Connect wagons with each other - it is possible using rules?

[stagecoach]

The train does not have to be invisible. A lorry parked in the logging area is one example. I use anything from motorcycles, cars to lorries and vans, even a driveable man can be used.

 

[davidbird]

The train does not have to be invisible. A lorry parked in the logging area is one example. I use anything from motorcycles, cars to lorries and vans, even a driveable man can be used.

Of course it doesn't have to be an invisible train on invisible track. Even a (otherwise unused) shunting loco parked on the end of a siding will work. Just don't use it for anything else.

This message system is actually very powerful, and not used enough in sessions (well, my sessions anyway �&#56841

 

[belgian46]

I think what is happening is you do end up with 2 drivers on the same train; the second one will lose all his or her commands. You don't say which of Bald's commands is the one where the coupling process starts.
For this to work the "Drive to red circle trackmark" must be the last in Bald's sequence. Similarly, the "couple to" command must be the last in Guriga's sequence.
The first "Check Consist" Rule (checks for consist with all 3 locos) then adds more commands to Bald's sequence, the first is decouple the last vehicle; the rest can be anything you like. The 2nd Check Consist Rule (checks for just the single loco on its own) adds the rest of the commands to Guriga's schedule.

In your screenshot you don't have any more rules as child rules of the 2nd check consist rule.

I think that must be where you are going wrong.

Actually I quite like Stagecoach's solution. It is better, as it doesn't involve session rules, but not so elegant as you will need an invisible train on invisible track.

Edit: Try this "session 3" for a version of Stagecoach's idea, with messages. It should be obvious which is supposed to be the invisible train... https://www.dropbox.com/s/50ayt07y88gv8w5/Lumber test session 3.cdp?dl=0

Hello David,

Thank you for creating the third session of the lumber test session. :clap:

Bald last command wasn't a drive to - ( I'm using another trackmarkname,but the result should be the same ) - but a series of commands until Bald reaches his final destination.

I removed the commands and created a third driver setup ( this one is the continue journey of the HLD55 locomotive with the lumber wagons.

I also reduced the double connected locomotives to a single one with the lumber wagons connected to it.

Before using Keith's solution, I would like to find a full proof working method of your solution. As I said before, all a matter of details. I hope to get there.

I just have to find the exact combination of Guriga's commands

Kind regards

Kurt :wave:

 

[belgian46]

Hello David,

Thank you for creating the third session of the lumber test session. :clap:

Bald last command wasn't a drive to - ( I'm using another trackmarkname,but the result should be the same ) - but a series of commands until Bald reaches his final destination.

I removed the commands and created a third driver setup ( this one is the continue journey of the HLD55 locomotive with the lumber wagons.

I also reduced the double connected locomotives to a single one with the lumber wagons connected to it.

Before using Keith's solution, I would like to find a full proof working method of your solution. As I said before, all a matter of details. I hope to get there.

I just have to find the exact combination of Guriga's commands



Kind regards

Kurt :wave:

Hello David, Keith,

Just a sitrep.

I have found the exact combination of Guriga's commands - now the snCBserie82 locomotive decouples and drives into the direction of the trigger lumber pickup and the trackmark lumber pickup. When the SNCBserie82 locomotive reaches the trigger lumber pickup, the HLD55B locomotive should continue its journey to its final destination. However the HLD55B doesn't start because no commands are available.

Before finding the exact combination of Guriga's commands, the SNCBserie82 locomotive didn't decouple, but the HLD55B started its journey, because the commands were available.

This shouldn't have happened because the trigger lumber pickup wasn't activated due to the fact that the SNCBserie82 didn't drive over the trigger lumper pickup.

I continue the search for the solution, before starting Keith's solution ( ref answer #18 )

Kind regards

Kurt :wave:

 

[davidbird]

Hello Kurt

Would you be able to send a cup to me? I'll have a look at it, and see if I can see what needs to be done. You can attach a cup file to a PM through this forum, it doesn't have to be done through toolbox or similar.

Cheers
David

 

[belgian46]

Hello Kurt

Would you be able to send a cup to me? I'll have a look at it, and see if I can see what needs to be done. You can attach a cup file to a PM through this forum, it doesn't have to be done through toolbox or similar.

Cheers
David

Hello David,

PM was sent

Kind regards

Kurt :wave:

 

[davidbird]

I've just realised that auto-correct has struck again! Of course, I meant cdp file, not cup file! PM received ok, you understood what I meant anyway!

 

[parryjc]

Hi John P.

If you decouple the original loco before the shunter couples up then it will work just fine. I use this method at King's Cross on the ECML route and have never had any issues with it.

Regards

Brian

Thanks Brian and apology for late reply.
I relied on my memory (not a good thing to do) from earlier trainzing when the station shunt would couple to the carriages and at the same time recouple to the Loco that had brought the stock in and had previously decoupled.

Tried again just as you said, so either there has been a tweak applied here or I'm loosing my mind.................................

...........................................In all probability the second reason is more likely.................:hehe: