Why I am upset with the last two "Updates"

I have no problems with placing and naming portals in Surveyor, but populating them with consists and drivers in the session while I setup drivers and consists throughout my routes.

UDS I admit is great for testing things such as ATLS and TRC crossings. Place short consist, test in Driver and then return to Surveyor for more configuration and fixing if necessary.

In some ways, this setup makes the whole Surveyor-Driver setup we've dealt with for 20 years obsolete. If the consists and schedules could be reset to starting positions, and not just the schedules, then that would complete that part of the puzzle. This would make setting up routes and sessions so much easier because there would no longer be a worry of what's where, or what's on the wrong layer.

JCitron said:

I have no problems with placing and naming portals in Surveyor, but populating them with consists and drivers in the session while I setup drivers and consists throughout my routes.

UDS I admit is great for testing things such as ATLS and TRC crossings. Place short consist, test in Driver and then return to Surveyor for more configuration and fixing if necessary.

In some ways, this setup makes the whole Surveyor-Driver setup we've dealt with for 20 years obsolete. If the consists and schedules could be reset to starting positions, and not just the schedules, then that would complete that part of the puzzle. This would make setting up routes and sessions so much easier because there would no longer be a worry of what's where, or what's on the wrong layer.

Click to expand...

A complete reset for all trains while retaining changes made to the route would certainly simplify matters and take the confusion out so the saving process. All of my routes use portals (controlled by the Central Portal Control) so using UDS has been problematic for me since I have to make sure all my trains and portals are in the session mode.

This whole discussion has been helpful to me. I will update one of my routes using lots of portals (as many as 25) and try using the UDS as it was intended.

One other question when using the UDS: when switching from the route mode to the surveyor mode should you pause the route before switching - or does it make any difference?

Paul_Bert said:

One other question when using the UDS: when switching from the route mode to the surveyor mode should you pause the route before switching - or does it make any difference?

Click to expand...

The pause will be automatically turned on when you switch to Surveyor. It can make a difference because consists that were moving in Driver when you make the switch will be moving in Surveyor if it is unpaused. This can lead to problems such as derailments and collisions. As a side effect it also means that all animations will be paused so no loco (or other) smoke, no animated procedural track switch blades, no animated assets, etc.

To add more to the pausing. This was added at the request of the beta testers. We found that we were chasing consists around while we were trying to fix things. While this may seem unintuitive, give it a try. You can still do that if you want by clicking pause while in the session editor with active consists. Talk about herding cats...

Paul_Bert said:

My conclusion is that for the UDS to work correctly both the trains and the portals must be in the session layer if you want everything to start back at the "beginning" position.

Click to expand...

N3V QA have gotten back to me on my portals and UDS "bug" report. At their request I have conducted some more extensive tests and tried some suggested actions that might resolve the issue. Placing the portals in a session layer certainly solves the problem but can cause other headaches when multiple sessions are used.

One test I conducted was to save a Driver Session (or a "Driver Game") after the train had been returned to the layout from a portal using different scenarios with the portal in a route layer in one scenario and then in a session layer in another. I exited Driver and then loaded and ran the saved Driver Session. While it was running I issued the driver with the driver command Layer Control > Hide > Session Layer to see if the train was actually in a session layer in both Driver scenarios. The train did not vanish in the scenario where the portal was in the route layer, confirming that the train really had moved to the route layer. It did vanish in the scenario where the portal was in the session layer, indicating that the train was still in the session layer.