Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 35 of 35

Thread: Zero Degree Node Removal for OR?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    known universe
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ebnertra000 View Post
    ...

    Please don't run down my street naked shouting in greek...
    lol Eureka.jpg
    Cheers, Gerry
    It's my railroad and I'll do what I want! Historically accurate attitude of US Railroad Barons.
    Forever, ridin' drag in railroad knowledge.


  2. #32

    Default

    Know what's ironic? The very original release of Scenic (for MSTS) used the default TSection, and accordingly did not have zero-degree nodes. The next version, with Mosaic, introduced zero-degree nodes because certain vociferous users demanded them.

    Then, remember the original release of the "Starter Route"? That was based on the original release of Scenic, and for that reason did not have Mosaic, boo-hoo, but neither did it have the zero degree nodes!

    This more recent release of the "Starter Route" is based on the final MSTS release of Scenic. It has Mosaic, it has the improvements around the Boing plant, and a couple of other goodies -- But it also has these now absolutely useless zero-degree nodes!

    With all due respect to the inestimable Charlie Brown, Arrrggghhh!

    But seriously folks, when nodes of any kind are added to a previously completed route, one must always allow for the possibility that errors have been introduced that often prove to be difficult or impossible to detect.
    Last edited by dcarleton; 03-23-2021 at 06:00 PM.

  3. #33

    Default

    The double set of nodes might be problematic if the path clearing logic is looking 5 nodes ahead, as that stretch of track alone is 5 nodes long.... anyone know how it works?

    Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Netherlands.
    Posts
    171

    Default

    There's a number of misconceptions and confusions here.

    First of all, these 'zero point switches' do not create passing paths. Even though they may form a 'loop', that loop would only be considered as possible passing loop if a path has been defined through it. For 'location defined passing path' mode, any train having a path through that loop would be enough. Otherwise, it would require a passing path defined through that loop. I very much doubt if that is indeed the case.
    So, the problem is not that the system considers these locations as passing paths. So checking on length would not change this.

    What then is causing the trains to get stuck around these locations?
    Signals along the single track sections are usually automatic. Once a train enters such a section, that full section is then reserved for that train, blocking access to any train trying to get on this section at the other end. It also would block any train to start on that section until the approaching train has passed.
    These switches 'break' this, as signals which have routes over switches cannot be automatic. So it is now possible for trains from the other end to get access to this section, or for trains to be started on this section. The deadlock processing is set up to prevent this, but sometimes the conditions are such that the deadlock processing fails to recognise the situation as a deadlock, or simply cannot prevent it.
    This can happen when the path of either train has reversal or double reversal points. The processing cannot check on deadlocks beyond reversel points. If a train is started on that section, there is no way the deadlock can be prevented. The deadlock processing cannot prevent trains from starting.

    So, in all, it is true that these problems occur around these zero-switches, but that's only because these switches create a situation where such problems can occur. I do not believe these switches actually cause these problems. It is actually quite possible that without these switches, the problems just would have occured somewhere else.

    So what can be done?
    First thing to do when this situation occurs, is to check on where and when the two trains which are facing each other were started, and what is in their path. Check for (double) reversals, and for timing problems. If it is not immediately clear what happens, create another activity using this same traffic, but with a player train somewhere 'off route', which starts just before the trains (or at least the second train) is started. It can then be observed what is actually going on. Most likely it is a timing problem.
    So there is no need to change either the route or the program, but just to adjust the activity itself.

    Regards,
    Rob Roeterdink

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    known universe
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Thanks, much Rob. Helps my understanding. Appreciate you looking in.
    Regards, Gerry
    Cheers, Gerry
    It's my railroad and I'll do what I want! Historically accurate attitude of US Railroad Barons.
    Forever, ridin' drag in railroad knowledge.


Posting Permissions

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