.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23

Thread: Interlocking Towers again

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Australia, Western Australia, North Perth
    Posts
    460
     

    Default Interlocking Towers again

    Once I got over a certain number of AI trains, I seem to have run into an increasing number of incidents where drivers just stop for no apparent reason. Sometimes, I can sort this out by adding a number of track marks to gently guide the bemused driver, but this does not always work.
    I have read in another thread that Interlocking Towers don't alway work in trs19.
    I was also wondering whether Navigate Via Trackmark has also stopped working, but I definitely need help to guide my novice AI drivers through my maze of points (switches).
    Any suggestions?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Australia, NSW, Gosford
    Posts
    693
     

    Default

    I have actually run into what seems a snag also. Have a route in TRS19 with three EIT's one of which now has 27 separate, short. paths which does not like any more added to it. So I have a q...is there a limit to how many paths a single EIT can handle?
    Creator of Blue Mountains Line > Southern Region - Brighton Line > LB&SCR [London Brighton South Coast Railway routes.

  3. #3

    Default

    I have found that if a TM is on the path it did not get seen by the driver. When I asked a driver to go to a TM beyond the path it worked fine. So I moved all TM's off of the paths. You will also have a problem where a driver can see two paths to the same destination and can't decide which one to take.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, California, Burbank
    Posts
    2,762
    Blog Entries
    6
     

    Default

    I may be imagining it, but I think the AI got significantly stupider since SP5 - like can't find the car directly in front of it and less than 300 yards away stupid.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Massachusetts, Haverhill
    Posts
    32,685
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frogpipe View Post
    I may be imagining it, but I think the AI got significantly stupider since SP5 - like can't find the car directly in front of it and less than 300 yards away stupid.
    Yup especially if there's a signal or a bunch of switches in between. If you park the driver past a signal or past a bunch of points, the driver will manage to find what it's supposed to couple to. I found if I remove the signals with the head facing towards the sidings rather than out from the sidings, the AI will couple happily. This fix was annoying because for years everyone was happy either way and then I had to spend hours fixing my various yards on my biggest routes.

    Tony has mentioned that the whole underlying AI engine needs updating but that's a whole project in itself and not an easy one at that and will be looked at some time in the future (tm).
    John
    Trainz User Since: 12-2003
    Trainz User ID: 124863
    Trainz-PLUS: 117669

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Australia, Western Australia, North Perth
    Posts
    460
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCitron View Post
    Yup especially if there's a signal or a bunch of switches in between. If you park the driver past a signal or past a bunch of points, the driver will manage to find what it's supposed to couple to. I found if I remove the signals with the head facing towards the sidings rather than out from the sidings, the AI will couple happily. This fix was annoying because for years everyone was happy either way and then I had to spend hours fixing my various yards on my biggest routes.

    Tony has mentioned that the whole underlying AI engine needs updating but that's a whole project in itself and not an easy one at that and will be looked at some time in the future (tm).
    Certainly needed. At present I have a driver who stops and loads passengers at a station and then refuses to move. I've even tried placing a Track Mark directly in front of where he is stopped, but he won't move to it. Normally, I would suspect a track break, but I have manually driven his train over the complete stretch to the next station without a problem. Perhaps it's more than my computer can handle or perhaps it's more than trs19 can.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    1,519
     

    Default

    I use EIT, set the path and then use autodrive to a trackmark on the other end of the path. If you have station stops drive to the station then use the autodrive to proceed farther. I have no problems doing it this way as autodrive will follow signals and not try to set path like drive to and navigate to.
    Pennsylvania Railroad affectionate PRRT&HS

  8. #8

    Default

    It's possible that the station script is still holding the train even after the load command vanishes.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Australia, Western Australia, North Perth
    Posts
    460
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KenRuof View Post
    I use EIT, set the path and then use autodrive to a trackmark on the other end of the path. If you have station stops drive to the station then use the autodrive to proceed farther. I have no problems doing it this way as autodrive will follow signals and not try to set path like drive to and navigate to.
    I have seen "auto drive" in a TRS video, but that doesn't appear in my version. Is there some additional rule that provides that or is it a trs22 thing?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Massachusetts, Haverhill
    Posts
    32,685
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rhban View Post
    I have seen "auto drive" in a TRS video, but that doesn't appear in my version. Is there some additional rule that provides that or is it a trs22 thing?
    It should be there. If it's not, you can download it from the DLS.

    To enable the driver command, you need to edit the session.

    In the session editing screen, you will see Driver Command.
    Click on edit and then scroll the list, it should be near the top since the commands are in alphabetical order, until you see the driver command Autodrive.
    Check the box next to that, and the command is now added to your available driver commands.
    John
    Trainz User Since: 12-2003
    Trainz User ID: 124863
    Trainz-PLUS: 117669

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    1,519
     

    Default

    autodrive is on the DLS and as JCitron stated has to be enabled in the session after installing. Here is the latest version "<kuid2:192081:4:5> Autodrive"
    Pennsylvania Railroad affectionate PRRT&HS

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,157
     

    Default

    Hi

    Just seen this thread so I apologies for the late reply. There isn't a limit to the number of paths in an EIT but there is a limit to the total number of objects (junctions, signals etc) that are on the paths that the EIT controls. You will get more paths if they are quite short but if the paths are fairly long with lots of junctions and signals, perhaps on the approach to a station for example, then you obviously won't get as many paths before hitting the limit. In my experience once you hit the limit you are unable to add any further paths. I usually try to keep the number of objects to less than 350.

    In the early days of EITs I had the whole of Kings Cross station on the ECML route controlled by one EIT containing 76 paths but that is now impossible. I now have the station controlled by three EITs, one for inbound, a second for outbound and a third controlling the loco yard.

    Depending on the circumstances it may be possible to split long paths into two parts. If paths have a number of objects common to all paths it may be possible to make one path which contains those objects and then other shorter paths for branching to the platforms or sidings. I find that it pays to examine a track layout before starting to add paths to a tower to see if it is possible to simplify them in this way.

    Autodrive is definitely the way to go when using EITs as it doesn't try to set its own paths which can cause clashes with the AI. As the tower controls all the paths to the destinations I find that I need far fewer trackmarks in a session.

    Regards

    Brian

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Australia, Western Australia, North Perth
    Posts
    460
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stagecoach View Post
    It's possible that the station script is still holding the train even after the load command vanishes.
    That does sound possible, but I can't guess at a fix for it.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Australia, Western Australia, North Perth
    Posts
    460
     

    Default

    One hopefully final question:
    In my version of trs19, there is no Enhanced Interlocking Towers, but in the Session list of rules I have a number of rules that seem connected:

    Interlocking Tower Configure Path
    Interlocking Tower Path Selection
    Interlocking Tower Set Path
    Path Rule

    Which one or which ones of these do I need to add to my driver rules? Oh, and I believe I also need to find and download 'autodrive' from DLS.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    655
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kennilworth View Post
    Hi

    Just seen this thread so I apologies for the late reply. There isn't a limit to the number of paths in an EIT but there is a limit to the total number of objects (junctions, signals etc) that are on the paths that the EIT controls. You will get more paths if they are quite short but if the paths are fairly long with lots of junctions and signals, perhaps on the approach to a station for example, then you obviously won't get as many paths before hitting the limit. In my experience once you hit the limit you are unable to add any further paths. I usually try to keep the number of objects to less than 350.

    In the early days of EITs I had the whole of Kings Cross station on the ECML route controlled by one EIT containing 76 paths but that is now impossible. I now have the station controlled by three EITs, one for inbound, a second for outbound and a third controlling the loco yard.

    Depending on the circumstances it may be possible to split long paths into two parts. If paths have a number of objects common to all paths it may be possible to make one path which contains those objects and then other shorter paths for branching to the platforms or sidings. I find that it pays to examine a track layout before starting to add paths to a tower to see if it is possible to simplify them in this way.

    Autodrive is definitely the way to go when using EITs as it doesn't try to set its own paths which can cause clashes with the AI. As the tower controls all the paths to the destinations I find that I need far fewer trackmarks in a session.

    Regards

    Brian
    With Pierre's latest EIT library there is now no upper limit to the number of objects in a tower.
    I am now running a session with 64 towers, 752 paths and 4357 objects with no problems at all. I do not allow AI to make any decisions at all.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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