR, no save appears in the resume window. Nor are previous save shown.
Carlo, i regret I don`t have the MSTS default routes.
David , you misunderstand my previous post.

Mick, in what way have I misunderstand your post? Also, my previous post referred to "turntable activities" when it should obviously have referred to "timetable activities"!

My situation remains the same for Rev 129 as it did with 128. My version of the route includes your latest commit ("Base scenery at Radstock"). I assume that you are using the same.

[dforrest]

Further details.

For me, in the most recent unstable version (U2022.08.13-2221 (debug)), saves before and after coupling appear in the resume window and can be resumed.

[Csantucci]

rickloader, on 14 August 2022 - 03:53 PM, said:

Carlo, i regret I don`t have the MSTS default routes.

Free BNSF scenic route and MEP 1.0 route are also OK for a Timetable test case.

[rickloader]

Unstable version U2022.08.15-0951 Now saves and resumes before and after coupling. In addition, it also shows previous saves in the resume window that were invisible on the 7August unstable version. This using the most recent Nf route from GitHub (Radstock)
Carlo, I very much appreciate your ORNYMG work. thanks. It would be a massive amount of work to compile a test timetable. I think there was a timetable made for Demo Route 1 from the OR website which might be suitable for tests
I suspect that some of these problems are due to "out of memory". I have noticed that sometimes trains pass with gaps where a wagon is not displayed, but seems to be present all the same, in the consist. Also sound loss. It would be interesting to know how much demands are being made on the computer by a large timetable like Nf route, and how much free resources.
But I do not wish to dismiss David`s problem, because the train in question runs early in the timetable. Later trains are probably more likely to fail, because of complex operations. I appreciate the feedback
Rick

[dforrest]

Rick, can we come to an agreement on which "flavour" OR we should use in testing (obviously the latest version of this available). From the posts in this thread "David" is not the only-one who has "David's problem"!

[Weter]

Quote

I suspect that some of these problems are due to "out of memory". I have noticed that sometimes trains pass with gaps where a wagon is not displayed, but seems to be present all the same, in the consist. Also sound loss

Actually yes (out of memory): several times I have seen engines without textures loaded (gray placeholder ORTS texture was on) but with lifting lights.

[rickloader]

It is hard to specify whether we use OR Unstable or ORNYMG. I think the important thing is to declare in full the version used ( as we have been doing). I am content to use either. Is there a preference?
The reason for my indecision is that ORMT seem to need our feedback as seen in the recent unstable version tt save failure. (ok now) .
On the otherhand , ORNYMG did have better memory handling ( not sure if still true)
It would be very helpful if timetable users of other routes tt would report if resume after save works reliably.
On return from holiday i will test more saves.
Thanks Weter, yes that is the kind of thing that seems to happen with low memory.
Rick

[dforrest]

Is there any way of extracting details of the content of the consist collected at Eastleigh (at the beginning of the "Timetable"), from the "timetable" files?

[dforrest]

Weter, on 16 August 2022 - 07:15 AM, said:

It's name only.

If that's a consist name, it would be ideal.