Open Rails does not follow player path file

[geepster775]

As a sidebar to the previous posting on Open Rails and path issues.....

One of my biggest pet peeves in MSTS era activities, especially payware ones, was when the wrong train holds the main at meets. To be prototypically accurate, the train that arrives first is usually (98% of the time) the train that goes into the siding. The train that arrives first is the train that accepts the delays associated with slower speed diverging moves and lower speed limits on most sidings, because it has more time to kill. Putting the first arrival into the hole avoids delays to the second train when it doesn't have to slow down to navigate switches that are reversed. With MSTS, however, you could successfully 'rig' the acts to perform prototypically by using specialty paths with waiting points for the AI. Many people who made acts, however, including payware vendors, just didn't know how to rig the acts properly.

This is the layout of an activity I was attempting on the Black Hills Sub portion of the Orin Line route.




Three trains vying for the same piece of single track. One is player (coal train), one is AI (intermodal), and one is a loose consist (ballast train). The two revenue trains have to pass each other but because of the Intermodal overtake of the ballast train occupying main 2, the "single track" separating the meet has been "stretched" from Osage to Newcastle crossovers. Because the coal has lower priority and will be the one killing the most time, the dispatcher makes him do the "step aside". It's the double track equivalent of the train that arrives first going into the "siding" routine, the train that has time to kill does the slow speed diversion moves, while the higher priority intermodal which is given the single track first doesn't break stride, doesn't slow down, and doesn't do any diverging movements. After the intermodal passes, the coal train is given the single track next, with the non-revenue ballast train waiting to be third.

In MSTS, the act has been 'rigged' and works as advertised. In Open Rails, it does not.

Approaching Jerome


Crossing over at Jerome





"Coal in the hole" waiting at Osage



After a 10 minute or so wait, the intermodal vacates the single track



The lower priority revenue train is given the single track next



Passing the non-revenue ballast train

[geepster775]

In Open Rails X3411, the player train does not follow the player path file. Here at Jerome, the train keeps going up Main 2 and does not cross over to Main 1




At Osage, the player train waits on Main 2 and forces the AI intermodal to diverge onto Main 1. Note on the track monitor how the train indicator is white indicating that the wrong track is the so-called right path for the player





The last-to-arrive AI must diverge. More non-prototypical nonsense, brought to you this time by Open Rails.



If I do anything to force the player train over onto the other main at Jerome, I get the infamous E-brake. Once I stop, I switch to manual signal mode, recover my air, and continue up Main 1 to Osage. When the AI arrives it passes on Main 2, but when I depart, the switch at Osage is lined against me and when I run through it I get the E-brake again. When I stop from that E-brake, I can switch to auto mode again, recover my air, and carry on.

As information, there are roughly 6 miles and 3 signal blocks in the double track between Jerome and Osage, and 2 sets of intermediate signals that get passed before stopping at the absolute at Osage.

[geepster775]

If you want more commercially available confirmation that Open Rails deviates from the defined player path and does all sorts of non-prototypical things, go run the Rockslide activity that comes with SLI's Feather River equipment pack. That act was designed for Open Rails, and involves the player train being the lowest priority of 3 trains that follow each other up the canyon. In that act, you follow 2 other higher priority trains that depart ahead of you. If you don't wait enough time giving the 2 other trains sufficient headroom and decide to "run on the yellows", you will notice how the open rails dispatcher lines you into and out of the sidings at Kramm and Elsey and James. For some reason, when running close behind the train ahead, Open Rails logic controllers see the sidings as a "path of lesser resistance" and lines the player train off of the pre-defined player path and into and through each siding, despite no meets or overtakes happening at any of them. Again, that is not prototypical. When trains are fleeted in the same direction and signals get "stacked", the signal computer is not always seeing the sidings as "more open and train-free over a greater distance" than the main and does not route the following trains to run needlessly though said sidings. When you examine the act in the activity editor, it shows the player path staying on the main, and not using the sidings you were routed through.

I'm beginning to fear that much of the code development in this application is being conducted by those who lack first hand knowledge of US heavy haul operations, and I am thinking of hedging against making many future investments until this is rectified. If I wanted TS16-like interpretations of US operations, I would would have bought into that competing show long ago.

[conductorchris]

So what we need is people with knowledge of US heavy haul and some skills to jump into open rail and contribute.
Alas, that is not me.
Christopher

[OTTODAD]

So what we need is people with knowledge of US heavy haul and some skills to jump into open rail and contribute.

Train Simulators have to run trains properly no matter where in the world their routes are, the US is only a small part of !

I don't think that there are people who know how all their physics involved work, including the countries individual signalling, etc.

[eric]

So jump in and make the suggestion over in ET.

Pissing and moaning about it here won't fix it.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lateagain]

So jump in and make the suggestion over in ET.

Pissing and moaning about it here won't fix it.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Having a bad day are we?

This is a forum for Open Rails and the OP posted something that is of interest to those watching the progress of Open rails. Forgot to add has gone to considerable trouble to illustrate the problem too.

I don't see the problem

[eric]

Nope, having a great day actually but thanks for asking.

It's a known fact that the ORTS developers don't hang out here, so it's counterproductive, regardless how much detail is being provided, to continue the discussion of this issue *here*.

If you want to see the problem addressed, either open up a bug request or raise it with them on the site where they congregate.

I'm pretty sure from past experience that Rob or one of the other devs who works with signaling and paths would jump on this if they knew about it, or provide an intelligent answer about why it works the way it does. Keep in mind that not everything MSTS did was right...

The point is they can't address what they don't know about.

[lateagain]

Nope, having a great day actually but thanks for asking.

and I'm truly glad to hear that.

It's a known fact that the ORTS developers don't hang out here, so it's counterproductive, regardless how much detail is being provided, to continue the discussion of this issue *here*.

....well frankly if this "Well Known" statement IS FACT? My question is why not? I've heard this one before.

NOW.... obviously this question isn't raised personally at you eric ....but rather as a query as to whether such an absurd state of affairs REALLY exists.

IF it does than there are a few folk who need to justify why they've taken such a stance. Having worked with a team on a UK route that took 6 years to develop and devoted a majority of my "Sim time" to that project it didn't stop me keeping in touch with what was happening on this and many more forums

When trainsim.com hosts a forum called Open Rails/Open Rails Discussion it's nothing short of stupidity for anyone involved in that project NOT to monitor it? It's hardly time consuming! All you need to do is monitor "New Posts" and scan the right hand column for Open Rails

If you want to see the problem addressed, either open up a bug request or raise it with them on the site where they congregate.

I tried that once, and got a load of negative feedback from ....actually I'm not sure who. In my experience of a six year project (still on-going with further development) that doesn't achieve much

I'm pretty sure from past experience that Rob or one of the other devs who works with signaling and paths would jump on this if they knew about it, or provide an intelligent answer about why it works the way it does. Keep in mind that not everything MSTS did was right...

The point is they can't address what they don't know about.

????? I refer those viewing to my first point!!

The OP went to considerable trouble to illustrate and articulate the issue here. It's a public forum. Why don't they know about it?

Elvas Towers is a great site and has some top contributors. However trainsim.com has a lot of very experienced folk from all over the World. It also has some of THE most helpful contributors on any of the Trainsim Forums. NOT to monitor feedback here is frankly unbelievable?

As I understand it Open Rails is the result of input from folk with expertise in may areas. It's a team effort? Why would anyone trying to achieve something not use EVERY possible source of feedback and help?

[qballbandit]

"When trainsim.com hosts a forum called Open Rails/Open Rails Discussion it's nothing short of stupidity for anyone involved in that project NOT to monitor it? It's hardly time consuming! All you need to do is monitor "New Posts" and scan the right hand column for Open Rails "

I would think the forum was opened as a courtesy for those who congregate **here**, so we could discuss and share ORTS info, not as a dedicated ORTS team forum, where base problems are ticketed, researched, and posted back with answers/corrections/fixes.

The core ORTS team chose their home, no obligation for them to monitor every MSTS related forum. We have to make the adjustment.
We have one place to reach them....they have numerous places to reach us.

[lateagain]

"When trainsim.com hosts a forum called Open Rails/Open Rails Discussion it's nothing short of stupidity for anyone involved in that project NOT to monitor it? It's hardly time consuming! All you need to do is monitor "New Posts" and scan the right hand column for Open Rails "

I would think the forum was opened as a courtesy for those who congregate **here**, so we could discuss and share ORTS info, not as a dedicated ORTS team forum, where base problems are ticketed, researched, and posted back with answers/corrections/fixes.

The core ORTS team chose their home, no obligation for them to monitor every MSTS related forum. We have to make the adjustment.
We have one place to reach them....they have numerous places to reach us.

???? ...Neil I refer you back to my original post that you so kindly quoted? We're talking about TRAIN SIMULATORS? .... Not High School hockey fan forums . We're also talking about feedback on a Beta version of a simulator. If those involved are not interested in feedback because it's not "laid at their feet" in the precise spot they can be bothered to look it's going to be a long time getting beyond a BETA?

MSTS is what it is today because folk from ALL OVER the World posted and shared fixes on numerous forums. Any useful tip or fix was shared many times over. These tips were linked to in other forums etc.etc. Through the efforts of countless folk, a good few of whom started posting here, we have arguably what is still the best Train Simulator ever produced.

If OR is going to succeed it has to look out at ALL those sources? The folk testing and reporting on OR are as important as the folk writing the code. Simulators are complex and testing and feedback is the only way forward. If anyone developing OR doubts that I's be firstly surprised and secondly disappointed.

[OTTODAD]

This web site has been what I have preferred to focus on since the birth of MSTS in 2001 and Nels has added sub-forums for all other Train Simulators of interest to its members.

Judging by the daily number of posts in the ET ORTS Discussions forum and in other web sites Train Simulator forums, not many are posting in them anymore, being mainly laptops or tablets "Gamers" now, not asking many questions about "How To" and many hard core simmers having found something else to do.

I am no longer interested in Simulators other than DTG's TS-20016 / UE4 and possibly a UE4 version of their Steam Flight Simulator, getting what I want from the former and having been a Private Pilot still get from MS-FSX !

[R. Steele]

It's a known fact that the ORTS developers don't hang out here, so it's counterproductive, regardless how much detail is being provided, to continue the discussion of this issue *here*.

....well frankly if this "Well Known" statement IS FACT? My question is why not? I've heard this one before.
NOW.... obviously this question isn't raised personally at you eric ....but rather as a query as to whether such an absurd state of affairs REALLY exists...

I'll tell you why. From the persepctive of a newcomer (relatively to you folks 10+ years of experience) to this small, but genuine and interesting, corner of the virtual world.

Two wildly different forum cultures (no judgements just stating the facts). This one for instance will dash wildly off into the weeds at the drop of a split hair (substitute "hat" for the more prosaic phrase) and then go about assiduously setting the weeds on fire.

This thread I present as evidence. We are now in another discussion out in the weeds.

[R. Steele]

Removed by original poster, not germane to the discusion and just blather. I stand by post #13

[lateagain]

I'm obviously missing something here?

Geepster goes to a lot of trouble to illustrate an issue with OR.

Instead of anyone coming back with observations on the post, or suggestions, or reports of similar issues..... He's attacked!

The idea that people working on OR do not (or as has been suggested WILL not) read this thread frankly beggars belief!

Anyone who created anything for this or ANY OTHER Sim has done so in the era of the Internet. THE most powerful and widely available research tool ever known to mankind. Anyone creating stuff who won't use that and the limitless potential it offers is...... fill in your own thought!

Frankly Gerry it doesn't matter a toss which forum has which values in anybody's opinion. What forums contain, in varying degrees of clarity is a bank of shared knowledge and experience. Anyone with more than two brain cells ought to be able to sort the wheat from the chaff?

If only researching stuff for reskins or modelling was as easy as having a forum with all that info laid at your feet? Of course those who've done any of those things will know that it takes searching through dozens of sites, hunting down books (often out of print) and yes asking help from others on the forums.

IF anyone involved in OR development want's to tell the members of this forum that they can't find 30 seconds a day to check for feedback here on one of the oldest Train Sim forums I'd suggest that the issue is with THEM ...NOT any of the forums or contributors to them. I have to say I find that unbelievable.