Strange invalid traction problem

Thinking about this a little, if the train is dragged over the final leg between Nuneaton and Birmingham, the train would have the correct type, 9/390 in Wembley Main and the three Rugbys. The class 57 being attached at Nuneaton to form the 57+390 forward to Birmingham/Wolverhampton.

It was very rare for a drag to be done throughout, often only in the case of a failure, When Pendolinos went to Holyhead the drag was only between Crewe & Holyhead

Meld in post 122296 said:

Thinking about this a little, if the train is dragged over the final leg between Nuneaton and Birmingham, the train would have the correct type, 9/390 in Wembley Main and the three Rugbys. The class 57 being attached at Nuneaton to form the 57+390 forward to Birmingham/Wolverhampton.

It was very rare for a drag to be done throughout, often only in the case of a failure, When Pendolinos went to Holyhead the drag was only between Crewe & Holyhead

So to make sure I've got it clear in my own head about how a TT should be written to cover this situation. Let us take the case of a 9/390 appearing in the various chained TTs and which then has Cl. 57 attached at Nuneaton to take the train forward. In all of the TTs as far as Nuneaton then the train type will show as the normal 9/390 and power AC electric. The train TT will terminate at Nuneaton and will have an action at Nuneaton of J 0Z00 to allow for the Cl. 57 to join and then an N working. This will be a new TT will be created forward from Nuneaton with a train type of Cl. 57 + 9/390 and power diesel plus AC electric. Although the train is not running under AC electric power, that power type will be needed to avoid the problem when the hauling loco is dropped off of a train appearing to be an unpowered consist. Then at the point where the Cl. 57 is detached, that TT will terminate with an action of DEF 0Z00 and an N working. The N working will pick up the TT for the train with a train type of 9/390 and power AC electric.

Thinking forward from that, it would seem sensible for TT writers creating timetables based on the current situation to check both power types when setting up the train type for the various bi-modal units which are appearing around the network. This will handle the situation where even if the unit only runs on one power type in the sim for which the TT has been created, there is a chained TT where the unit changes power mode. If both power types are checked as a matter of course, it will be able to switch to the other power mode in a chained sim without the rigmarole of having to create new TTs, train types or whatever.

A DEF would not be appropiate in this case as it would remove all power types from the remaining portion of the train.

MarkC in post 122298 said:

A DEF would not be appropiate in this case as it would remove all power types from the remaining portion of the train.

DEF would but DF should just remove the diesel portion I would have thought

postal in post 122297 said:

Meld in post 122296 said:

Thinking about this a little, if the train is dragged over the final leg between Nuneaton and Birmingham, the train would have the correct type, 9/390 in Wembley Main and the three Rugbys. The class 57 being attached at Nuneaton to form the 57+390 forward to Birmingham/Wolverhampton.

It was very rare for a drag to be done throughout, often only in the case of a failure, When Pendolinos went to Holyhead the drag was only between Crewe & Holyhead

So to make sure I've got it clear in my own head about how a TT should be written to cover this situation. Let us take the case of a 9/390 appearing in the various chained TTs and which then has Cl. 57 attached at Nuneaton to take the train forward. In all of the TTs as far as Nuneaton then the train type will show as the normal 9/390 and power AC electric. The train TT will terminate at Nuneaton and will have an action at Nuneaton of J 0Z00 to allow for the Cl. 57 to join and then an N working. This will be a new TT will be created forward from Nuneaton with a train type of Cl. 57 + 9/390 and power diesel plus AC electric. Although the train is not running under AC electric power, that power type will be needed to avoid the problem when the hauling loco is dropped off of a train appearing to be an unpowered consist. Then at the point where the Cl. 57 is detached, that TT will terminate with an action of DEF 0Z00 and an N working. The N working will pick up the TT for the train with a train type of 9/390 and power AC electric.

In theory John 1Z00 joins 0Z00 @ Nuneaton then the sim should change the traintype to 57+390 amending length train and power types, there should be no reason for terminating the train and creating a new schedule Saltley/BNS & Wolves should be given the traintype 57+390

Quote:

Thinking forward from that, it would seem sensible for TT writers creating timetables based on the current situation to check both power types when setting up the train type for the various bi-modal units which are appearing around the network. This will handle the situation where even if the unit only runs on one power type in the sim for which the TT has been created, there is a chained TT where the unit changes power mode. If both power types are checked as a matter of course, it will be able to switch to the other power mode in a chained sim without the rigmarole of having to create new TTs, train types or whatever.

Maybe there should be a new traintype added for Bi-modals at source which would effectively allow the trains to seemlessly switch between the 2 as required.

I can foresee there being an issue with for example Severn Tunnel where the Bi-modals have to switch to diesel go through then back to electric on the other side, you can't really allow for that in a schedule at the moment.

Id argue for the tunnel being wired in sim as well but not being marked on the panel. Not 100% accurate but I doubt performance will be that much different.

Meld in post 122300 said:

MarkC in post 122298 said:

A DEF would not be appropiate in this case as it would remove all power types from the remaining portion of the train.

DEF would but DF should just remove the diesel portion I would have thought

That would be the case

Id argue for the tunnel being wired in sim as well but not being marked on the panel. Not 100% accurate but I doubt performance will be that much different.

In theory John 1Z00 joins 0Z00 @ Nuneaton then the sim should change the traintype to 57+390 amending length train and power types, there should be no reason for terminating the train and creating a new schedule Saltley/BNS & Wolves should be given the traintype 57+390

Meld in post 122299 said:

In theory John 1Z00 joins 0Z00 @ Nuneaton then the sim should change the traintype to 57+390 amending length train and power types, there should be no reason for terminating the train and creating a new schedule Saltley/BNS & Wolves should be given the traintype 57+390

Yes: at a join the core code just adds all the power types together.

But at a divide (except DEF/DER) it just gives all the power types to both trains.

One day we'll have a vehicle-based model instead of a train-based one, but at the moment it's some vague ideas in my head and a large dragon labelled "backwards compatibility".