simonjackson1964

I did this originally, and had a different issue: The single route exiting the junction leads to an 8 track fiddle-yard. (The layout pre-dates virtual depots). When two trains arrived at the junction heading the same way ut from different directions, the one that went first correctly selected a route, the one follow did not. I finally fixed this, but one of the things I tried, before realising what was actually causing it, was to split the routes after the junction. Re-combining them would totally destroy the system I put in that works... But really, that isn't the point. It shouldn't matter how long the route is nor how long the train is. As I "colourfully" pointed out already, if this were the prototype, there would be hundreds dead and a massive lawsuit pending! I think the fault does in fact lie within the system, because the light on route 6 should never go green while there is even one wagon still on that crossing from route 4 and vice versa. I am going to put a "manual" check in place to prevent this, but I think the team should consider a fix for this.

No worries. It's cosmetic anyway. I tried your example, and the trains are shorter than the gap between the crossing and the end of the block. I shortened one of the blocks and the trains both hit the crossing at the same time almost ignoring the signals! Have you tried my example yet? it shows clearly what the issue is.

The ground signal, the one that shows which way the point is ... pointing. In that last picture, it's still showing the curve where the point is set straight... Okay... 3B7194FC-3D4A-4B2F-910C-0508F4FB9078 My simple example. Select route 4, which will select/lock, then select route 6. Route 6 will show blocked. Start train 2 moving and it will stop at the signal. Start train 1 moving and it will go through the junction, and stop at the end signal. When it does it releases route 4. Route 6 then selects/locks and allows train 2 to pass through the cars still sitting on the junction... I'm not trying to be difficult, I just want to make sure I haven't done something stupid first.

Not the track... The ground signal is still linked to the Arnold point so hasn't changed. I'm going to see if I can reproduce this on a test bed, and if I can, I'll upload it for you.

Sorry, I was having a bit of fun with it. I have tried replacing the Arnold Spur N 1854 with a 1853 to the same effect. Now trying it with "|1435| K138/10 Kreuzung 10°" from the model oriented set, which also meant replacing the points so it fits together... sort-of. I'm not sure what I'm hoping to prove, because if I still get a collision then it is something else weird, but if I don't then I am going to have tp re-lay all the track which defeats the object of upgrading the layout..... Anyway I will let you know what the outcome is.

Restarted from the save point and managed to capture the whole event this time... Hopper train is held at the light, and the point is showing to go the other way Tank train comes around the corner. (By the way in case you're wondering, this part of the layout is supposed to be hidden from view, but while upgrading I wanted to see it.) With the tanks still on the crossing, the signalman has a brainfart and changes the point and the signal. The driver of the hopper train is either blind or insane, because he starts moving forward! KABOOM!

I just checked and it does it at other places where that crossing is used. I think it's a problem with the track itself. Unfortunately I was too slow on the pause button, but there's no way the hopper train could have got that far without hitting the last few tanks. Not on any railway I've ever heard about! The whole point of signals is to prevent trains hitting each other, not cause them to...!

Hi Goetz But they do. I even deleted the original crossing from V5 and put it back in at V7 to see if that might make a difference. It could be something wrong with that particular track object, but I've used the same object in all the other places where two tracks cross each other and I've not seen it do the same thing, but that could be because I'm not watching for it. As I said, the one track blocks while the the other is "locked", but as soon as it "unlocks" - when the train reaches the contact for the next block - the crossing route clears, while the train is still on the crossover.

I think I may have found a bug? This is an old V5 layout that I thought might work better at V7. It does, and so far I've managed to solve every conundrum it as thrown at me, except this one... The layout is paused for clarity, but I can record video of this happening if you wish. As ypu can see there is a train on the junction. it has passed the signal to the next route and so the route it is leaving is now no longer selected, but is still blocked. Trying to select that route gives a "blocked" message, as it should. The yellow route is the anti-clockwise route crossing the track with the train on, highlighted blue with a pencil in the route sidebar. Logically if I select that route it should go "Blocked", right? Except it doesn't. The route selects (and due to a deliberate event, also selects the next route down, as it's clear). Clearly this should not happen! As I said, I can easily provide video of this "signalling failure" that has caused hundreds of pretend little model people to be killed, when the trains hit each other and (fortunately) pass through. It looks to me like the system is not recognising the coaches on the back of the loco. Except it is or the route it's on would be selectable...? Help, please? Thanks Simon

I also noticed a typo: The event to release a car to leave is triggered by the expiry of "Abfahrttimer" with two "t"s, but the variable holding the timer name holds "Abfahrtimer" with only one "t". I was wondering why there were two timers both set to zero and not doing anything, and why the cars never seemed to leave. Played with both and figured out what was going on. Easy enough fix to add a t into the name in the variable. Cheers Simon.

@prinz The car park doesn't seem to want to hold more than 33 cars. Is this because you only built 33 active parking spaces, or is there a table that could be increased in size? [edit to add] I've had a look at the components of the garage itself, and I have answered the question. Honestly, I can't I blame you for stopping where you did. It would be a long and tedious project to add the rest of the spaces! Maybe something to be worked on when one has the time and inclination, adding a few at a time. I might have a go at it, one weekend when I'm bored! Then again I might not... Cheers Simon

@prinz Yes, that's exactly what I needed. Thank you.

Thanks, Herman, that's really cool. One issue though, is that it doesn't work with automatic acceleration, so if you have a line of cars all waiting to go in, the first one buys the ticket and the rest all crash the gate. It needs a bit of tweaking. Unfortunately I don't speak German so I can't read the conditions and actions. I did find the delay on the gate close, but that didn't have the desired effect: The gate closed faster, yes, but the following cars still drove through without stopping.

In version 7 there are eight different car parks, not including the "on-street parking" in the City Streets. In Version 7 gibt es acht verschiedene Parkhäuser, das "On-Street Parking" in den City Streets nicht mitgerechnet. Only one of them actually works, and that is the rotating car-park, which actually works as a road junction. All the rest are decorative only (again, not counting the City Streets parking bays). Nur einer von ihnen funktioniert tatsächlich, und das ist der rotierende Parkplatz, der tatsächlich als Straßenkreuzung fungiert. Der Rest ist nur dekorativ (wieder die Parkbuchten der City Streets nicht mitgezählt). It is possible to create a working car park using the City Streets parking bays, but it's a bit cumbersome. Es ist möglich, einen funktionierenden Parkplatz mit den Parkbuchten der City Streets zu schaffen, aber es ist ein bisschen umständlich. I'm wondering whether it would be possible to add routes and junctions to one or more of those pre-made car parks (especially the multi-story)? Of course it is possible with the virtual track, but to be honest I found this to be even more clunky than using the city streets. Ich frage mich, ob es möglich wäre, einem oder mehreren dieser vorgefertigten Parkplätze (insbesondere dem mehrstöckigen) Routen und Kreuzungen hinzuzufügen? Natürlich ist es mit der virtuellen Strecke möglich, aber ehrlich gesagt fand ich das noch klobiger, als die Straßen der Stadt zu benutzen. Cheers Simon

Quickly created example: The event can be made more efficient by the use of a route keyword and a variable holding the next route on each route, and the event "When a route is activated". but the above is "quick and dirty". All signals are red - then a train approaches. All Signals are green except the entry to E which is yellow. And the train - well a loco in this case... goes past. Using Object (Route) variables would enable a train following to set all the routes as far as the one the train in front is in on a rolling basis, by using the deferred activation, I'm pretty sure. Need to try it.

Hi Hermam I have used "If route is free and can be activated" when dealing with KS type signals. The KS Multi-section signal shows a different aspect if this block and the next block are both free than if only this block is free. So if I have a signal at the start of Route A and route A ends at the signal that is the start of Route B, I want to activate route A to let my train in, and if route B is free and can be activated I set the signal to KS1, if it is not I set the signal to KS2. - I can also use the same function to activate Route B, and check if route C is free and can be activated, thus cascading the green light up the line.

I'm considering making a short instructional video (in English) of the easiest ways I've found of electrifying a layout (with a catenary - Not sure if "catenarify" is a word). I admit I found it hard at first but over the course of several layouts I've learned a few tricks that others might not know.

Looks Good!

That's fantastic, thank you!

Certainly. The ship comes into the harbour, and to avoid smacking the bow on the arbour wall, it stops parallel to the quay, a distance away. This activates the tug, which chugs around on it's own hidden track until it reaches an accurately placed contact, where it stops, bow against the side of the container ship. I attach the ship to the tug, which of course detaches it from the rails it was on. The tug then starts up again, and "pushes" the ship until it hits the quayside, then stops. I attach the ship to the water surface so it moves with the tide and the tug retreats back to it's own moorings. If I used a dummy loco to move the ship, it would be left invisible in the "arrival" track, which feels wrong to me.... I suppose it could work, but I have this fear of loosing the dummy loco. Also, the ships with motors behave like bogie wagons when going around corners, while a ship with a dummy loco behaves like a rally car on ice! Even with the loco in the middlethere is a significantly greater overlap at bow and stern. With the loco at one end or other, forget it! So put the dummy loco in the middle of the ship.... This would mean having a separate stop contact for the Evergreen at each dock, and events to detect which ship is at the contact and either stop it or let it pass through. Putting the dummy loco at the front means the ship's stern swings wide as above. One final issue with this: The dummy loco in the middle doesn't enter a block until the ship is already half way in, while he motorised vehicle ship enters it straight away. The dummy loco leaves a block while the back half of the ship is still in it, while the motorised ship leaves the block once the stern is past the waypoint and not before. This causes lots of collisions when trying to run more than one ship at once. I even tried attaching wagons to the loco. That sort of worked, but requires the loco to be at the front... Can't think of any more off the top of my head. What I do know is that I scrapped the entire layout and started again from scratch with the blue and red "Frachtschiff" ship that I build a container bay for. One last question: could the ships be re-scaled? Put the Captain by one of the hatches on either of the above two ships and he has to duck to get in. Scale them to 1.2 and they work nicely. Cheers, Simon.

Hi (blame google for mistranslations!) A while ago I created a "test layout" to see what it would look like and if I could make it work: Vor einiger Zeit habe ich ein "Testlayout" erstellt, um zu sehen, wie es aussehen würde und ob ich es zum Laufen bringen könnte: Scaled up so the doors/hatches on the ship are 2m high, the ship holds 150 containers. About a tenth of what the real Evergreen ships hold, but a lot for a model. Vergrößert, sodass die Türen/Luken auf dem Schiff 2 m hoch sind, fasst das Schiff 150 Container. Etwa ein Zehntel dessen, was die echten Evergreen-Schiffe fassen, aber viel für ein Modell. Inspired, I decided to create a container port layout... Inspiriert beschloss ich, ein Containerhafen-Layout zu erstellen ... Still a work in progress, obviously... But the ship I'm using only holds 60 containers when scaled up so the sailers can go inside without banging their heads. Offensichtlich noch in Arbeit ... Aber das Schiff, das ich benutze, fasst nur 60 Container, wenn es vergrößert wird, damit die Segler hineingehen können, ohne sich den Kopf zu stoßen. I'd love to use the Evergreen, but it has no engine. I can't put a "dummy loco" in it because that would cause issues with the tug pushing the ship to the dock and pulling it away again... Or at least it would make life a lot more complex. Ich würde gerne den Evergreen benutzen, aber er hat keinen Motor. Ich kann keine "Dummy-Lok" darin einbauen, weil das Probleme mit dem Schlepper verursachen würde, der das Schiff zum Dock schiebt und wieder wegzieht ... Oder zumindest würde es das Leben viel komplexer machen. Is it possible to add an engine to the Evergreen, so she runs as a vehicle? Ist es möglich, der Evergreen einen Motor hinzuzufügen, damit sie als Fahrzeug läuft? Thanks Vielen Dank Simon

You're welcome

Hi Wolfgang You can use 4 and 5 instead of 2 and 1 turned... Cheers Simon

Hi Herman The crossbeam and variants are there, mostly at the station. I took a bit to work out how they worked, but they are easily the best option for electrifying a lot of tracks Quick and hopefully easy tutorial (Points are there just to give track centres): With irregularly spaced tracks where they might be on platforms for example. Start with Variation 1 (default) on the left. Let it autosnap to the track. I recommend doing this on track with Z rotation = 0, 90, 180 or -90 at least for the first one. Adjust the Y coordinate (or x if the track is 90 or -90) to an easy number. I used y=-280. Then add another crossbeam to the next track, set the Y coordinate the same. Then set to Variation 2. Use the Breite animation to adjust the length so it just overlaps with the first crossbeam Repeat for the next track but set to Variation 3 Continue until you are at the last track, using variant three for all of them except the last. For the last track use variation 4. Finally, add one more crossbeam and set to Variation 5. It will automatically go to the other side of the track and if you set the Y coordinate it will join with the number 4. Number 1 and 5 can have the length adjusted to move the pylon away from the track if needed. You are now ready to add the Catenary. One small point - for extra realism add an insulator to the top wire next to the pylon. If it was really like that, the top cable of the catenary would short to earth! The concrete (Beton) pylons can be used where there is a platform on the outer tracks - harder for kids to climb! Left and right variations for corners, and also superimposed to have two wires side by side. I always select the whole shebang once I've done one, copy and paste it and make adjustments if needed. Hope that helps?

Hi Herman I've managed to get Catenary to work so I feel reasonably qualified to offer some advice. Regarding the spacing, I have noticed that if you stretch an individual length of catenary too far, the middle "pops up" demanding a gantry. I use this as my "maximum allowed spacing for gantries on straight track, and also on complex junctions Below see some screen shots of one of my layouts that has a pretty comprehensive catenary system. One tip I've found when using the "realistic" straight catenary is to place it with the automatic snapping turned off, otherwise they tend to decide where they want to go not where you want them!. Turn it back on to position the next gantry. And work in one direction on the track but stretch the catenary backwards towards the previous gantry. Also I use the catenary maintenance railcar to check that the cables are in the correct place so at least one will be in contact with at least one pantograph at all times. It just seems appropriate some how! Cheers Simon (Blame Google for wrong translations!) Hallo Hermann Ich habe es geschafft, Catenary zum Laufen zu bringen, also fühle ich mich einigermaßen qualifiziert, um Ratschläge zu geben. In Bezug auf den Abstand ist mir aufgefallen, dass, wenn Sie eine einzelne Länge der Oberleitung zu weit strecken, die Mitte „auftaucht“ und eine Brücke verlangt. Ich verwende dies als meinen "maximal zulässigen Abstand für Portale auf geraden Gleisen und auch auf komplexen Kreuzungen Unten sehen Sie einige Screenshots von einem meiner Layouts, das ein ziemlich umfassendes Oberleitungssystem hat. Ein Tipp, den ich bei der Verwendung der "realistischen" geraden Oberleitung gefunden habe, ist, sie mit ausgeschaltetem automatischen Einrasten zu platzieren, da sie sonst dazu neigen, zu entscheiden, wohin sie wollen, nicht dorthin, wo Sie sie haben wollen!. Schalten Sie es wieder ein, um das nächste Portal zu positionieren. Und arbeiten Sie auf dem Gleis in eine Richtung, aber strecken Sie die Oberleitung nach hinten in Richtung des vorherigen Portals. Außerdem benutze ich den Oberleitungswartungstriebwagen, um zu überprüfen, ob die Kabel an der richtigen Stelle sind, damit immer mindestens eines mit mindestens einem Stromabnehmer in Kontakt ist. Es scheint nur irgendwie angebracht zu sein! Prost Simon