Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Thread: Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

  1. #1

    Default Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

    Has anyone else had the problem of the rear coupler sticking on most any loco when using the Bin 1.6.1 patch? I have noticed that it takes several clicks to uncouple and sometimes it won't uncouple at all. It's always the car or engine directly behind the lead loco. One or more cars or engines away and there is no problem. I have tested this on several engines and in different routes and get the same results. I like the front coupler finally being able to work with crashes.

    Regards,
    Pinpuller

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Stevens Point, Wisconsin, USA.
    Posts
    14,705

    Default UN Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

    Try this:

    [Link Expired]

    Download, unzip, read readme, try it, give feedback good or bad.

  3. #3

    Default RE: UN Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

    Thanks Jim, I used the 1102 and it works great! I tried it in all sorts of engine configurations and it works like a breeze. What a pleasure to have the couplers perform as they should. One more step to realism.

    Thanks again and best regards,
    Pinpuller

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Woodburn, OR, USA.
    Posts
    1,770

    Default RE: UN Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

    I'm posting to get a confirmation with the couplers and the Bin patch. I'm upgrading my fleet to Otto's mpk3 coupler standards. I noticed that the engines use two coupler regions but the cars only use one. Will the difference in the two styles effect the performance of the couplers in the sim? Should I add a second coupler region to the railcars to match the engines? It would not be difficult to do I just want to make sure I do the right thing as we are talking a lot of cars. So far things seem to be working well but it doesn't hurt to double check.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Guyton, GA, USA.
    Posts
    1,662

    Default RE: UN Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

    All of the below refers to MSTSBin:

    Jim Ward's ( Sniper ) hack to the default.wag file aids the sticky couplers. I use a slightly different one that sets the coupling speed just a bit lower, and have no problems, but I have coupler settings with much lower values than the default equipment ( you can check my settings in the physics forum at 3DTrains. The double section in the .eng files helps with some MU locomotive coupling problems. I haven't proved any value yet to using double sections in the .wag files yet other than improved appearance in "slack action" ( which is reason enough for me to stay with it for now, at least until I am able to improve on them, which I think will be possible with MSTSBin ). The settings that Otto has in his "collection" work quite well. Even the default.wag setting he has seems to work almost as well as Jim's, especially with his coupler settings. Otto has diligently tested and tweaked and then compiled very satifactory values, and graciously grouped and hosted them for us.
    Joe Morris, OVSRails Vice President
    OVSRails Engineer #2
    OVSRails
    OVSRails Forums

  6. #6

    Default RE: UN Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

    Hi Bill !

    As Joe kindly mentioned, all my coupler settings in the: www.otto-wipfel.co.uk/downloads/mp3kcons.zip
    work perfectly with all coupling manoeuvres and different coupler settings in wagons do not seem to affect their couplers efficiency as long as all of them have this CouplingHasRigidConnection (1) line where shown below !

    Also make sure their Damping ( ..... ) lines show N/m/s their ends !

    The presence of buffers is arbitrary and their absence seems to make no difference when "Rigid" couplers are being used, as is the second coupler section in locos ! But as the presence of the latter seems logical, used in steam locos where there is another coupler type connecting one to a tender and works also in other locos, I am leaving them in. "If it works then don't change it" ! :7

    The only problems found with coupling were the occasional loco or wagon which had a Bounding Box covering the coupler knuckles !

    O t t o



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Woodburn, OR, USA.
    Posts
    1,770

    Default RE: UN Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

    Thanks for answering Joe and Otto. I am using Otto's coupler values for upgrading the Cascade and North Western VR to Bin standards. I just noticed that the cars had one coupler section and wanted confirmation that this is indeed the intended plan. Also Otto, I'm cutting and pasting your actual coupler regions into the eng/wag files to make sure all are exactly alike. This has helped to cure the swinging accelerometer problem we talked about when helpers are on the rear of the train. It now shows Rock steady with movement mirroring exactly as the train is doing. Like I said we have had no issues in testing so far but I just wanted to be sure I hear it from the pros in this area. I will continue with the 300 or so wagons we have. Can't wait til the members get to play our game with the outstanding Bin upgrades and new activity possibilities. Again thanks Joe and especially Otto for helping me clear a couple of high hurdles on this project.

  8. #8

    Default RE: UN Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

    You are welcome, Bill !

    And thanks for helping me with the invisible sound wagons idea, teaching me a few things on sounds, which triggered my "Going-over-switches" sound sources ! :7

    Take care, O t t o.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Woodburn, OR, USA.
    Posts
    1,770

    Default RE: UN Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

    Most welcome Otto!!

    Now I have another question. The C&NW has a passenger fleet as well as a fleet of Roadrailers as we model western railroading based on traffic patterns I observed in my carreer as engineer from 93 to 2002 running into Brooklyn yard in Portland Oregon and Eugene Yard in Eugene, Oregon and traffic departing and arriving Portland eastbound out the Columbia Gorge. I've watched the Southern Pacific many a time assemble the Swift trailer train bound for Southern California out of Brooklyn Yard and was amazed at the fact that 40 trailers only had six inches of slack in the whole train. This fact was confirmed by carman that used to assist with assembling the train as both crafts, carman and Conductor worked in conjuntion to load the trailers on the bogies and then assist with the airtest. I want to mimic this absence of slack in our trailer train equipment as well as our passenger equipment which also prototypically has virtually no slack. Can someone give me some coupler parameters to work with the Bin parameters of Otto's mp3kcons.zip files, which I am updating our entire fleet to, but with no slack action in the train? Otto's values in his freight cars does have slack action but again as stated above I want to eliminate the slack action from the passenger cars as well as the roadrailers. Now granted these consists will see little switching action so perfect coupling and uncoupling performances can be compromised some to achieve the desired slack results.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Guyton, GA, USA.
    Posts
    1,662

    Default RE: UN Coupling Problem w/Bin 1.6.1

    Post the coupler section from those trailer cars. I will try to give you a setting that has little slack action after looking at what you have now.
    Joe Morris, OVSRails Vice President
    OVSRails Engineer #2
    OVSRails
    OVSRails Forums

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •