Points locked by previous service

[PWHolmes]

I have built a light railway with no signalling and am trying to create a scenario with more than one train. Sadly this has proved to be impossible as whenever I try to reverse any of the points, I am told that they are locked by Service 1 (an AI train) even though it has disappeared into a portal, never to return.

Is there any way around this? All of the points are manual and I hoped that I would be able to reverse them with impunity but this seems to be impossible. I have thought of burying some signals underground but would appreciate any help on this.

[AndiS]

No. Or yes, if you stick the signals underground.

The RW dispatcher assumes to be dealing with block operation. Not signals means 1 block means 1 train in service.

All you can do is install proper signalling at all the junctions and hide the signals underground. Of course, this leaves the question how the player will know that he has to stop at a signal showing stop, when it is underground.

[PWHolmes]

Hello again, AndiS.

"The RW dispatcher assumes to be dealing with block operation. Not signals means 1 block means 1 train in service."

....even when that service has disappeared from the world into a portal, never to return??

Looks like I will have to start burying signals then... would ground disks do the job? Regarding how to know when to proceed...... I am only running one other train to a set timetable hence I will simulate dispatch by telephone instruction from a controller via written on-screen instructions. I will have to build a lot of slack into the job with a lot of hanging around at junctions, though, just like real life.

[AndiS]

If you use AI so sparsely, you could try putting a block signal next to the portal, so the AI passes that on the way from the junction to the portal. Just a thought.

Alternatively, you need just a junction signal, wrapping all the switches at the problem area. The point is: The AI assumes that any train passes a link 0 first, then the switches, then a numbered link. 5 seconds after that, the junction is released, i.e., unblocked.

Whether ground disks would help I don't know. As far as releasing the junction, they might be sufficient. As far as having an AI train follow any other train is concerned, you need "first class" signals. They are those which have "is stop signal = true" in the .bin file. Mostly main signals, but there is the odd ground signal or two with this property, but they tend to be confusing, being in the middle between main signal and shunting signal ignored by AI.

[PWHolmes]

Tried it Andis. See below for signals and arrangement of links. Both signals are h_1T. No other signals are installed anywhere on the route yet.


The signal for the green loco is off and the road is set throughout. This is an AI train that starts about 400 yards back and should just continue to a portal about 2 miles away and vanish. I hoped that by going over link 0, then the points, then link 1 would unlock the points. Without any signals, the AI train proceeds fine but I cant get out of the siding!


This signal is set at danger and the points are against the black loco. I was hoping to be able to reverse the yard points (when unlocked) and follow the green loco permissive block.

What goes wrong is that whatever arrangement of signals I try (and I've tried a whole bunch of different junction and single signals), the green AI loco gets as far as link 0 and then stops at the cleared signal.

This is driving me nuts!!!

[Kromaatikse]

Are all the signals pointing the same way? If you, you need some pointing the other way as well, if trains go in that direction.

[AndiS]

What goes wrong is that whatever arrangement of signals I try (and I've tried a whole bunch of different junction and single signals), the green AI loco gets as far as link 0 and then stops at the cleared signal.

Now this is really funny. (Not for you, of course.)

There are several different thoughts on this. No idea which combination of them will get you further.

1) The facing points to the right need signalling, too. The normal case is to use a 2T signal instead of the 1T and have link 1 in the left track and 2 in the right track. I cannot promise that this will fix it by itself, but as it stands, the junction is half signalled, so the dispatcher could be half happy.

2) Putting a block signal down the road to the portal would underscore the fact that there is a clear block ahead (without switches in it, I hope!). Whether the dispatcher will note that then is to be seen.

3) In case you have further switches down the route to the portal, be sure that they all are wrapped, or at least there are some correct signals before you hit the first unwrapped switch.

4) There is a little possibility that you placed the link 1s a little too near. When you hover the mouse over the diverging track, you see a yellow or red frame around the track piece. The cube of link 1 must be beyond the end of this curved track piece, for both signals. If not, then the signals do not protect the converging junction, because this end of the curved track is the logical location of the convergence. Of course, item 1 would implicitly fix this.

5) Be sure that there is no other engine in the scenario besides the two shown.

[PWHolmes]

Thanks for that, AndiS.....er....

..wrapped?????

[AndiS]

By wrapped, I mean that there are links all around the switch. Engulfed, encircled, surrounded would be possible to, no idea. The point is: Starting at the frog, you should not have a chance to get away from the switch without passing exactly one link of the signal in question. Then, I say that the signal wraps the switch.

I am always happy for better suggestions regarding wording, honestly!

I see it as wrapping because if there is a hole in the arrangement, then signal messages leak out and get lost.

Footnote 1 for the knowing: More precisely, messages leak in and hit the trailing switch set against them where they die.

Footnote 2: Some people argue leaving out links for paths which are never ever taken. I say "never say never", even less in a game. But the default signals make life hard for you, if you go for complete coverage in stations. But this takes us far off topic because here we are just burying some signals to make AI possible. Thus, there cannot be oversignalling.

[PWHolmes]

Thank you for that.

[PWHolmes]

Andis,

Please see diagramme below, I think its pretty self explanatory. I think I have "wrapped" all the points.



Basically, when I start the scenario, AI1 moves towards the passing loop but stops at the 0 link to signal 11 which is showing a green aspect. The road is set right through and this is shown as a heavy line throughout on the key 9 map. Nothing I can do will make it start again.

However, if at this stalled juncture I go into edit, shuffle around with any signalling and then click on run, it starts away as required and continues towards the far portal.

Totally at a loss here.

Paul

[AndiS]

Do you have the links where you show them on the map, or close to the signal for the opposite direction? Specifically where the player train is.
If you do, then make sure that from left to right, it is P1 (player train) - 14 - DPT1 (links 1 of signals 9 and 10). As drawn, the player train would stand inside the "wrapped" region of the junction, occupying and blocking it.

You could also have P1 - DPT1 - 14. I am not too decided about the relative order of this pair of link 0 and numbered links for the other direction. But in general, the numbered links are nearer to the switch because the signal is always spaced a bit off the switch and the important bit about the numbered links is that no one stand around on them. It is also important that they are indeed beyond the last switch but that is ascertained in your case, I am sure.


This bit about "if at this stalled juncture I go into edit, shuffle around with any signalling and then click on run, it starts away as required and continues towards the far portal" makes me weary because that sounds like a dispatcher thing then. However, I have no idea which.

You sure deleted the AI service a 100 times and placed it again, didn't you? Otherwise, give it a try. Obviously, the dispatcher needs some thinking about the situation which he does not perform beforehand but when you leave the scenario editor, he does it.

If the above does not win you anything, I'm afraid I am sorry for your effort because this looks really well signalled minus the question above.

[PWHolmes]

I am on the point of giving up on this, Andis. Nothing seems to work in allowing me to run another train anything like realistically. The AI train will not budge past the signal 0 link. I have noticed that my point levers have disappeared now that I have tried to use colour light signals - any idea why?

I may try again with semaphores before abandoning the effort as I dont hold out much chance for success. I guess that the SHLR will have to be a one-engine-in-steam operation without any signals, and very limiting that is in terms of interest.

Why have the developers put in so much time in superficial development when the basic signalling/train despatch software is so painfully deficient?

[AndiS]

If the point levers disappear, that is not a good sign. You might want to relay track where it happens. But be sure that you remove all signals surrounding ("wrapping") this part of the route. E.g., if you swap CLS for semaphores, it will be a good occasion.

Also be sure that the numbed link (1) is between the point and the starter signal for the opposite direction, as mentioned above.

[PWHolmes]

Andis,

thanks for your help but I have now given up on this. A further weeks wasted effort in trying to get this idiotic programme just to do what I want it to... eg behave like a railway and not like a capricious, spoilt little child. I have spent so many hours juggling with signals and the scenario editor to what end?? .... all I wanted to do was to have a train proceed down a single line and for another train (the one I am driving) to leave the sidings and follow it. All I get are path conflicts and stalled trains. On the one instance where I actually achieved something, it suddenly stopped working again for no apparent reason and no amount of removing AI instructions would get it to work again, it is almost as if it consciously said to itself "A-hah! I can see what you are trying to do - NO YOU'RE NOT - I am going to stop you!".

Maybe some simple signalling device to unlock points in the wake of a service would eliminate the need for signalling on light railways or maybe I am just talking rubbish. Whatever it is, the SHLR will have to remain a "one engine in steam" railway.

I am on the verge of abandoning Train Simming altogether, or at least the creative part. It suddenly struck me today how ridiculous this whole thing is - it's a game, for heavens sake and it was taking over my life and giving me little but frustration in return. Months of wasted effort to no end. Not only that but my PC wont cope with the new 2012 version and I can ill afford to upgrade it. I would ask for advice on the forums but I have become aware just recently how ignorant I am of what others are taking about - its all too much for both me and my old PC. I dont even know what questions to ask or where to start.

And why have all my rivers and lakes gone Radox blue - they look terrible!

Thanks for your efforts anyway.

Paul