TSection 42

[douglee]

Hi All,
I think. For what it's worth!!!

Unless a route builder really needs new track sections, that any update to an existing route should maintain the tSection it was built with. Even to the inclusion of the information in any readme, suggesting the use of Train Store to do the changes. This would avoid no end of crashes when loading. Of course any brand new route would not have the problem.

Good luck
Doug

[terrycunliffe]

I haven't got the time, nor inclination to test out the new version, the NWE route is too large and complex for that.
Unless the newer version's points clearance distance is put back to the values found in build 38, then it is that build that must be used with my route.

[phill70]

I still have V38, so I could upload that as it is, ether now or, on the release of NWEv3, its up to you lot ?

[douglee]

Hi Glyn,

I still have V38, so I could upload that as it is, ether now or, on the release of NWEv3, its up to you lot ?

Well if you are allowed to?
Then it would not hurt to have t38 available as so many of the routes in the library need it, to work correctly and many answers to posts are to try t38 to solve a problem.

I still have my t38 as well, others newer to MSTS probably don't and get tripped up by the t41 problem.

Good luck
Doug

[NiallGray]

I'm with Doug on this. If it's allowed to have v38 in the library as well, I'd like to see it as it's the recommended version for my route.

[rufuskins]

Oh my aching head - again!

I now have 4 Tsection folders in my storage HD, namely 38, 40 41 and now 42. Who needs Camelot when we appear to have our own lottery!

I think that I am still typically operating with T38, but . . .

But I appreciate the effort being made to create a standardised folder, but it reminds me of my own work situation where Euro Codes are now the norm for civil/structural design. They are intended to ensure that all parts of the European Common Market can provide design services to all other parts, except that every country within the ECC has their own National Annex associated with each part of the Euro Codes suite, and therefore it's a nightmare trying to ensure that your standardised approach is tailored for an individual task!

Thank goodness I retire in less than two years!

Alec

[douglee]

Hi Alec,

Thank goodness I retire in less than two years!

Alec

And guess what!



We'll be out of Europe by then.


t38 is the cure all for older routes before t40/41

Good luck
Doug

[douglee]

Hi ALL,

I'm with Doug on this. If it's allowed to have v38 in the library as well, I'd like to see it as it's the recommended version for my route.

Taking things a step further. There is no reason why t38 could not become the 'British Route' standard, Is there? Because from what I gather it is British Signalling Practice with the new sections in t41,t42 ect. that conflict.

Even to the extent of using Mini Routes to keep the tSection separate. All though as said Train Store is capable of the swapping as needed. I seem to remember Route-Riter having some thing as well.

There again I don't do routes and am used to getting shot down in flames.

Good luck
Doug

[tonyhap]

I don’t think signaling practice is the cause. I think it is train operating practice that is the cause. Unfortunately, I have had no luck in convincing US simmers of this via PM’s.

I believe that it is very significant that the problem of too low a ClearanceDist value was found and raised by only US simmers. I believe that there are two reasons for this. I deduce these reasons from all the pictures and posts on TrainSim.com.

First, and very obviously, for a collision to occur you have to have two trains very close to the points on the diverging side. Since no UK simmers ever complained, UK train operations are very unlikely to ever have two trains very close to the points on the diverging lines. So a value of 26m for the ClearanceDist for a 10 deg point is no problem to a UK operator.

Secondly, think about a lot of tracks in the USA. (And in particular the Marias Pass where this problem reportedly surfaced.) There are many miles of single track with passing loops. In order to get the maximum efficiency, USA trains are as long as they can be. The maximimum train length is the length of the shortest passing loop on the train’s route. And for this to work, the last wagon has to be pulled clear enough to avoid a collision. So a value of 35m for the ClearanceDist for a 10 deg point is essential to a US operator.

I would also stick my neck out and say that this track situation is the ONLY place where a collision due to a low ClearanceDist will ever occur. That is, fully occuping any loop or siding with a stationary train is risky as there are no safety margins.

I therefore tried to suggest that if US operators (simmers) reduced their freight train lengths by one or two wagons, they would have no problem with a 26m value as the rear end of a long freight train could be pulled well clear. The reply was that 26m was wrong and that 35m was the correct value. Period.

Sorry for all the words. I vote for different versions of the Tsection.dat files being placed in the UKTS library.

Regards,
Chris

[douglee]

Hi Chris,
I take your point and defer to make my meaning British Operational Practice. My meaning was referring to the placement of British Signals closer to the points.
But much the same thing though, considering the U.S. simmers being the fault finders.

Again, I don't do routes but limiting tSections available, for British Routes, to those in t38 does not seem too restrictive if the number of sections is any thing to go by.

Good luck
Doug

[terrycunliffe]

We've been here before, and going around in circles
http://forums.uktrainsim.com/viewtopic. ... &sk=t&sd=a

IMO, a UK (or even European) standardised tsection.dat based on build 38 is essential

I'll certainly be including that version in NWE3 (when released), as I know that there will be problems without it

I still have V38, so I could upload that as it is, ether now or, on the release of NWEv3, its up to you lot ?

Glyn, why not stick it in the MSTS "quick picks" as a stand alone item along side the latest version?

[douglee]

Hi Terry,

We've been here before, and going around in circles
http://forums.uktrainsim.com/viewtopic. ... &sk=t&sd=a

IMO, a UK (or even European) standardised tsection.dat based on build 38 is essential

I'll certainly be including that version in NWE3 (when released), as I know that there will be problems without it

I still have V38, so I could upload that as it is, ether now or, on the release of NWEv3, its up to you lot ?

Glyn, why not stick it in the MSTS "quick picks" as a stand alone item along side the latest version?

With every possible respect, it was not solved to UK Simmers satisfaction then either.

Maybe, now the masters of the Global tSection have not resolved the issue. UKTS could take the lead and set t38 as the recommended "British" Route Standard.
Obviously not for me to say.

Good luck
Doug

[phill70]

I still have V38, so I could upload that as it is, ether now or, on the release of NWEv3, its up to you lot ?

Glyn, why not stick it in the MSTS "quick picks" as a stand alone item along side the latest version?

Can do, I will sort it out atfer work tomorrow.

[terrycunliffe]

With every possible respect, it was not solved to UK Simmers satisfaction then either.
Doug

I know, and fully concur Doug. "Heads and brick walls" sprang to mind in a kind of defeatest (but also defiant) attitude when I saw this very thread earlier.

It was mooted in the other thread that we should have a this side of the pond tsection.dat, and the action that Glyn will do will go a long way towards that.

[ianmacmillan]

I disagree with the use of TS38 as the UK standard.
Instead we should use TS42 with the clearance distance on the 10 degree points restored to their original value.

Otherwise we will have problems when routes appear with the newly added items.

If I ever run the Marias route I will just look where I'm going and wait till the oncoming train has cleared.

I am angry that the Americans are unwilling to change something that causes such major problems for UK simmers in order to correct a very minor problem on a few US routes.

I don't want to swap TS files for different routes nor do I want to use Trainstore.