Class 37 relief train scenraio (possible problem)

[mforeman04]

Hi vern,
firstly thanks for making the scenario available. Would just like to let you know of an error I have recieved.



The second thing I would like to note is that on passing 1P32 and later 2P34, they are both static and are not moving, hence why I think the collision is happening.

Michael

[paulharvey]

Hi

I'm getting the same problem, and the same static AI trains

Paul

[bigvern]

The collisions never occurred during testing...

The AI is static because it hasn't reached the start time yet (drive slower!).

[Shadders]

Hello bigvern,

First, thank you for posting your scenario.

I afraid that I too had a detrailment, but I can offer some additional information which may help you in this or future scenarios.

I read your read me about not exceeding 80Mph in the 37, shame RW seems to allow the user to go over the speed limit of both the loco and the wagons on the train. Hell, I don't even know IF the wagons have their own speed limit in RW!

But I'm getting off subject, I made sure that I did not exceed 80mph and everything was hunky dory until after Reading. As I was approching the next station, I saw a class 166 stopped on slow line going in th Oxford direction, just behind it (I don't think they were seperated by a signal) was a 47 with a rake of full coal hoppers. The scenario derailed just after my loco passed the 47. I assume it was the player train that derailed as I saw a carrage on it side that was not a 166.

I think the problem may have started as I exited Reading. As I was waiting, an HST also heading in the Paddington direction pulled up on one of the other platforms. I compleated my passenger load and started off, shorty followed by the HST. The HST then had to stop at a signal just outside of Reading as I got given priority, and I got in front of it.

I hope this helps; I have also been trying to become an initiate into the black arts of creating scenarios. And I haven’t got as far as adding AI traffic yet. My showstopper was to create ‘scenario only’ siding markers so that the player could pick up some wagons at a point on a route where there are no markers. Why the hell a ‘marker’ of any sort should be needed to get the player to pick up some wagons is beyond me. But I don’t make the rules. I had everything working with no Ai traffic, the player train was going where it was meant to. Then as I was playing, I saved my progress and tried reloading. I got error messages about being unable to find the destination markers I set!

[msdejesus]

Hello bigvern,
Then as I was playing, I saved my progress and tried reloading. I got error messages about being unable to find the destination markers I set!

RW does not seem to "remember" scenario markers, I have successfully used them during some trials and they work, but you have to play the scenario "in one go". If you save and re-load, you'll get the dreaded "cannot find scenario marker" error.

Regards,

Manuel

[emrhd01]

Hello bigvern,
Then as I was playing, I saved my progress and tried reloading. I got error messages about being unable to find the destination markers I set!

RW does not seem to "remember" scenario markers, I have successfully used them during some trials and they work, but you have to play the scenario "in one go". If you save and re-load, you'll get the dreaded "cannot find scenario marker" error.

Regards,

Manuel

Hi Manuel,

I hope you have reported your findings to support@railsimulator.com so hopefully they will sort it out

[msdejesus]

I hope you have reported your findings to support@railsimulator.com so hopefully they will sort it out

I have just done it!

I hope this will be taken into consideration, since it would mean many new possibilities in scenario creation it it worked properly.

Manuel

[bigvern]

The incident with the HST sounds different again then to what was reported earlier. Sounds as if the HST is moving off before the rear of the player train (which is about eight mark ones) has cleared the next signal. When I ran the activity, I was pulling out of Reading as the HST was running in so must have got far enough ahead when the AI ignored the signal!

I think I should rename this scenario "Pot Luck if You Get There"!

Anyhow I've got another one under testing with the Class 158 and a fair bit of AI traffic so it will be interesting to see how that pans out.

The problem is, on Pad - Oxf you can't really do a convincing scenario with only a light amount of traffic. Coincidentally I had another Controller's "spare" day today and was visiting the Marlow and Henley branches. However waiting at Maidenhead and Twyford I observed there is a constant flow of trains on all four lines, incredibly busy, so I think RW (& RS) struggle to represent that without falling over.

[emrhd01]

Hi again Manuel,

I have just done it!
I hope this will be taken into consideration, since it would mean many new possibilities in scenario creation it it worked properly.
Manuel

That's great, I have also reported the 'Save' failings with the Scenario Markers, if enough of us raise it maybe they'll have a look

Couldn't agree with you more about the possibilities of Scenario Markers, if working correctly they could well be the way to make the Dispatcher do what we want.

[Darpor]

I just had a report back from someone who had done my "1N07 - Northallerton to Newcastle" scenario but had saved it half way through. This resulted in one of the AI workings going "off path" on resuming the game yet it works fine if all completed in one sitting.

[bigvern]

It sounds as if saving an activity is somehow resetting the AI traffic. All this could be avoided if the AI trains actually followed what the signals are showing rather than the curious sub-routine which Kuju wrote to fudge it in.

Now having fresh problems with the next scenario I'm working on. Class 158 from Acton Wells to Didcot (emulating the old Wales & West early morning Waterloo to Maesteg) however despite stopping at Slough, Reading and Didcot as per the setup it's returning a "fail" message on each one. I will still upload it but with the caveat that even if you finish the run, RW will probably decide you haven't.

I think it's RW that's the "fail", myself.

[TheTazman]

I have not had a go at this yet. But it seems completey stupid that AI STATIC trains should be causing a derailment. How on earth will we get bigger scenarios that have more AI traffic to ever work in Railworks?

[SuperTux]

I have not had a go at this yet. But it seems completey stupid that AI STATIC trains should be causing a derailment. How on earth will we get bigger scenarios that have more AI traffic to ever work in Railworks?

What would happen if we added a static AI train, but gave it a destination, but with a time some 9 hours ahead of the player train? Not tried this yet and was curious if this would prevent any AI derailments?

[Bullet399]

The collisions never occurred during testing...

The AI is static because it hasn't reached the start time yet (drive slower!).

That's while we need urgent eventdriven scenarios instead of only timedriven (I know RW.com is watching )

[emrhd01]

Hi Vern,

Just thought I'd give your 'Relief' Scenario a run this lunch time and completed with no problems whatsoever.

I did run it in one sitting with the occasional press of the 'Pause' button while I got drink (it is along way from Didcot to Paddington ), so it would seem that's the way to go to run it successfully..