[Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.3]

User avatar
runs
Member
Posts: 3225
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 08:32

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by runs » Post

bme.png
bme.png (470.2 KiB) Viewed 3227 times
Congratulations, you are a happy SAMMY AWARDS winner!

Participate to get your prize.

W3RQ01
Member
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2020 06:33
GitHub: W3RQ01
In-game: Dario23 or W3RQ01
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by W3RQ01 » Post

runs wrote:
Fri Dec 23, 2022 18:10
bme.png

Congratulations, you are a happy SAMMY AWARDS winner!

Participate to get your prize.

YES WE DID IT BOYS! WE DID IT!!
OneUnitedPower

yw05
Member
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 12:59
GitHub: y5nw
IRC: y5nw
In-game: ywang
Location: Germany

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by yw05 » Post

Spoiler
runs wrote:
Fri Dec 23, 2022 18:10
Congratulations, you are a happy SAMMY AWARDS winner!

Participate to get your prize.
IMO we should also acknowledge the nice features that are developed and implemented by various train packs. Marnack's DlxTrains (for its extensive livery features) and doxygen_spammer's Minitram (for visual line number displays and the seat attachment offset fix, wihch are developed for it) are quite significant advancements, even though these are not in the Advtrains source code.

User avatar
Blockhead
Member
Posts: 1622
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2019 10:14
GitHub: Montandalar
IRC: Blockhead256
In-game: Blockhead Blockhead256
Location: Land Down Under
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by Blockhead » Post

yw05 wrote:
Fri Dec 23, 2022 21:03
Spoiler
runs wrote:
Fri Dec 23, 2022 18:10
Congratulations, you are a happy SAMMY AWARDS winner!

Participate to get your prize.
IMO we should also acknowledge the nice features that are developed and implemented by various train packs. Marnack's DlxTrains (for its extensive livery features) and doxygen_spammer's Minitram (for visual line number displays and the seat attachment offset fix, wihch are developed for it) are quite significant advancements, even though these are not in the Advtrains source code.
Agreed. The core modpack has basically stalled and stagnated this year, beyond your branch work on new-ks and doc, which is yet to be merged; whereas the real way that AdvTrains has progressed this year is in quality and innovative train packs.

2022 in AdvTrains saw the following additions:
  • Two-position wheel positioning for wagons added to the core
  • DlxTrains tanker-as-container loads
  • DlxTrains G1206 and SW1500 Diesel locomotives.
  • Doxy Mini Tram: The Konsal 105N, as well as the associated Multi Component Liveries and Visual Line Number Displays library mods.
  • Moretrains InterCity wagons.
  • AdvTrains Supplemental (particularly myself and W3RQ01 but also others) working on MBB's old train packs and adding them to ContentDB.
  • 'Subways' mod by Sylvester Kruin/matzko
  • Xenon/xenonca's MeseJet
A surprising amount of what I thought was 'recent' in AdvTrains was actually from 2021, which was a good year. AdvTrains just moves slowly and I'm not spending every waking hour thinking about it, or trawling websites to find out what's new :) If you haven't already check out Noah's Railyard; if nothing else, I at least recommend checking the list of mods used in that map so that you know the breadth of content that's out there for this mod.
/˳˳_˳˳]_[˳˳_˳˳]_[˳˳_˳˳\ Advtrains enthusiast | My map: Noah's Railyard | My Content on ContentDB ✝️♂

User avatar
orwell
Member
Posts: 958
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 18:45
GitHub: orwell96
IRC: orwell96_mt
In-game: orwell
Location: Raxacoricofallapatorius

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by orwell » Post

Hello everyone,

Like Blockhead said, it is true that there has not been much movement in the advtrains core. I also think that I need to apologize for not pushing out a new core release for so long - IMO there are some nice improvements that are not officially released yet.

As for me, I am currently in the process of writing a thesis and finishing my engineering degree, besides caring for my small family, so I didn't have much time to invest into Minetest. My hope is that beginning next March, I will have some free time to get more active and make some progress with the advtrains core again, and bring some order into all the patches submitted over the last few months.

Also from my side, great thanks to all the people who have contributed to all those advtrains extensions and supplemental materials. I can't wait to try them out myself.

What's left for now is for me to wish you a happy and successful new year 2023. Have fun!
Lua is great!
List of my mods
I like singing. I like dancing. I like ... niyummm...

yw05
Member
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 12:59
GitHub: y5nw
IRC: y5nw
In-game: ywang
Location: Germany

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by yw05 » Post

orwell wrote:
Sat Dec 31, 2022 21:15
Hello everyone,

Like Blockhead said, it is true that there has not been much movement in the advtrains core. I also think that I need to apologize for not pushing out a new core release for so long - IMO there are some nice improvements that are not officially released yet.
Regardless, Advtrains is a nice base to work/make improvements on.
As for me, I am currently in the process of writing a thesis and finishing my engineering degree, besides caring for my small family, so I didn't have much time to invest into Minetest.
Viel Erfolg!
My hope is that beginning next March, I will have some free time to get more active and make some progress with the advtrains core again, and bring some order into all the patches submitted over the last few months.
I look forward to the update with the route programming rework; that could make interlocking work much easier (and less time-consuming, which is IMO the main drawback of the system).

It would also be nice to see some of doxy's work (if he approves it) make its way into the core - it would be a (at least) notable improvement to the graphical aspect.
Also from my side, great thanks to all the people who have contributed to all those advtrains extensions and supplemental materials. I can't wait to try them out myself.
The wagon packs are definitely worth trying.

User avatar
56independent_actual
Member
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun May 23, 2021 16:10
IRC: independent56
In-game: 56independent
Location: Girona Province
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by 56independent_actual » Post

💥🚄
Last edited by 56independent_actual on Sun Jan 15, 2023 16:20, edited 1 time in total.
Warnig: Al my laguage ekscept English is bad, includig Hungarian (magyàränoлиски), Spanish (esпagnyoл), and Russian (рÿсскïанöл).

W3RQ01
Member
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2020 06:33
GitHub: W3RQ01
In-game: Dario23 or W3RQ01
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by W3RQ01 » Post

Happy new year to everyone! I am looking forward to increase the Supplemental organisation quality. Thanks to everyone that helped us!
OneUnitedPower

yw05
Member
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 12:59
GitHub: y5nw
IRC: y5nw
In-game: ywang
Location: Germany

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by yw05 » Post

As part of my work on the new-ks branch, I changed some formspecs used in Advtrains and would like some feedback on this.
Spoiler
2023-01-06-14-30-05.png
2023-01-06-14-30-05.png (11.63 KiB) Viewed 2915 times
This is the formspec for choosing the aspect from speed signals. Note that I removed the "distant aspect" option, as I already implemented distant signaling, and the shunt aspect selector is also used for the "proceed_as_main" flag. I also added the options to change the IP and distant signal assignment.
Spoiler
2023-01-06-14-30-50.png
2023-01-06-14-30-50.png (23.75 KiB) Viewed 2915 times
This is the formspec for choosing the aspect from route signals. I extended the section on distant signals as there is sufficient space for this purpose. The dropdown only has "danger" and "free" options as the latter should be decided by the interlocking system.
(For anyone curious, I used https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... attern.png as the reference when making the Japanese signals.)
Spoiler
2023-01-06-14-31-14.png
2023-01-06-14-31-14.png (9.27 KiB) Viewed 2915 times
This formspec is only used for choosing the signal aspect for interlocking routes. This layout is chosen as it allows players to choose the signal aspect without making it depend on the type of the signal.
The formspec for the influence point has been expanded to also include properties for distant signaling, which is similar to the signal aspect selector for route signals. This formspec is still accessible by right-clicking while holding the Aux1 key.

While the commit for these changes is upsream, I have not yet updated the code to (correctly) handle these changes. There are also a few known issues that I need to address, specifically:
  • The signal aspect selector for routes still depends on the type of the signal (speed vs route signal) assigned to the TCB side. Edit: While it is theoretically easy to fix on its own, I need to think about my approach toward handling route signals, especially in the interlocking system. This will likely result in some changes in the signaling code in general that is less specific to the interlocking system.
  • Assigning signal signs as distant signals causes a crash. (I overlooked static signals when I wrote unittests, so I did not catch this earlier.) This is fixed in a later commit.
  • It is possible to set the aspect for the Japanese repeater signal, which is inconsistent with the design that the distant aspect should be chosen internally. Currently, the signal properties form (expanded from the IP form) is shown for repeater signals. However, repeater signals are still not handled correctly, especially when unassigned.
Edit: I will stop updating this post as this thread is not a bugtracker. Feedback (especially bug reports) is still appreciated though.
Last edited by yw05 on Sat Jan 07, 2023 13:26, edited 2 times in total.

W3RQ01
Member
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2020 06:33
GitHub: W3RQ01
In-game: Dario23 or W3RQ01
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by W3RQ01 » Post

yw05 wrote:
Fri Jan 06, 2023 14:06
As part of my work on the new-ks branch, I changed some formspecs used in Advtrains and would like some feedback on this.
Spoiler
2023-01-06-14-30-05.png
This is the formspec for choosing the aspect from speed signals. Note that I removed the "distant aspect" option, as I already implemented distant signaling, and the shunt aspect selector is also used for the "proceed_as_main" flag. I also added the options to change the IP and distant signal assignment.
Spoiler
2023-01-06-14-30-50.png
This is the formspec for choosing the aspect from route signals. I extended the section on distant signals as there is sufficient space for this purpose. The dropdown only has "danger" and "free" options as the latter should be decided by the interlocking system.
(For anyone curious, I used https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... attern.png as the reference when making the Japanese signals.)
Spoiler
2023-01-06-14-31-14.png
This formspec is only used for choosing the signal aspect for interlocking routes. This layout is chosen as it allows players to choose the signal aspect without making it depend on the type of the signal.
The formspec for the influence point has been expanded to also include properties for distant signaling, which is similar to the signal aspect selector for route signals. This formspec is still accessible by right-clicking while holding the Aux1 key.

While the commit for these changes is upsream, I have not yet updated the code to (correctly) handle these changes. There are also a few known issues that I need to address, specifically:
  • The signal aspect selector for routes still depends on the type of the signal (speed vs route signal) assigned to the TCB side.
  • Assigning signal signs as distant signals causes a crash. (I overlooked static signals when I wrote unittests, so I did not catch this earlier.) This is fixed in a later commit.
  • It is possible to set the aspect for the Japanese repeater signal, which is inconsistent with the design that the distant aspect should be chosen internally.
Good job!
OneUnitedPower

User avatar
Blockhead
Member
Posts: 1622
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2019 10:14
GitHub: Montandalar
IRC: Blockhead256
In-game: Blockhead Blockhead256
Location: Land Down Under
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by Blockhead » Post

yw05 wrote:
Fri Jan 06, 2023 14:06
As part of my work on the new-ks branch, I changed some formspecs used in Advtrains and would like some feedback on this.
I don't think I like the use of a fixed-width font. I would keep it to just some text inputs like the ARS rules editing. Sorry I don't have any more in-depth feedback; I should actually get my hands dirty with it first.

Prototype advtrains "don't walk on tracks" sign, what do you all think? Always a greater fool, right?
Attachments
Advtrains-WarningSign.png
Advtrains-WarningSign.png (1.12 KiB) Viewed 2820 times
/˳˳_˳˳]_[˳˳_˳˳]_[˳˳_˳˳\ Advtrains enthusiast | My map: Noah's Railyard | My Content on ContentDB ✝️♂

yw05
Member
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 12:59
GitHub: y5nw
IRC: y5nw
In-game: ywang
Location: Germany

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by yw05 » Post

Blockhead wrote:
Mon Jan 09, 2023 16:09
yw05 wrote:
Fri Jan 06, 2023 14:06
As part of my work on the new-ks branch, I changed some formspecs used in Advtrains and would like some feedback on this.
I don't think I like the use of a fixed-width font. I would keep it to just some text inputs like the ARS rules editing.
Ah. I did not (intentionally) choose a fixed-width font. I chose a monospace font as the default for my client, which is why the formspec is rendered like that.

On a less related note, perhaps I should consider picking up my earlier Minetest PR on font selection.
Sorry I don't have any more in-depth feedback; I should actually get my hands dirty with it first.
The thing is that, while I did write unittests, certain things are overlooked when making these tests, and that is how bugs still come up. (Some user-facing code is also not particularly easy to test with Mineunit; I might still consider picking that up though.)
Prototype advtrains "don't walk on tracks" sign, what do you all think? Always a greater fool, right?
Looks nice. I would additionally go for taking your vehicle collision patch and showing a variant of the explosion that is colored red when someone is hit by a train.

On a less related note, I hope TenPlus1 does not mind if people (ab)use the fiery dirt from the ethereal mod. Oh wait, I already do that.

W3RQ01
Member
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2020 06:33
GitHub: W3RQ01
In-game: Dario23 or W3RQ01
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by W3RQ01 » Post

Blockhead wrote:
Mon Jan 09, 2023 16:09
Prototype advtrains "don't walk on tracks" sign, what do you all think? Always a greater fool, right?
Nice. Are you going to integrate it on trainblocks?
OneUnitedPower

W3RQ01
Member
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2020 06:33
GitHub: W3RQ01
In-game: Dario23 or W3RQ01
Contact:

by W3RQ01 » Post

Hi everyone,
I announce that the london underground train has been moved to advtrains_supplemental!

This mod was originally made by Mainote but sice the author is no longer active, it has been moved to a better place.

I have made a branch called "clf" that stands for "Custom Livery Feature" where i am adding the support for the bike painter. Any contributions are welcome!
OneUnitedPower

yw05
Member
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 12:59
GitHub: y5nw
IRC: y5nw
In-game: ywang
Location: Germany

Re:

by yw05 » Post

W3RQ01 wrote:
Tue Jan 10, 2023 11:14
Hi everyone,
I announce that the london underground train has been moved to advtrains_supplemental!

This mod was originally made by Mainote but sice the author is no longer active, it has been moved to a better place.

I have made a branch called "clf" that stands for "Custom Livery Feature" where i am adding the support for the bike painter. Any contributions are welcome!
There are a few issues with the livery feature:
  • Only the locomotive can be painted.
  • The small area above the external display is (awkwardly) not painted. (See attachment)
  • It would be nice to be able to paint the rest of the body. Doxy's multi-component livery mod may be helpful for this purpose.
Also, the init.lua file in the clf branch has an extra minus sign at the end of line 124.

Other than that, there are a few minor issues that are mostly related to the limitations of Advtrains or Minetest:
  • The overlap of the connection area between the locomotive and the regular wagon looks IMO a bit weird. Implementing an API for wagon coupling while taking visual accuracy into consideration is unfortunately not trivial and would also add some work for modders.
  • The wagons may be lit differently, which makes the area between the two wagons look weird in terms of lighting, especially from the inside.
  • The attachment of the driver stand makes it impossible to select the wagon when looking to the side from the driver stand. (This would require doxy's attachment offset patch to fix)
The visual line number display mod might be useful for the external display.
Attachments
2023-01-10-12-33-59.png
2023-01-10-12-33-59.png (131.89 KiB) Viewed 2780 times

User avatar
56independent_actual
Member
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun May 23, 2021 16:10
IRC: independent56
In-game: 56independent
Location: Girona Province
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by 56independent_actual » Post

💥🚄
Last edited by 56independent_actual on Sun Jan 15, 2023 16:20, edited 1 time in total.
Warnig: Al my laguage ekscept English is bad, includig Hungarian (magyàränoлиски), Spanish (esпagnyoл), and Russian (рÿсскïанöл).

yw05
Member
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 12:59
GitHub: y5nw
IRC: y5nw
In-game: ywang
Location: Germany

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by yw05 » Post

56independent_actual wrote:
Tue Jan 10, 2023 13:38
yw05 wrote:
Fri Jan 06, 2023 14:06
As part of my work on the new-ks branch, I changed some formspecs used in Advtrains and would like some feedback on this.
Perfect! Is it safe to run on a multiplayer server yet?
No, and I do not provide forward compatibility for the master branch (in other words, backup your server if you want to use it for testing the new-ks branch).
Any improvement to the extremely manual approach to routemaking?
No. The changes to the new-ks branch is mostly related to the signaling system.

Orwell is working on improvements to the route programming system. I would leave this to him.
This is the formspec for choosing the aspect from route signals. I extended the section on distant signals as there is sufficient space for this purpose. The dropdown only has "danger" and "free" options as the latter should be decided by the interlocking system.
Route signals? Does this mean there is now API support to telling mods the route taken? This would be very useful for British "feather" route-showing signals!
Route information is not yet provided. Route signals are mainly introduced because it makes more sense to do so as I implemented distant signaling.

I would consider adding a field for custom route information. The info field of the signal aspect could be useful for this purpose.
In any case, support for recursive distant signalling would also be helpful as some British signals allow looking at the second signal ahead, like this.
Support for distant signaling over multiple signals is implemented, but I still need to look into how to let the routesetting system support this.

I recall testing (literally) recursive distant signal assignments, I do not think this is in the unittest though.

By the way, I should consider expanding the set of Japanese signals.
Heck, a double flashing yellow means the second yellow has a diverging route, mixing both of these functions (!!).
I need to think about how this should be implemented.
Also, and this is a stretch, there are signs in the UK that show two numbers; one for light trains and one for heavy trains. Maybe there could be support based on train lengths or existing carriages.
I am not implementing this for now, as Advtrains currently does not differentiate between "light" and "heavy" trains.

User avatar
56independent_actual
Member
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun May 23, 2021 16:10
IRC: independent56
In-game: 56independent
Location: Girona Province
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by 56independent_actual » Post

💥🚄
Last edited by 56independent_actual on Sun Jan 15, 2023 16:20, edited 2 times in total.
Warnig: Al my laguage ekscept English is bad, includig Hungarian (magyàränoлиски), Spanish (esпagnyoл), and Russian (рÿсскïанöл).

User avatar
56independent_actual
Member
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun May 23, 2021 16:10
IRC: independent56
In-game: 56independent
Location: Girona Province
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by 56independent_actual » Post

💥🚄
Last edited by 56independent_actual on Sun Jan 15, 2023 16:20, edited 1 time in total.
Warnig: Al my laguage ekscept English is bad, includig Hungarian (magyàränoлиски), Spanish (esпagnyoл), and Russian (рÿсскïанöл).

yw05
Member
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 12:59
GitHub: y5nw
IRC: y5nw
In-game: ywang
Location: Germany

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by yw05 » Post

56independent_actual wrote:
Tue Jan 10, 2023 15:39
Route information is not yet provided. Route signals are mainly introduced because it makes more sense to do so as I implemented distant signaling.
Ok, whilst i was waiting for your reply i had a think for like three seconds and then realised routes can have aspects set. In ks, you can add a speed limit. In Britsignals, i could add a route. But this option is a bit ugly and manual, so eventually i might add support for automatic feathering based on wether a point is Cr or St and where it appears, later being a more vertical line.
IMO dedicated fields for e.g. the route name would be helpful for route indicators that are capable of displaying letters. (as the name of the route may differ from what the operator wants to show on the indicator, for reasons such as formatting).
I need to think about how this should be implemented.
I think it's quite simple to think about. We have the route feather at a distant signal in the junction. The signal can "see" the feather is lit, so flashes its yellow aspect signal as a result if the signal can see the distant. Feathers in the Britsignals only light up if the signal is green.

From here, the only support one would need is to be able to see ALL the present info of a distant signal. Which might even exist!
The dst field only includes the main aspect of the next signal. Putting the distant aspect into something like info.dst would not be hard though.

The problem is with the part involving diverging routes, which are hard to identify with Y-/3-way-turnouts. I would let the operator specify this in some way (e.g. by specifying this in the route information)
I am not implementing this for now, as Advtrains currently does not differentiate between "light" and "heavy" trains.
I'm sure i could use LuaATC commands to find the size of the train... somehow.
The problem is that the "length" of the train (in terms of the number of wagons) does not necessarily correspond to its weight, especially that the length (and weight) of the wagons would differ if these were in real life.

The other thing is that Advtrains does not have a mechanism for specifying signal aspects based on the properties of a train.

User avatar
56independent_actual
Member
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun May 23, 2021 16:10
IRC: independent56
In-game: 56independent
Location: Girona Province
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by 56independent_actual » Post

💥🚄
Last edited by 56independent_actual on Sun Jan 15, 2023 16:20, edited 1 time in total.
Warnig: Al my laguage ekscept English is bad, includig Hungarian (magyàränoлиски), Spanish (esпagnyoл), and Russian (рÿсскïанöл).

yw05
Member
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 12:59
GitHub: y5nw
IRC: y5nw
In-game: ywang
Location: Germany

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by yw05 » Post

56independent_actual wrote:
Tue Jan 10, 2023 16:46
yw05 wrote:
Tue Jan 10, 2023 16:31
The problem is with the part involving diverging routes, which are hard to identify with Y-/3-way-turnouts. I would let the operator specify this in some way (e.g. by specifying this in the route information)
I think inside the route options, a little button saying "main route" being ticked (and possibly now grayed out on other routes) or the only route with * ARS rules can determine the main route, thus either no indication or an "m" for main, depending on signal type.
Like I said, I prefer thinking about this first.

A list of route properties could also be discusses in a future conference.
I am not implementing this for now, as Advtrains currently does not differentiate between "light" and "heavy" trains.

The other thing is that Advtrains does not have a mechanism for specifying signal aspects based on the properties of a train.
LuaATC does, though:

Code: Select all

if event.type == "approach" then
    if train_length() >= 10 then
    	atc_set_lzb_tsr(5)
    else
    	atc_set_lzb_tsr(10)
    end
end 
And since LuaATC uses advtrains functions, maybe somehow you can execute arbitrary LuaATC code based off a call to a signal or something.
That is not relevant to signal aspects.

The internal logic for atc_set_lzb_tsr is mostly provided of the LZB system, not the signaling system (the latter does use LZB to actually control the train though).

My wording previously is actually a bit loose: from the perspective of implementation, LZB is set based on whether shunt mode is allowed for a train or not. However, there are many limits to shunt mode (and also some logic on handling this mode in particular), and extending the aspect to depend on (for example) the type of the train will easily become a source of confusion for LuaATC users, modders and partly even for developers.
Maybe we could tell how heavy a wagon is based on a "density" value for models and finding the volume of the model.
The models have hardly any volume if you do not consider the theoretical maximum volume of the payload. Calculating the weight of a train based on the maximum volume of its payload is also problematic considering that the actual payload it can hold is defined by the inventory and driver/passenger seats. This is further complicated by wagons with additional features (e.g. batteries for charging tools), where you would also need to calculate the weight of those.
The UK system does classify a difference between "light" passanger, parcel, and some other types of trains, from the "heavy" cargo trains. I think it might be based off braking power.
The further problem with classification is that different countries classify wagons differently. Classifications for trains becomes further complicated in that the combinations of wagons in a train has hardly any limit.
The sign is static, with the heavy number on top and light number on the bottom (which is also a decent failsafe; if you can't read the bottom, you have the lower speed limit, which covers both possibilites).
This is irrelevant; static and dynamic signals use the same code for signal aspect handling.

User avatar
56independent_actual
Member
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun May 23, 2021 16:10
IRC: independent56
In-game: 56independent
Location: Girona Province
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by 56independent_actual » Post

💥🚄
Last edited by 56independent_actual on Sun Jan 15, 2023 16:21, edited 1 time in total.
Warnig: Al my laguage ekscept English is bad, includig Hungarian (magyàränoлиски), Spanish (esпagnyoл), and Russian (рÿсскïанöл).

yw05
Member
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 12:59
GitHub: y5nw
IRC: y5nw
In-game: ywang
Location: Germany

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by yw05 » Post

56independent_actual wrote:
Tue Jan 10, 2023 18:21
yw05 wrote:
Tue Jan 10, 2023 18:07
My wording previously is actually a bit loose: from the perspective of implementation, LZB is set based on whether shunt mode is allowed for a train or not. However, there are many limits to shunt mode (and also some logic on handling this mode in particular), and extending the aspect to depend on (for example) the type of the train will easily become a source of confusion for LuaATC users, modders and partly even for developers.
Let me clarify what i mean; i'd like to send LuaATC code to the approaching train with a specified signal aspect. Currently, a LuaATC track can check the signal aspect on an approach, but this is requires an external component aside from the signal assembly.
Sending LuaATC code to trains is outside the scope of signaling and doing so from signals is particularly problematic in terms of security (as interlocking seems to be considered to be safer than LuaATC in terms of potential damage)

Is there any reason you can not put a LuaATC track near the IP of the signal? What exactly do you want to do with this?

User avatar
56independent_actual
Member
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun May 23, 2021 16:10
IRC: independent56
In-game: 56independent
Location: Girona Province
Contact:

Re: [Mod] Advanced Trains [advtrains] [2.4.1]

by 56independent_actual » Post

💥🚄
Last edited by 56independent_actual on Sun Jan 15, 2023 16:21, edited 1 time in total.
Warnig: Al my laguage ekscept English is bad, includig Hungarian (magyàränoлиски), Spanish (esпagnyoл), and Russian (рÿсскïанöл).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests