Skully

Confirmed fixed in 05/01/2023.

On EN1 14:32 (Jan 6th 2023 RT) system falsely deleted 421046. System must never delete a non-AI train. System must never delete a train which can be driven by AI (aka move forward) and can be routed by AI. Which should leave: only trains driven by AI and which can not be routed by AI are to be deleted. (This should include AI trains facing one-another on single track.) As I showed in the topic below 421044 was able to drive from S6 to L1 2841 so there was no reason for the deletion to happen.

Some days are nice and quiet with trains flying by, others days are like "what would happen if I pull AZK3?". Well after some blinking of Tor 3 in white and LK 160 in red the line appears to be reversed as expected. But then when a train arrives at S7 it fails to ZWBL... mucking about it does seem to WBL... Still you're left with track onto which no route can be set. Well nothing is lost because you can always SzS7 and let the train go... except this time... It faces a broken block. This calls for grand plan! Let the train proceed forward past junction 658 to have it reverse to S6. Now I hear you say, where is S6? On opposite end of Łazy Łc. And thus 421044 could safely be dispatched onto track 1 to happily travel ever after. Which could not be said for subsequent 4210s. 😁

Voting will lead to a different type of abuse / trolling. The game should detect faulty maneuvers and dish out penalties. Three strikes and you're out for a day. Next strikeout sees 2 days then 4 days until you've enough for get 64 days consecutively. Each day of good running can take away a day of your potential strikeout until you're back to 1 day.

Build 05/01/2023 has it fixed on my end.

[2023-01-06 01:02:33]: FormatException: Index (zero based) must be greater than or equal to zero and less than the size of the argument list. at System.Text.StringBuilder.AppendFormatHelper (System.IFormatProvider provider, System.String format, System.ParamsArray args) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at System.String.Format (System.String format, System.Object arg0) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at TrainAnnouncement.EnterStationCommunications.HandleStationEnterTrainAnnouncement (TrainAnnouncement.TrainAnnouncementData currentAnnouncement, System.String region) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1[TResult].Start[TStateMachine] (TStateMachine& stateMachine) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at TrainAnnouncement.EnterStationCommunications.HandleStationEnterTrainAnnouncement (TrainAnnouncement.TrainAnnouncementData currentAnnouncement, System.String region) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at TrainAnnouncement.AnnouncementController.HandleQueue (TrainAnnouncement.TrainAnnouncementData currentAnnouncement) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncVoidMethodBuilder.Start[TStateMachine] (TStateMachine& stateMachine) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at TrainAnnouncement.AnnouncementController.HandleQueue (TrainAnnouncement.TrainAnnouncementData currentAnnouncement) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at TrainAnnouncement.AnnouncementController.Update () [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 --- End of stack trace from previous location where exception was thrown --- at TrainAnnouncement.AnnouncementController.HandleQueue (TrainAnnouncement.TrainAnnouncementData currentAnnouncement) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncVoidMethodBuilder.Start[TStateMachine] (TStateMachine& stateMachine) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at TrainAnnouncement.AnnouncementController.HandleQueue (TrainAnnouncement.TrainAnnouncementData currentAnnouncement) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at TrainAnnouncement.AnnouncementController.Update () [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 --- End of stack trace from previous location where exception was thrown --- at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncMethodBuilderCore+<>c.<ThrowAsync>b__7_0 (System.Object state) [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at UnityEngine.UnitySynchronizationContext+WorkRequest.Invoke () [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 at UnityEngine.UnitySynchronizationContext.Exec () [0x00000] in <00000000000000000000000000000000>:0 If you see this in log you're equally affected.

Hehe, nice one. But "fixed"? 🤣

As extensive repairs are needed a temporary speed restriction has been put into place.

I think it is a question on a lot of minds with an answer that is currently hard to find. I could not find any. Maybe a SM48? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/SM48-086_locomotive.jpg Or a SM42? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Sm42-916.jpg

If a train gets stalled on unelectrified track (for whatever reason) it should be removed after a minute or two. And the dispatcher should be penalized.

Pst... But don't tell the devs ... sssshhh. 😁 (I may see a case here for some system rules. 😄)

So you can have 5 or 10 minutes in total. (I think coffee break is okay, poo break is another story.)

So I rode the EP07 with windows open and voila I heard a couple of announcements. I think the issue is that the announcements are played when the train is far away approaching. They should really be played at least twice, once on approach, once when the train has stopped. Maybe again 1 minute before the train is departing. That's right up until Then things got quite again. Why need pokemon if you can have hangman. 😁

So far I have maybe heard announcements 3 or 4 times. There was a bug with WindowsTTS loading but that has been fixed. Just to be sure: if I see the following I should hear the station announcement, right? I also see the following in the log which might be related. [2023-01-04 16:20:05]: Audio source ambient is null! Who does hear station announcements? And would you by chance have an Oculus connected or Oculus SDK installed?

It is not an image, it is the schedule for that station on that server managed by the central traffic system. The computer in game is a browser to that URL.

On 07/07/2022 (03 Jan 2023 RT) line inspectors found track 3 to have a kink after junction 615. Officials wanted to institute a speed restriction to ensure no trains would derail but this was not possible on short notice. Decision was made to close the track. This meant trying to convince Łazy station AI to send trains over track 1. Ehr... So this meant bringing in traffic over track 3 but holding them at S3 until track 1 became clear. This caused some dismay amongst drivers. Especially the cargo trains taking the long route back onto track 3 had a long drive ahead of them. Then all of a sudden Łazy station AI saw the light and routed a train properly from H3 onto track 1. Well hopefully the kink in the track will be fixed soon. Until then expect reroutes or speed restrictions. And maybe Łazy station AI wasn't the real bastard in

I'm hoping they can pull it off but from what I understand now is the main traffic manager runs on a central server (currently on Amazon cloud). In game we kind of sneak peek into it via https://panel.simrail.eu:8091/?station=Katowice_Zawodzie&serverCode=en1 To be able to host this privately (/ off premise) the game would need to be able to connect to a different traffic manager. This traffic manager would need to be hosted by someone. Technically a private server but one that is a bit more than just firing up a server in Steam behind your ISP connection. If SimRail can host it then potentially anybody else can as well but it probably won't be trivial.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Et41-001.jpg You already have the interior, the carriage and most of the exterior. And we need more power! 😄

It appears to be generic as I saw this on Sean's stream:

Now everyone wants to get into Łazy...

Not the perfect answer but you can yank https://www.bsk.isdr.pl/usrk_pulpity.php through Google translate.

I would love to see this get to the same level of detail as ISDR and not turn into a TSW arcade button presser. But as long as we do not have the proper tools to unclog dispatcher mistakes we regrettably have to live with system rules blocking certain actions. As for system rules terminating opposite direction routes that might be a bit too drastic. There is no need to get penalized for this. And yes, this is to allow newbies to join the fun and block the trolls. PS.

We now have system rules preventing some train routes, which I think is currently a reasonable solution to prevent network clogs. But we also have routes which are rejected by interlocking but in actuality are rejected by system rules. Or requiring D to be set before E2 can be set at Będzin. For this one I would expect: "[System] The route from E2 requires D to be set." So in order to be consistent I would like to see all routes which can be enabled IRL but rejected by system rules to give a clear yellow warning prior to cancelling. Same as we have with bad train routes.

Minor detail (if any) isn't U2-> 51cd supposed to turn yellow as well in case of overlap? I have no clue how this looks in real life but that's how overlap appears in Dąbrowa Górnicza.

Same, I thought it was my rig.