Herman

Hello Pete, As always difficult to answer with so few information. But I only give some things I get stuck in the past. When I worked with containers, to figure out how the crane works, there was always a problem when trying to give more than one instruction to the crane in "crane finish lifting/lowering" . Is it not possible to change that and get the same result ? I.e. 1 container handling when the event triggers "crane finish lifting/lowering" ? Kind regards, hopefully you come to a solution. Herman * I do not think you have the other common problem I found in old programs on the forum. The event that triggers (crane finishes lifting/lowering) has to be the only code in EV or LUA for that crane.

Hello @Neo Thank you very much. It's clear for me now. Kind regards, Herman

Hello @Neo Can you help ? Thanks in advance. Greetings, Hermna

Hello @Goetz Thank you very much, even if we have not a real answer. But thanks you always respond. Another expert that can shine more light on the "view" parameter in the EV action "Activate Camera" ? Surely the makers have an intention with that view other than [0] ? Kind regards, Herman

Then we use a camera from the catalog, as I did before, and not one of those 10. Hello @Goetz, thanks for the response. In the EV action, camera is understood, sorry it's the view I'm not ready with. Just to say I understand the following in Lua, so the cockpit as camera is known to me. -- when a train with cockpit view arrives switch to the camera view if layout.activeCameras[0] == vehicle then layout.activeCameras[0] = $("Kamera01") end Back to the EV action : what to fill in view ? Sorry, but I want to learn this. Kind regards, Herman

Hello members, I have already a new question and need a little help. 1) In the following good working command I want to replace the $("Kamera01") with one of the 10 free cameras. If possible of course. How can I do this ? layout.activeCameras[0] = $("Kamera01") 2) But maybe the action in the EV "Activate Camera" can do a lot ? Just even without previous question, can I get some explanation of this action please. Kind regards, Herman

Hello, Exactly. I used this, because this subsection of tracks has colors. But such track contacts are confusing because of the arrowhead. And for double active track contacts ( both directions are black if you use such color here ) Probably those colors are only intended for tracks, where they work fine to give a temporary effect on a track. But then let's refrase the request - and still not important - could we get more standard colors in the track contacts ( now 10 ) @Goetz Thank you for the remark ! That's nice. Kind regards, Herman

Hello @Neo, Just a very minor request for the future ? But not important. Sometimes I want an extra color for a track contact. ( extra to the standard coloring, and taken from the catalog - tracks - color ) If we do so, the wrong end is colored compared to normal track contacts. ( a remnant of earlier versions ? ) Kind regards, Herman (BE)

Crossing of messages. Thanks !

Hello @Goetz, We both do not give up hé. Nice you come still with an answer. That's the answer I was looking for. Thank you very much indeed ! Nice regards, Herman

Hello, Mostly in this part of the forum there is asked for a solution. Here it is the other way around. The solution is there, is not cumbersome, and works fine. Track Switches and Static Crosses are handled the same in the route table. So I needed something to distinguish. I took position 99, but it could be whatever. But I forgot to implement it in a new project. I forgot to give the crosses a position, it does not exist in the table. And still all is working as before. Strange not ? I leave it here, sorry I'm not more clear. Kind regards, Herman

That's exactly what I do. It is a simple lock. The switches and static crosses have a boolean in it code : Switch["SwitchPoint"].variables["#TSW Locked"] = true Never mind. It's just I do not understand why an non existing "thing" causes no error in the if then else. There is a misunderstanding about what I'm asking ... However, thanks a lot for your time and answer. Kind regards, Herman

Maybe someone wonders why the cross is in the table. Well it has no state indeed, but still needs locking if the train comes there. So I wanted to handle switches and crosses in the same manner in the route table. The code then filters out the cross for the state, but still locks correct.

Sorry, interrupt. So I forgot the = 99 position. I wonder why all is still working. In if Switch["Position"] ~= 99 then , the Switch["Position"] does not exist in the table ( if it is a static cross ) Why is there not an error ? Sorry my question was confusing. Herman

Hello @Goetz, Yes I know that. Of course it has no state to switch. That's why I gave it in the route table position 99 as an non existent state. The if ... then sees the 99, and there is no change of the state. That works fine. But now I forgot to give ( in the route table ) to give this 99. I gave no position a

Hello, Sorry I'm here back only to understand / learning something. Before the question a short introduction. In route locking I have also crosses which must be locked. And a static cross doess not have a position. ( unlike a track switch ) Solution : give in the table position 99 to such crosses, so they are handled as another switch, and trap in the code with an if ... then. Works fine Code -- lock the switches, crossings for i, Switch in ipairs(t) do -- a cross without position has in the list/table position 99 if Switch["Position"] ~= 99 then Switch["SwitchPoint"].state = Switch["Position"] end Switch["SwitchPoint"].variables["#TSW Locked"] = true end In a project I forgot to give the crosses the 99 position, they have none as you can see in the table : Route [2] The code is as above, but even when I looked with the analyser, it seemed there was no script error visible, and I did expect one. And it all works fine ? Is there an error or not, or did I just not seen it ? Do I overlook something ? As always thanks for reading, super thanks for an answer. Kind regards, Herman

Hello Atrus, Thanks for the nice support. Kind Regards, Herman

TB08 SignalG V6 v05.mbp Hello, The error is fixed. (*) But I'm not going to publish them again in the catalog. Should anyone have some interest, it can be downloaded here. Kind regards, Herman * The error was not so bad as I thought. It caused a script error, with no further consequenses for the event. That's the reason I discovered it only when use the analyse. Otherwise I would never had found it.

Hello Götz and Thomas, With "only references to" from Thomas I understood that I was comparing two different things. Thanks to both ! Nice regards, Herman

Hello @HaNNoveraNer You : "Those are only references to tables". A reference to the memory ( like a pointer ) I agree with you. Thanks for your answer ! Greetings, have a nice weekend. Herman (BE)

Hello Simon, "storing all those container IDs is killing me ..." Do you really use ID's ? Why not the reference to the object. But still a time consuming option. Succes with your project. Greetings, Herman

Hello, Maybe a more special question, but here we go. Just to see if I have a good understanding wich t comes out here : local t = layout:getVehiclesOn(signal) gives a table t with the vehicles on that track contact. ( 1 item or none ) local t = layout:getVehiclesOn($("LongTrack")) gives a table t with the vehicles on that track I want to know if there is a vehicle an the contact of the signal. In previous tests I used # for the number of items in a table. if #t ~= 0 then ( there is a vehicle on the signal , a wagon or a loc ) So far so good, my problem is solved. But t is a table, the test if t ~= {} an empty table failed, why ? Some help is welcome. Kind regards, Herman

Hello, I'm back here, just take it as it is : When testing my container handling, I had also the problem that sometimes the container goes trough the other one when stacking. I alsways used an object from the list to give actions to the crane. Those objects are : a place ( on a train, on the ground ) or another container. I looked to an error in my code first, but it was only a mistake in the list : the ground position was activated (or a lower container), instead of the actual container. And of course .... . The cronological order in my list is import to find what action, so a mistake is easy there. KInd regards, Herman

Hello, It is difficult to see only in your text what is going on, and even then, I'm not an expert, but there ary many experts among the members. Probably I cannot help with your specific question , but maybe ( just maybe ... ) you can find something in 911459D6-84DF-439B-AD37-E5E19B2EDE63 , a layout I published recently in the catalog. I hope somebody can give you a solution. Feel free to ask questions about my own layout, if you think it might help. Kind regards, Herman (BE)

Hello, I published last days a duo signals called signalG and signalV in the catalog. I just removed them. They were based on the above topic. But there is a serious error in it. So do not use those signals if you should have downloaded them. They do not work properly. (*) Sincere apologies, Herman (BE) (*) When one opens the signal manually, and there is no train before the error occured.