AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
This train had plenty of room and time to slow down yet failed in doing so. The AI system needs a vast overhaul.
Train Not Slowing Down For Speed Reduction
- Thread starter AdvancedApproach
- Start date
A few observations I made.
- The line speed drops from 79 (mph???) straight down to 15 in a single step.
- The consist is already slowing down well before the first junction but I notice that an "Excessive acceleration" (or in this case it should be "deceleration") warning appears on the bottom right of the screen. This indicates to me that the required speed change is in excess of what the engine specs will allow. That plus I have no idea what load is being pulled by the loco.
- add additional speed reductions before the first junction
- set the second signal to show STOP until the first signal has been passed (use the Set Signal Extended Rule and Track Triggers)
AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
Why would I decrease the speed on a mainline? It's entering a yard. Now granted, it's a fully loaded coal train but operating in DCC mode due to being controlled by AI, there's no excuse for not slowing down in a timely manner. It doesn't take years of experience or knowledge on the route. This isn't real life. Also, the excessive acceleration point you made is incorrect. Quite frankly, it's a joke. It doesn't take much for an excessive acceleration alert to be triggered. Just moving the throttle up or down a notch in CAB mode will cause an excessive acceleration alert to be triggered. I can get 96 cars of loaded coal down to 15 mph in no time. AI has no problem reacting timely to a less favorable signal indication.
Last edited:
Then blame the creator(s) who wrote the engine specs for the locos. I see the same "Rough handling" or "Excessive ..." on some locos but not on others on the same route when running at identical speeds. The difference come down to differences between the engine specs.
AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
I see rough handling or excessive acceleration ALL the time when driving manually. It's not the creator's fault that N3V the set distance is too short for AI trains to detect a reduction in speed and slow down accordingly. As you seen in the video that train was actually gaining speed for a short while before attempting to slow down. It wasn't until around 15 seconds before attempting to slow down. That's not going to cut it.
AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
Then the idiot AI driver blows past a red absolute signal while switching tracks and hits another train and somewhat miraculously doesn't derail. It's things like that which anger me about this game.
Its a game, not an exact copy of reality. Otherwise there would be only a single type of loco, a single type of wagon, a single type of industry, a single type of track, a single type of signal, a single type of switch, etc etc. And no road traffic!
Trying to realistically simulate the correct operation of every asset, weather condition, sunrise & sunset (according to your latitude and time of the year), phase of the moon, operating rules for different railroads, etc, etc would throw the whole thing into the "too hard basket".
I accept that Trainz is a game with obvious limitations (the AI being one of them) and I work within those limits. Over the years I have adopted the new features that have been appeared, as incremental as they sometimes are - but I am not into Multiplayer. I look forward to further improvements, again incremental, that may/will come.
I do not get angry at issues that are not up to "my expectations". I do post about problems that I have found and I fill out a Bug Report if I can reproduce the issue. I do not add the demand "N3V has to fix this" to every post about a problem.
Trying to realistically simulate the correct operation of every asset, weather condition, sunrise & sunset (according to your latitude and time of the year), phase of the moon, operating rules for different railroads, etc, etc would throw the whole thing into the "too hard basket".
I accept that Trainz is a game with obvious limitations (the AI being one of them) and I work within those limits. Over the years I have adopted the new features that have been appeared, as incremental as they sometimes are - but I am not into Multiplayer. I look forward to further improvements, again incremental, that may/will come.
I do not get angry at issues that are not up to "my expectations". I do post about problems that I have found and I fill out a Bug Report if I can reproduce the issue. I do not add the demand "N3V has to fix this" to every post about a problem.
A hobby should be relaxing, not stressful. Perhaps it is time for you to take a break from Trainz.
AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
We've been waiting on those incremental changes to the tunnel dig hole system for over 20 years and that may never happen according to N3V. I get angry because Trainz can be better and improve but N3V seems to be lagging behind by not capitulating to customers every demand as they're supposed to. Without customers they don't have a business. Then when they provide half ass fixes that are rushed through like Nascar drivers on pit row which causes more problems than were solved or create new ones, N3V shifts the blame to us rather than taking accountability. That's where my anger comes in as does many other people who have complained on this forum. Maybe you don't make demands but I do. Just hoping and praying to the video game gods that N3V will actually listen to their customers won't work. By the way, I took a four month long break from Trainz.
Try using advance signals prior to your absolute or interlockings. These will forewarn your AI drivers that the upcoming signal is red.
Trains reduce speed when entering yards. I've seen them do that in real life. This is the reason why I have a through line that operates at speed offset from the yard. This allows the through trains to pass by at full speed while the freight trains move along slowly off the mainline.
The AI drivers are dumb. They only do what we tell them to do via driver commands and nothing else. They cannot read our minds. This is where the challenge comes in. At the very least, we are programming the AI to do what we want by using a high-level programming language. It may not look that way but we are actually stringing together subroutines by placing the different driver commands in the driver command queue.
The various messages that appear about excessive acceleration and curve speed started in TRS19. Routes that never showed any problems now have them. I've seen the excessive acceleration caused by AI drivers as they slow down while entering a station or when starting up. I just ignore them; they're less annoying.
In the end, Trainz is not a real simulator. If it was, it wouldn't be $12.99 a month for Plus.
Trains reduce speed when entering yards. I've seen them do that in real life. This is the reason why I have a through line that operates at speed offset from the yard. This allows the through trains to pass by at full speed while the freight trains move along slowly off the mainline.
The AI drivers are dumb. They only do what we tell them to do via driver commands and nothing else. They cannot read our minds. This is where the challenge comes in. At the very least, we are programming the AI to do what we want by using a high-level programming language. It may not look that way but we are actually stringing together subroutines by placing the different driver commands in the driver command queue.
The various messages that appear about excessive acceleration and curve speed started in TRS19. Routes that never showed any problems now have them. I've seen the excessive acceleration caused by AI drivers as they slow down while entering a station or when starting up. I just ignore them; they're less annoying.
In the end, Trainz is not a real simulator. If it was, it wouldn't be $12.99 a month for Plus.
stagecoach
75377
Check the distance between speed signs. They need to be more than the length of the train.
norfolksouthern37
what's a normal map?
It may help to also have a proper signal at the switch and not one immediately after it in the yard too. There is no way this is able to display and give the ai driver the proper information as it is set up. You are trying to go from 79 to 15 through an advanced approach signal off the main line, at the very least, a signal leading up to that point should convey some information to slow down. I think you are just asking too much from your applied route.
recommendation:
The original problem likely has to do with the distance between the signal on the main and the one right at the yard ladder as well as signal type. The train saw a much higher signal than it should there, which could contribute to not slowing quickly enough. If you revise to something like the diagram you should be able to better control traffic, and it is more prototypical. If the 06 is unbonded the way into the yard will always be a restricting route (typical of entering a yard), which will cause the distant signal to indicate and slow the train far before the junction, which would be proper. If not, the indication will still be of a divergence, which will also slow the train. The slowing section should be long enough to allow your trains to come down from main line speed. You may leave the speed post where it is if you like.
recommendation:
The original problem likely has to do with the distance between the signal on the main and the one right at the yard ladder as well as signal type. The train saw a much higher signal than it should there, which could contribute to not slowing quickly enough. If you revise to something like the diagram you should be able to better control traffic, and it is more prototypical. If the 06 is unbonded the way into the yard will always be a restricting route (typical of entering a yard), which will cause the distant signal to indicate and slow the train far before the junction, which would be proper. If not, the indication will still be of a divergence, which will also slow the train. The slowing section should be long enough to allow your trains to come down from main line speed. You may leave the speed post where it is if you like.
AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
There's one particular problem; I need a permissive signal to perform pickups and setouts. I have configured my route to have those functions in conjunction with the local freights assigned at both yards. How would I work around that?It may help to also have a proper signal at the switch and not one immediately after it in the yard too. There is no way this is able to display and give the ai driver the proper information as it is set up. You are trying to go from 79 to 15 through an advanced approach signal off the main line, at the very least, a signal leading up to that point should convey some information to slow down. I think you are just asking too much from your applied route.
recommendation:
The original problem likely has to do with the distance between the signal on the main and the one right at the yard ladder as well as signal type. The train saw a much higher signal than it should there, which could contribute to not slowing quickly enough. If you revise to something like the diagram you should be able to better control traffic, and it is more prototypical. If the 06 is unbonded the way into the yard will always be a restricting route (typical of entering a yard), which will cause the distant signal to indicate and slow the train far before the junction, which would be proper. If not, the indication will still be of a divergence, which will also slow the train. The slowing section should be long enough to allow your trains to come down from main line speed. You may leave the speed post where it is if you like.
stagecoach
75377
You could use an invisible speed sign on the main line that tells the train what speed to use at the junction. The invisible speed sign can set different speeds for each diverge.
norfolksouthern37
what's a normal map?
Clarify why that is the case, along with the smaller signal right at the yard ladder, its hard to see in the video.
AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
This is where my trains perform setouts or pickups. I have trains stop at that track marker to add or subtract cars from the consist.
AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
This is the yard.
AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
Without a permissive signal, AI drivers would not be able to couple and decouple cars from consists during the commission of performing setouts or pickups. I'd have to perform them manually. The game is programmed to ensure AI drivers don't pass absolute stop signals at danger and rightfully so. Now unless N3V adds a command which enables to override a stopped AI train and let it pass signal at danger, this is our reality. Or they could have AI request permission from user to pass signal at danger which we could approve or deny.
AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
@norfolksouthern37 hopefully that provides a sufficient amount of clarity.
norfolksouthern37
what's a normal map?
If you set the diverging route to unbonded then it would always be a restricting indication into the yard. The returning train can usually couple to the train if its the first behind the signal, so no trouble reconnecting to the train.
AdvancedApproach
Well-known member
It doesn't always do that. I tried getting a returning train to couple onto my empty consist for another local industry run and the AI drivers get stuck. That's even with those railcars being the first ones behind a particular signal. Same problem when I put locomotives in a set staging area. I have a type 5 dwarf signal with number boards, indicating it's a permissive signal and the AI driver will still get stuck. As for the diverging route being unbonded I actually had that problem play out by accident on another route of mine. Then again it was due to my own carelessness. I'll swap out those signals to see what impact it'll have.