simonjackson1964

Hey @Dad3353 I just had a look at the layout Variations. Did you solve the issue with the N2 crossing yet? Because I can tell you what is wrong and if you haven't found it, I think you might kick yourself...! Simon

Also... A quick flirt with Google Translate reveals that @Henry did something similar in his signalling tutorial for the ground signal of a 3-way point. I knew I'd seen that somewhere! And I now know how to do the 3-way point on my layout too!

Well that turned out to be trickier than I thought it would be... The hard part was making it so it would take trains alternately if they were waiting, but just pass the trains from one side if none were coming the other way... Still not perfect - If I take all the trains off going anticlockwise but leave them running clockwise, I have to manually change a couple of points and signals to start things moving for some reason I don't want to try and solve... Now looking at my junctions... Oh yes, this is going to be interesting when I get it going. I'm going to use a variant of storing the train's route in the locomotive - Which I would never have thought of so thanks @Goetz Bu one thing that was bugging me was how to get a pre-signal to change the signal it is repeating when a point between them is thrown? I tried using an event on the point to change the property "link", but I realised that's the "physical link" that makes two objects move together, not the "connection" which is what I was trying to change... Then I came up with the perfect solution. I'm not using the pre-signals for anything except decoration. I might at some future date add something that causes a train to go slower if it passes a signal at VR0, but I'm not yet and if I do I will allow for this. So, we have a pre-signal, a facing junction and two main signals, and we want the pre-signal to show the aspect that mirrors the main signal that the junction is currently set to. How do we do this? We can't change the signal's connection property, and we can't connect both main signals back to the pre-signal because that would result in one of those signals changing the other. How do we do it? We use two pre-signals. Link one to one main signal and link the other to the other one. Then use the event on the points to toggle the visibility of both signals. Then we simply put them both in the same place (on the mast of the main signal before the junction). And the effect is exactly what I wanted! I just had to tell someone... And there might be someone reading this who realises that the visibility property is exactly what they need but hadn't thought of it!

Got that working, I used the track contact on advance (pre-) signals to check the block indicator and set things accordingly. I've also managed to get a train exiting the viaduct to start a train waiting to enter. Currently figuring out how to combine the two so a train that has already passed the advance signal but not stopped yet still gets started... I think I have a solution... Yep, that will work!

Thanks. Now I just have to put the rest of the signals in where I think I need them, along with their contacts, decide how I'm going to set the preceding signal to green (probably when signal contact is activated on leaving, and store the name of the preceding signal in each one). But most importantly I need to figure out how to automate this: Yep, that's a single track viaduct with a train waiting at both ends. (view from the cab of one and the other is that raised blip in the far distance...) I really wanted a viaduct, and couldn't find a two-track one I liked. And I figured it would make operating the layout entertaining to have a single track section. It's only since I got the "stop at red" working that I was able to put two trains on the track, and it is good fun sending them past each other manually, but I want to get on with other parts of the layout, so now I have to create an event for a train arriving at each end that checks if a train is already on the viaduct and if not, sets the route and clears the signals (There's an exit signal at both ends to prevent the train going onto the wrong track). I've already got events that set and clear a global boolean "Viaduct blocked". My one concern is the one in a million chance that two trains arrive at the same time. Because it's bound to happen! Murphey's law says so... And just delaying execution on one side doesn't help, because it just means that the other train has to arrive that little bit later to be at exactly the same time. I've not been able to think of a solution for that one since I first downloaded the free version 3 and then bought version 4. I suppose I could use two booleans, one for each direction, so I check the one for my direction. If it's true, I stop. If it's false, I set the one for the other direction true, wait a second then check the one for my direction again. If that's true I flash a big red light and pause the program....

So... With programming/coding there is no "Right" way of achieving something as long as it works... I have just done the same on V5, (because I have no patience and I want it now!) and it's actually a bit simpler... An object variable on the track contact, which is set further back from the signal to allow the train to slow (distance by trial and error!), holds the address of the signal it relates to. When the contact with the keyword STOP is triggered on entry, if contact.variables["Signal for"].state == 0 then vehicle.targetSpeed = 0 contact.variables["Signal for"].variables["Train at"] = vehicle end When a signal with keyword "signal" is changed if not (signal.state == 0) then if signal.variables["Train At"] ~= nil then signal.variables["Train At"].targetSpeed = 100 signal.variables["Train At"] = nil end end And that's it... Well, apart from "Closing the door". On the prototype, back in the old days of manned signal boxes on every station and at every junction, the signalman would wait until the train had passed completely before setting the signal on and blocking the track - he would do this latter by sending a coded bell message down the telegraph to the next signal box, saying "Train in block". (And I'm not being sexist, just historical, I don't think there were female signalpeople until very recently. Not in the UK anyway.) But these days,in the UK at least there is an actual track contact, something like this(?), just beyond the signal and when the locomotive passes over it, it sets the signal red. Which is why, when watching from the window of a passenger train in the UK, the signals always seem to be red when you go past them, unless you are right at the front of the train. If the track is straight enough (or curved just right) you can sometimes see the signal change as you get closer to it. Because of this I prefer to use the signal track contact event "On entering (Vehicle Centre)" which realistically changes the signal while the train is still passing it. (Of course to be totally true to prototype one could use one of these and have it set the signal "on entering"... But that's too much hard work!

Hey guys Thanks a million, those were really helpful. V6 looks really amazing and I can't wait to see it. (By the way, I spotted the missing full-stop before either of you! My wife must think I'm crazy, because I was all but yelling "There's a full-stop missing...!" at the computer screen!)

@Goetz That is what I was hoping for. I didn't think I could possibly be the first one to see the need. @Dad3353 Thanks. Yes I'm aware of the track contacts that can be used in conjunction with the signal to slow and/or stop the train, but the problem with the current system is that you have to specifically name each contact and signal (yes it's worth doing that anyway), but then you need a separate event for every contact because each one is dependent on the state of the signal behind it, but there's no link between the signal and the advance contact point. I suppose one could soft-code a link - create an object variable on the contact that held the state of the signal, and have an event that updated it when the signal changed. But again you'd need a different one for every signal. less work than having an event for every contact for every state of the signal, but it seems a bit superfluous if V6 is coming soon... When is V6 due out?

This might already have been suggested, and may even be in the pipeline - I don't read German I'm sorry to say, so I don't know what all the other headings are. My suggestion is that the track contact on the various signals be capable of being moved away from the signal itself. Either that or have the ability to connect a track contact to a signal. As it is at the moment, you either have the train reach a red signal and stop a little way past it (or stop unrealistically suddenly if you use "set current speed"), or you check each individual track contact with the exact same code but each one having it's own event. What I have in mind is something like: When any signal contact is triggered, if the signal [Trigger] is 0 Set vehicle[trigger] target speed to 0. And have the trai slow realistically to a halt just before the signal.

Actually, I found that there is a type of spacer (the yellow arrow shaped ones) that behaves itself.... When is V6 due for release? Because unless it's today I'm not going to be able to stop tinkering with layouts... I still think the best thing about 3D Train Studio is the fact that other than the initial outlay for the program, I can build as many layouts as I like and it doesn't cost anything except time. I just checked and the price of a 1m length of Peco streamline flexi-track is just under £5, that's just over €5.Call it even... A set-track point is £11.50. that's €12.50 near enough... And £16 for a streamline electrofrog point... To put together some of the layouts I've seen could cost well over a thousand pounds on track alone. As for rolling stock, forget it! So frankly, I don't mind the fact that everything I do is going to be obsolete when V6 comes out, because it's not like I'm paying for point motors and electronic stuff that I'm going to have to throw away because it won't work anymore!

I'm so bad at doing scenery that I decided to do a layout with just scenery, to see if I could make it look good. I have to say I think it's okay as far as it goes... But then I decided to put cars on the roads. And I decided to put a timer on the junctions to make them change at "random" and direct the traffic down different roads. And I encountered two problems. 1) In order to prevent the road switching while a vehicle was on it I used the simple condition "If any vehicle is on track junction 1". Which works fine, except a semi trailer is not a vehicle, apparently. The truck was for ever loosing its trailer at the junctions. In the end I gave up and deleted the trailer. Does anyone have a way of preventing this? 2) The invisible men from Mars... Okay the spacers. They are vehicles. They are great for keeping the traffic spaced out, but they don't stay where I put them... The instructions say that the spacer should be placed between the vehicles and the clutches deactivated. But should the spacer be driving itself? Should the clutches on the actual vehicle also be deactivated? Should the vehicle be pushing the spacer? Or should the rear clutch on the vehicle be active so it pulls the spacer?

Ahhh. Live frog and dead frog. That sounds like a nasty thing to do to amphibians! The frog being the V where the two inner tracks meet. I'm familiar with using these in real models. Dead frog points have a plastic insulator between the rails with wires underneath to carry the current across to the switch rails. These can be switched manually because there's no electrical interference between the tracks. Live frog points have no insulation and thus have to be wired to switch electronically, with additional wiring to isolate the correct section of track.

Interesting: I just tried to recreate the same effect by crossing four straight tracks at the same point. It worked - as in, I got the loco to change direction, But it was almost impossible to do by accident. I had to very deliberately set the X and Y coordinates of the track. So pretty sure it's not something that would ever be a problem. While I've got your attention though... The points (turnouts, switches) on the top are the lower number, the ones beneath are the higher number. I have so far failed to spot any difference. Is there any?

In fact it is only necessary to shorten two of the branching routes, as long as they are a matched pair. To number the points as R1 and L1 on the top track and L2 and R2 on the bottom track, (fortunately Left and Right start L & R in English and German!) if we shorten L1 and L2, and fill with a snippet of flexible track F (bending the laws of physics because with real N-gauge track that wouldn't be possible - but then with real track it wouldn't be necessary!) but leave R1 and R2 the same length, then the contacts for R1 and R2 are now joined to each other the same as for a normal cross-over. Meanwhile L1 is only connected to F and L2 is only connected to F. I've tested it and it works! L1 I reduced the "angle" to 12° then copied and pasted for L2. This method also removes the need to lengthen the straight spur on one of the tracks. Tatsächlich müssen nur zwei der Verzweigungsrouten gekürzt werden, solange es sich um ein übereinstimmendes Paar handelt. Um die Punkte als R1 und L1 auf der oberen Spur und L2 und R2 auf der unteren Spur zu nummerieren (zum Glück starten Links und Rechts L & R auf Englisch und Deutsch!), Wenn wir L1 und L2 kürzen und mit einem Ausschnitt aus flexibel füllen Spur F (Biegen der Gesetze der Physik, weil mit einer echten Spur mit N-Spur das nicht möglich wäre - aber mit einer echten Spur wäre es nicht notwendig!), aber lassen Sie R1 und R2 gleich lang, dann die Kontakte für R1 und R2 werden nun wie bei einer normalen Überkreuzung miteinander verbunden. Währenddessen ist L1 nur mit F und L2 nur mit F verbunden. Ich habe es getestet und es funktioniert! L1 Ich habe den "Winkel" auf 12 ° reduziert und dann für L2 kopiert und eingefügt. Diese Methode beseitigt auch die Notwendigkeit, den geraden Sporn auf einer der Spuren zu verlängern.

Ah, that explains it, thank you. And I am now going to see if I can construct what you show. By the way it is also necessary to lengthen one of the straight tracks, as you may have noticed. This is equally weird but has a logical explanation that lies somewhere in the realm of advanced geometry that I refuse to contemplate on a Sunday afternoon! Ah, das erklärt es, danke. Und ich werde jetzt sehen, ob ich konstruieren kann, was Sie zeigen. Übrigens ist es auch notwendig, eine der geraden Spuren zu verlängern, wie Sie vielleicht bemerkt haben. Dies ist ebenso seltsam, hat aber eine logische Erklärung, die irgendwo im Bereich der fortgeschrittenen Geometrie liegt, über die ich an einem Sonntagnachmittag nicht nachdenken möchte! (Translation by Google Translate)

On a slightly different but related topic, perhaps either of you could solve a mystery for me? I'm trying to create what I understand is called a "Scissor" crossing. The top track formation works just fine. (The blue button just makes sure that the correct point gets changed so they all change together) But obviously, it takes more room and jinks the tracks over. The lower formation would be preferable, but it does weird things... (The gaps in the straight routes are deliberate, because I wanted to be sure the angled routes were connecting properly.) I'm using Arnold Spur N for no other reason that it's first, It looks okay and I've modelled in N since I found I could fit more into the same space as HO. So I have no idea why or what causes it, but drive a train from bottom right, it should go to top left, but instead it does a fancy (and physically impossible) pirouette and goes to top right. Drive a train from top left, it goes to bottom right. But oddly, so do trains fro the other two directions. Top Right pirouettes and goes bottom right, bottom left does a delicate swerve to go bottom right. Any ideas? Oh and I do recommend trying it out, because watching a BR 01-118 and tender pirouette like that is really entertaining! Edit to add - It does it on other track makes too. Tried it on Atlas O, and it's the same.

That's fine. I was wondering. I'm getting to grips with the track editor, slowly.

Another question, on a related subject: the Gleissperre mit Boden-Formsignal, track closure with ground shape signal. I can see how it works and why it would be used, but is this something that would only be found on a siding, or would the Gleissperre on its own be used, possibly linked to a main signal, on say, a branch line joining or crossing a main line? Or even on a main line to prevent a train leaving a station - Possibly on a slope? Next question (possibly @Henry) Your document contains this paragraph: Wer möchte, kann durch Einbau einer zusätzlichen virtuellen Sperrweiche (rot) versuchen, den Zug entgleisen zu lassen. Das markierte Gleis hat die Eigenschaft unsichtbar aus dem Archiv. If you want, you can try to derail the train by installing an additional virtual blocking switch (red). The marked track has the property invisible from the archive. I've been unable to find such an item. The locomotive runs straight through the track closure, and will only stop at the trailing point if points are locked for it... Or (obviously) if an event is set to stop any vehicle at closure.

SHIFT!!!!!!!! Thanks! That's what I'd forgotten!

Hi, it's that English guy who asks a lot of questions again... So, didn't there used to be a way to create a mountain by dragging a point up? Can't seem to find how to do that on V5...

Thanks guys, that's really helpful. (Does mean I'm going t have to re-do the signalling on all the layouts I've created so far though!) *eyeroll* Although as none of them have been (or likely will be) uploaded, I suppose it doesn't matter, as long as what I've got stops the trains hitting each other... Next project will have proper signalling. I hope... My biggest problem now is the damn scenery. I can never get it to look as good as everyone else does... *grumble*

Hmm... So. basically the semaphore and orange disk are one in front of the other (with enough room for the disc to rotate). I actually found that in your original response just now. Apologies for nor reading it properly! So... The signal on the left means "Stop" (HP0). The signal in the middle means "Proceed" (HP1). The signal on the right means "Slow Speed" (HP2) (According to Google Translate). What I'm trying to understand here is when would the signal HP2 be used? You said something about on a tight curve, but if there is a tight curve surely there would be a speed limit on the track anyway? Or the signal wouldn't be capable of displaying HP1, (As per Form Signal 3). Hmm.... So I think I might have had an answer to my original question, all the way back there, but without realising it... If the point is set straight then the signal shows HP1. But if the point is set curved then it shows HP2? Presumably if the point is a Y, then again the signal doesn't show HP1? ...Moving on... I read an interesting article about the light signals. So two reds obviously means "Stop" (HP0). One green means proceed (HP1). Green and yellow (HP2) I now have to assume means proceed slowly, because there's a junction ahead.The single red with the two angled white lights (SH1) means Stop, unless you're shunting. Basically the equivalent of having a ground signal alongside (or on the post with) the main signal. But the thing that surprised me is that last one, ZS1 - that apparently means "Hey, I'm not working properly, but you can go anyway!"

I didn't ask the question very well... The Home signal in British practice is the signal at the exit to a block. Often at the entrance to a station. As soon as the last car in a train has passed this signal the block is "Clear" and another train may enter from a permitted direction. The Starter signal is the one at the entrance to the block, often but not always at the exit of a station. As soon as the first vehicle passes the signal, the line is "blocked". and may not be entered by any other train. The distant signal is the yellow one with the notched end, and serves the same purpose as the orange disc. However as you might notice if you look ap pictures of British signals, you will often see a "main" signal - usually a home, but can also be a starter, on the same pole as a distant signal. The idea is that the main signal controls train movement at that point and the distant indicates what the next signal is. Basically this mirrors the use of coloured lights, with red indicating stop, yellow indicating proceed but be prepared to stop at the next light (two yellows can indicate stop at the next light but one) and green indicates proceed. What I'm wondering is, would the German signal with two arms extended be the equivalent of the Home being Proceed, but the advance (or Warner) being "prepare to stop". So, if the home signal is at Stop, the distant will be prepare to stop Similarly if the starter is at stop, the warner will be at prepare to stop,So the condition where a train can enter the station, but cannot leave would be signalled on the home gantry by the home signal being "proceed" and the Warner being "Prepare to stop". That's what I'm trying to get across...

Slam the brakes on? Ha ha! It is worth noting that 90% of all train crashes ever were due to signalling errors or failures! Yes, I'm aware of signal interlocking (I did a brief stint as a trainee signalman on the Kent & East Sussex Light Railway, before a hernia put paid to that ambition!) - In fact I took my little "sample" I made for the picture above and took it the next step... Not too happy with the point controls, I'll see if I can find something better, but the red/green lights act as buttons to control the home and starter signals. The "Panic Button" just sets both trains current speed to zero. Interlocking the points and signals is my next task. Because the signalling is manual, but the trains are event driven. So, what would be shown on a Home signal to indicate that the next (starter) signal is at "Halt"?

Hi Goetz Thanks, that does make things clearer. I suppose the British practice of telling the driver where he's going is unnecessary, after all, it's not like he has a choice! The only time it might be important is at a large terminus like Waterloo, where the driver might need to know which platform he's being directed to, but even then it would only be so he could pass information to the passengers. If the platform is too short for the train, that's the signalman's fault and there's not a lot the driver can do about it! That said.... In the situation above it might be nice for the driver to have some advanced warning that he's going straight and not going head to head with the train coming the other way...! Driving trains is all about trust!