Train takes way too long to stop when braking

[skyballer455]

I haven't posted on this site in a long time, so here I go. As the title of the post suggests, when I'm playing Open Rails, the braking is way too slow. I've noticed this recently when doing passenger activities on the awesome MONON route but this applies to all other routes I play in OR. The braking is so slow that I miss the station by a long shot every time. Applying emergency brakes makes absolutely no difference as the train slows down at the same rate with emergency brakes on or off.

Is this a problem with the game, or am I starting braking too late? Any help would be greatly appreciated. I'm playing OR on my Windows 10 gaming laptop, if that helps.

[ebnertra000]

How far out do you start braking? That would tell us if it's operator error or something else. My best guess other than braking too late would be less-than-ideal physics parameters in your rolling stock

[skyballer455]

How far out do you start braking? That would tell us if it's operator error or something else. My best guess other than braking too late would be less-than-ideal physics parameters in your rolling stock

I just threw together in example for you using the MONON route, specifically the 1965 era passenger activity. Here is the very first station, Little Englewood coming into view. As you can see, I'm going at about 50 mph at this point and the station is 0.4 miles away.
Ex1.jpg

When the distance reads 0.3 miles, I start applying the train brakes up to 50%. By that point I'm already flying through the station, so I increase brake to emergency. As I mentioned that makes no difference whatsoever in the rate of deceleration. I try applying the engine brake to see if that helps but it doesn't. When the train finally comes to a stop, I'm all the way out here:
Ex2.jpg

Wow, just wow. I hope that helps.

[mikeebb]

1) the physics of a lot of older MSTS trains don't work wonderfully in ORTS. Also, it looks like you're using the 3DTrains F units, and in my experience they don't have strong braking.
2) in real life, you could stop at the station from 50mph 0.3 mile out with a light rail train, using max regen or dynamics, a good bit of friction brake at the end, and probably some heavy hits of track brake as well. There would be funny smells swirling around the train for a little while after the stop (I've been on a few that were operated like that). Regular trains don't have brakes like that and are much heavier, and take much longer to stop. In practice, you would be on the brakes at least 0.5 mile out at 50, probably farther if you want to be nice to your passengers, and would enter the station at 20mph or less (preferably 15ish) to allow for braking to the right stopping spot.

IOW, while there are probably some physics issues, the problem is mainly operator error.

[plainsman]

skyballer455,

If you would be so kind, create a zip file of the .eng file only, and attach that zip to this thread via the "go advanced" option, I would be happy to look at your .eng file and try and identify any problems that might exist.

[skyballer455]

skyballer455,

If you would be so kind, create a zip file of the .eng file only, and attach that zip to this thread via the "go advanced" option, I would be happy to look at your .eng file and try and identify any problems that might exist.

Here is the train used in the scenario in question. Hope this helps.

F3A_Monon_208.zip

[uli2]

The engine and probably also the cars are from the "BLW/ZT Monon Equipment Pack II".

[rfranzosa]

The engine and probably also the cars are from the "BLW/ZT Monon Equipment Pack II".

.... and if they are, I would definitely want to know the solution, Bob (plainsman), so that I can apply it universally and post some patches to the affected sets.

Rick


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[plainsman]

Let me explain what I did.
This is a passenger locomotive, so these values don't apply to freight units. According to the EMD operating manual for an F3, the base weight is 230,000 pounds working weight, and for a passenger locomotive there would be a steam generator and other facilities for lighting and a heavier pressure reservoir for the 110 pound system pressure used on passenger trains with that speed rating, so I added weight to 235,000 pounds. I set the system pressure to 110 and I used ~passenger brake settings, I don't work with passenger locomotives very often, so these are approximate. Passenger units would have a brake system with higher application and release rates than freight locomotives. The big thing I did was to increase the amount of air allowed through the brake pipe. The value in the original file was MUCH too low!
I also redid the power and force settings. The original file had this thinking reversed. Because of the ability of an electric motor to go asymptotic at very slow speeds, the starting force or starting tractive effort, is a function of mass and adhesion. It really doesn't matter if it has 1,000 HP or 3,000 HP, at 0.001 mph, the electric motor will generate enough force to reach adhesion. For a locomotive geared for fast passenger service, the time it could hold that force would be a small fraction of a second, but passenger trains are light so that condition should never be a problem. The maximum continuous force is a function of power, traction motor capability, and gearing. The fastest gearing for an F3 in the EMD operating manual, would be 56:21 with 21 inch wheels, which would only be about 104-105 mph max. An F7 could have 55:22 gearing, and maybe MONON switched gears in a road shop, but I went with the fastest factory spec. As you gear faster, the continuous tractive effort (force) drops proportionately. You can see this in the tonnage ratings in the operating manual. I adjusted the max continuous for 56:21 gearing, it would be less if the road shop installed 55:22 gears. I used the minimum continuous speed specified for 56:21 gearing in the manual.
I don't know how the .wag files are setup for braking? That might also be part of the problem, but the brake pipe issue would be a major factor!
Please let me know if this resolves the issue, or if not, I would be happy to look at the wag file or files as well.
BTW, I left this as a file for use in MSTS. If it is only used in Open Rails, I would write the file much differently!

[skyballer455]

Let me explain what I did.
This is a passenger locomotive, so these values don't apply to freight units. According to the EMD operating manual for an F3, the base weight is 230,000 pounds working weight, and for a passenger locomotive there would be a steam generator and other facilities for lighting and a heavier pressure reservoir for the 110 pound system pressure used on passenger trains with that speed rating, so I added weight to 235,000 pounds. I set the system pressure to 110 and I used ~passenger brake settings, I don't work with passenger locomotives very often, so these are approximate. Passenger units would have a brake system with higher application and release rates than freight locomotives. The big thing I did was to increase the amount of air allowed through the brake pipe. The value in the original file was MUCH too low!
I also redid the power and force settings. The original file had this thinking reversed. Because of the ability of an electric motor to go asymptotic at very slow speeds, the starting force or starting tractive effort, is a function of mass and adhesion. It really doesn't matter if it has 1,000 HP or 3,000 HP, at 0.001 mph, the electric motor will generate enough force to reach adhesion. For a locomotive geared for fast passenger service, the time it could hold that force would be a small fraction of a second, but passenger trains are light so that condition should never be a problem. The maximum continuous force is a function of power, traction motor capability, and gearing. The fastest gearing for an F3 in the EMD operating manual, would be 56:21 with 21 inch wheels, which would only be about 104-105 mph max. An F7 could have 55:22 gearing, and maybe MONON switched gears in a road shop, but I went with the fastest factory spec. As you gear faster, the continuous tractive effort (force) drops proportionately. You can see this in the tonnage ratings in the operating manual. I adjusted the max continuous for 56:21 gearing, it would be less if the road shop installed 55:22 gears. I used the minimum continuous speed specified for 56:21 gearing in the manual.
I don't know how the .wag files are setup for braking? That might also be part of the problem, but the brake pipe issue would be a major factor!
Please let me know if this resolves the issue, or if not, I would be happy to look at the wag file or files as well.
BTW, I left this as a file for use in MSTS. If it is only used in Open Rails, I would write the file much differently!

Thanks. Most of that went waaaay over my head, but thanks all the same. I've only ever played the MONON route in Open Rails, however.

[superheatedsteam]

BTW, I left this as a file for use in MSTS. If it is only used in Open Rails, I would write the file much differently!

For those who may not know, if you create a folder in the loco/wagon folder called OPENRAILS you can save the OR specific eng/wag files in this folder. These eng/wag files must have the same name as the MSTS version.

If Open Rails finds an eng/wag file within the OPENRAILS folder with the same name as in the loco/wagon folder, it will use the eng/wag file located in the OPENRAILS folder instead of the MSTS version.

This stops MSTS from crashing if it reads an Open Rails specific file located in the loco/wagon folder. It also allows using consist editors that are designed for MSTS only.

Cheers,

Marek.

[crstagg]

For those who may not know, if you create a folder in the loco/wagon folder called OPENRAILS you can save the OR specific eng/wag files in this folder. These eng/wag files must have the same name as the MSTS version.

If Open Rails finds an eng/wag file within the OPENRAILS folder with the same name as in the loco/wagon folder, it will use the eng/wag file located in the OPENRAILS folder instead of the MSTS version.

This stops MSTS from crashing if it reads an Open Rails specific file located in the loco/wagon folder. It also allows using consist editors that are designed for MSTS only.

Cheers,

Marek.

That is not correct. MSTS does not crash when it finds a parameter it does not recognize. Instead it just skips to the next line. The use of a second ENG file in the OpenRails folder is to allow a parameter that is used by both MSTS and ORTS to have a drastically different value in the data portion to be used by both sims.
As in:
MSTS SD90mac eng
MaxPower ( 3263kW )
MaxForce ( 650.65kN )
MaxContinuousForce ( 550kN )
ORTS SD90mac eng
MaxPower ( 4213.5kW )
MaxForce ( 823.4kN )
MaxContinuousForce ( 756.2kN )