.
Page 10 of 17 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 248

Thread: TRS19 Service Pack 3 Official Release

  1. #136
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, Qld
    Posts
    6,560
     

    Default

    Hi deneban - you quoted me but didn't provide the KUIDs requested.

    However, no need now as QA have now been provided with a repro that results in a regular derailment. Obviously in all our beta testers we don't have any that run reverse locos through portals to have discovered this issue prior to release.

    As for the script error, it is complaining, rightly, that there is no driver.

    We're working on a fix for this along with the other issues raised and we'll be releasing an update to resolve the problems. Meanwhile, the solution is to un-reverse those locos to avoid the derailment and you'll be back to normal.

    Last edited by Tony_Hilliam; April 22nd, 2021 at 08:44 PM.
    Tony Hilliam

    Got questions about TRS19? Click here for TRS19 FAQs

    Looking for answers to in-game functionality? Click here for help

  2. #137
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Massachusetts, Haverhill
    Posts
    29,741
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Hilliam View Post
    Hi deneban - you quoted me but didn't provide the KUIDs requested.

    However, no need now as QA have now been provided with a repro that results in a regular derailment. Obviously in all our beta testers we don't have any that run reverse locos through portals to have discovered this issue prior to release.

    As for the script error, it is complaining, rightly, that there is no driver.

    We're working on a fix for this along with the other issues raised and we'll be releasing an update to resolve the problems. Meanwhile, the solution is to un-reverse those locos to avoid the derailment and you'll be back to normal.

    Tony,

    I actually had this problem, but never attributed it to a portal issue because the derailments occurred within the consist usually with some smaller wheelbase vehicles such as "beer tanks" or small covered hoppers. The locomotive would split off at the tanks and run as a separate train while the rest of the consist ended up driverless.

    What complicated things is these derailments occurred prior to SP3, making it impossible to attribute anything to the portals. After I had removed those wagons, things worked better, but I would still occasionally get a derailment. With the off and on derailments, I eventually stopped running DPU (Distributed Power Units) on the end of my trains.

    With that said, hopefully these fixes will resolve that issue once and for all and I can then again run DPU locomotives on the end of my long consists to assist them with the grades they encounter.
    John
    Trainz User Since: 12-2003
    Trainz User ID: 124863
    T:ANE Build: 94829
    TRS2019/Trainz-PLUS: 109641

  3. #138
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    At home
    Posts
    139
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCitron View Post
    Tony,

    I actually had this problem, but never attributed it to a portal issue because the derailments occurred within the consist usually with some smaller wheelbase vehicles such as "beer tanks" or small covered hoppers. The locomotive would split off at the tanks and run as a separate train while the rest of the consist ended up driverless.

    What complicated things is these derailments occurred prior to SP3, making it impossible to attribute anything to the portals. After I had removed those wagons, things worked better, but I would still occasionally get a derailment. With the off and on derailments, I eventually stopped running DPU (Distributed Power Units) on the end of my trains.

    With that said, hopefully these fixes will resolve that issue once and for all and I can then again run DPU locomotives on the end of my long consists to assist them with the grades they encounter.

    Yes, as I mentioned before, something needs to be done about the coupler sensitivity, if your train has too many "light" cars, like flatcars the engines will "rip off". Its also part of the yo-yo effect mentioned earlier. But I am glad you found the issue with the reversed locos coming out of the portals.

  4. #139
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Massachusetts, Haverhill
    Posts
    29,741
     

    Default

    I thought that may have been the case and that was related to the physics of the 'enginespec' used for the beer cars and covered hoppers I was using. They came from a particular author so I thought it was something he had done in his design, or perhaps the couplers he had used. I never thought it would part of the actual game engine its self.

    I did see the yo-yo effect once, but like other weird things I could never get the issue to happen again, therefore, I never reported it. The issue being I didn't know what I did to trigger the yo-yo issue. I hate reporting one-off issues because there's no repeatability to the process that caused the problem. If something is repeatable, it's relatively to provide steps to cause the issue so it's more easily fixed.
    John
    Trainz User Since: 12-2003
    Trainz User ID: 124863
    T:ANE Build: 94829
    TRS2019/Trainz-PLUS: 109641

  5. #140
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, TN, Memphis
    Posts
    1,755
     

    Default

    With over 500,000 assets available and all the combinations and permutations that are possible it is remarkable that more bugs don't appear. People are doing things with Trainz that are very diverse and inventive.

    This really points out the need for as many beta testers as possible on new versions. Some folks in the past have berated the beta testers for missing some bugs. Many tester, including me, tends to get into a rut of only testing stuff they are working on and don't venture into other aspects of the game. I want to make sure all my stuff works OK first off, and then I try a few other things to test bugs that others have reported. But my routes probably only utilize 40% of the total capability of the program, so there are many bugs which never affect me. So my input is that more people should consider joining the beta testing fray - the more the merrier so to speak.

    For instance in the case of the portals I have emitted trains with over 50 cars with a pusher at the end with no problems. But my pushers have all faced forward - because that's the way I have always seen them on the trains going through my area every day.

    So in my case SP3 has been a great success and step forward.

  6. #141
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,405
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Hilliam View Post
    Looks fine here in the ECML Dundee sessions. Please check CM to see if anything is modified or provide more detail about which loco, which version of the rule is being used.
    Any loco, any route, and I didn't modify anything. Was fine in SP2.

    Edit: Seems to be random (it decided to display again suddenly while driving a session).
    Last edited by HPL; April 23rd, 2021 at 08:30 AM.

  7. #142
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Massachusetts (originally from NYC)
    Posts
    1,237
    Blog Entries
    17
     

    Default

    Video of in-Portal Derailment in Map Mode

    This YouTube video shows an example of TRS19SP3 in-portal derailment for a session that worked flawlessly in SP2. The derailment occurs towards the back of the train within the portal. Not shown is the train is indeed ejected driver-less and uncontrollable.

    Here it can be seen both the consist speed and the interval for adding a new car vary quite noticeably. In SP2 there was no such variations. The longer the train gets, the more these parameters vary. We can hear the coupler compression and expansion. Perhaps this SP3 loss of "fixed intervals and speed" is associated with the new derailment characteristic?

    The consist manually ejected using the QPM consists of the following:

    kuid2:37573:1000268:4
    kuid2:37573:1000268:4 (reversed)
    kuid2:334896:200083:2 x 30
    kuid2:334896:200089:1 x 30
    kuid:86105:15090

    Click the YouTube lettering for best visibility.
    Last edited by deneban; April 23rd, 2021 at 09:04 AM. Reason: The longer the train gets...

  8. #143
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    At home
    Posts
    139
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul_Bert View Post
    For instance in the case of the portals I have emitted trains with over 50 cars with a pusher at the end with no problems. But my pushers have all faced forward - because that's the way I have always seen them on the trains going through my area every day.

    But as mentioned earlier its not just pushers, it happens with multiple units as well. Even the Build-in content derails. The test train I made with the EF81 and the SJ Os flat cars is all original build in content.

  9. #144
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Massachusetts (originally from NYC)
    Posts
    1,237
    Blog Entries
    17
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Hilliam View Post
    Hi deneban - you quoted me but didn't provide the KUIDs requested.
    I also quoted you in post #87 but that did not seem to draw a response , I am happy to receive this feedback . I did not supply the KUIDs because I characterized the problem as occurring with a "wide spectrum of diesel locos with varying games versions and authors", meaning it should be apparent without much trial and error. I supposed I could have qualified it with "North American Diesels", but the video and post I made adjacent to this post suggests it is more related to train length/mass rather than what kuid locos are placed back-to-back. The longer the train gets as it is emitted from the portal, the greater the "push-pull" effect and coupler sounds heard.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Hilliam View Post
    However, no need now as QA have now been provided with a repro that results in a regular derailment.
    I guess QA (Quality Assurance) would acquire it (as the collector of "field" data?), no such assurance can be made now, once the horse is out of the barn; by now I hope it is in the hands of dev.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Hilliam View Post
    Obviously in all our beta testers we don't have any that run reverse locos through portals to have discovered this issue prior to release.
    That is quite surprising since most North American class I railroads, except for mountainous regions, operate their cabs in a back-to-back lash up so the pair can take on either heading without a lot of making and breaking of connections:



    Is it possible the testing was not sufficiently structured to encompass what users may model from modern railroad practices? In North America "plains" areas, like Ohio, back-to-back lash-ups like that above with 250 cars are common and very frequent.

    Also, is it verified the testers received the new portals? You said in p
    ost #101 "there have been many thousands of hours of testing for SP3", and in this post https://forums.auran.com/trainz/show...58#post1862358 said the portals were being worked on March 8 (i.e. at the later end of development). The release was April 15, so hopefully the testers got the new portals in what seems to have been an ambitious schedule.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Hilliam View Post
    As for the script error, it is complaining, rightly, that there is no driver.

    Ok, I take it the report is a bi-product of the derailment mishap, not the source of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Hilliam View Post
    We're working on a fix for this along with the other issues raised and we'll be releasing an update to resolve the problems. Meanwhile, the solution is to un-reverse those locos to avoid the derailment and you'll be back to normal.
    Easier said than done. Surveyor doesn't seam to readily allow consists kuids to be "revised". In the screenshot below I made all cabs face forward on an established consist kuid preconfigured into my quick portal manager sessions. Using the "Get Consist" tool, does not allow an overwrite of an asset kuid, the option is ghosted. Nor can one make a new superseding version. Correct me if I am wrong or there is another method besides editing config files.

    Last edited by deneban; April 25th, 2021 at 05:39 PM. Reason: removed easier workaround

  10. #145
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    USA - North Carolina
    Posts
    1,888
     

    Default Comment on the Portal weirdness

    Oddly, I just saw this weird Portal behavior. This with SP3 and TRS-19 Port Zyd on which portals normally work flawlessly.

    I added a two engine "engines light" consist to the Central Portal Control rule. I used two of the GT GP9 blacks. The engines were configured as "forward" but when they emerged they were long hood forward. I changed both engines to "reversed" and jumped back to the session.

    When the session started up from this change a consist was built and emerging. This was not the one I just made. This was the first consist configured in the rule (as one would expect). The complete consist was emerging out of the portal but then it started the "shaking" back and forth and it then ran backward into the portal and was consumed. The next consist build and emerge was normal as were all following ones, including my added "engines light" consist.

    So what I saw here was that a changing the directon for a vehicle does something to the rule which affects the next consist out. Then the rule "settles down" and runs as it should. Perhaps changing of the rule mid-session may be causing some of these issues. At least here.

    As a final note. After seeing this weird behavoir I saved the session at a point where I knew no consists were being built and ejected. After this save things worked normally on startup.

    Addendum: Thinking about it.. it's as though the script applied the new consists' "reverse" setting to the first consist coming out of the portal when session was restarted. But only after the emerging consist was built and coming out. Then once the script ran through this particular consist which was consumed, the script continued with a new consist and worked fine. Hope that makes sense. ie: the "direction" parameter (variable) is not being applied properly on restart.
    Last edited by 1611mac; April 24th, 2021 at 08:40 PM.
    Greg
    TRS19 StndEdition SP3, Plus SP2, Plus SP3, Plus Beta-113642
    WIN10 GTX 1060-6 Windforce
    - also OSX installs: iMac, MBP


  11. #146
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    At home
    Posts
    139
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Hilliam View Post
    Hi deneban - you quoted me but didn't provide the KUIDs requested.

    However, no need now as QA have now been provided with a repro that results in a regular derailment. Obviously in all our beta testers we don't have any that run reverse locos through portals to have discovered this issue prior to release.

    As for the script error, it is complaining, rightly, that there is no driver.

    We're working on a fix for this along with the other issues raised and we'll be releasing an update to resolve the problems. Meanwhile, the solution is to un-reverse those locos to avoid the derailment and you'll be back to normal.


    After some researching I found the issue, deleting TNIPhysicsCore.dll from the main game folder and everything is working as normal. No more splitting consists, no more yo-yo effects just smooth running. So whatever is causing these problems must have something to do with that dll file. Even the reversed locos and multiple units run smoothly out of the portals. I don't know if removing that file from the game directory will have any negative impact on the game itself but as far as I can see everything else is normal.
    Last edited by Williamg; April 24th, 2021 at 09:19 PM.

  12. #147
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Massachusetts (originally from NYC)
    Posts
    1,237
    Blog Entries
    17
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Williamg View Post
    After some researching I found the issue, deleting TNIPhysicsCore.dll from the main game folder and everything is working as normal.
    OMG, a "Portal" is a fictional construct in Trainz - what possessed a developer/developers to have a real-world physics package be applied to a fictional construct? It all ended very badly.
    Last edited by deneban; April 25th, 2021 at 09:19 PM.

  13. #148
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Australia, Victoria, Churchill
    Posts
    2,274
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Williamg View Post
    After some researching I found the issue, deleting TNIPhysicsCore.dll from the main game folder and everything is working as normal.
    Ah, but the most pertinent questions would be: What did the removal of the .dll file break? Does it control all Trainz physics and if so what other effects will it have? A nice temporary solution I think.
    Graeme

  14. #149
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    458
     

    Default

    Portals are like 16 years old now?
    Why is so much development time still put in those?
    Add 2 or 3 baseboards and make a shadow station, with or without return loop
    or/and use the excellent "instant move train" driver command from pitkin
    Beta testers are not to blame (never to blame even)
    this could have been caught way before any beta
    removing the new TNI physics is just a temp solution (I hope)
    and indeed what will break if we remove it
    Still having fun in build 100240 :-)
    greetings GM

  15. #150
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Massachusetts (originally from NYC)
    Posts
    1,237
    Blog Entries
    17
     

    Default

    Isn't it odd how the official release versions are labeled as "beta" in the bug report form??


    Last edited by deneban; April 25th, 2021 at 09:40 AM. Reason: deleted trigger bug descritpion

Posting Permissions

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