Notice to all visitors and members of the Train-Sim.Com message forums: If you plan on using a signature banner in your posts, we would like to remind you that there is a maximum size for banners. That maximum is 450 pixels wide by 120 pixels high, and not to exceed 25k. Your compliance is appreciated. FORUM RULES Problems? There are two common reasons for problems with logging in and posting messages. The first is that you are running a firewall that prevents your messages from being sent to the server. The other is that you have cookies disabled; the DCForum software requires cookies to work properly.
Hi!Having found Jim Ward's front coupler hack 709 to work wonderful on most of my diesel engines I tried to adapt it to my steam warriors.And ... IT WORKS! However, quite a few things need to be modified in order to make it work right:1) Only use ONE coupler section in the .eng file. That is, DELETE (or comment out) the entire tender coupler section (the bar-type coupler). I got frequent send/don't send if I didn't do this.2) Do the same in the tender's .wag file.3) Use the good coupler values as suggested on 3dtrains.com forum - but only once and only with positive velocity.*4) As Jim Ward suggested, use DerailBufferForce ( 600kN ) - don't know whether it is obligatory, though.5) Use the replacement default.wag and .org files from Jim Ward.6) Get out in the yard and do some decent switching. I had absolutely no problems adding several strings of cars from several different spurs to the front and back of my engine and dropping them off later, it worked every time and front coupling went smooth like never before (without exaggeration: exactly like "normal" rear coupling!) Below are three pictures of the beginning of some switching done at Reiner Yard.I will attach a sample .eng file (it's of the GN Consolidation) that includes the changes. To get Jim Ward's front coupler patch, look here: http://www.train-sim.com/cgi/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=18998&forum=DCForumID3*edit: sample coupler section: Coupling ( Type ( Automatic ) Spring ( Stiffness ( 1.2e6N/m 4.6e6N/m ) Damping ( 1.3e6N/m/s 3.4e6N/m/s ) Break ( 1.8e7N 1.8e7N ) r0 ( 20cm 30cm ) ) Velocity ( 0.1m/s ) )
Hmm, thanks for the tip. I found that the double coupler entries made it swap ends when using the front coupler, turning the front coupler of the loco into bar and the back into automatic. Forgot about the tender and left the double couplers in that, haven't seen any effect from it but probably a good idea to make that a single as well.One other item since that ancient post;Coupling ( Type ( Automatic ) Spring ( Stiffness ( 1e6N/m 5e6N/m ) Damping ( 1e6N/m 1e6N/m ) Break ( 1.1e7N 1.1e7N ) r0 ( 20cm 30cm ) )That's from one of the default US2freightcars, the damping line should be N/m/s, not N/m. Route Riter's "Check/Fix Rolling Stock" button will change all the defaults to fix that line, which also helps keep the front coupler from going send/don't send. You could change all the couplers to Plainsman's values, but just fixing that damping line seems to correct most problems regardless of what coupler values are used.As for #4, I use 800kN or even 1200kN on engines. I dunno if it's obligatory either, but since I suspect the actual cause of MSTS crashing when using the front coupler is caused by the game trying to load the derail cam from the "wrong" end, anything you can do to eliminate derailments will stop the send/don't send. Since the front coupler is a lot more delicate than the back coupler it requires either a higher derail buffer force value or coupling like you were handling nitroglycerin.Curious, this is the first real feedback I've had in over a year on that 709 (named because it was July 9th of 2003!), has anyone done any further experimenting with the default.wag since then? I'm still using the 709 hack simply because it works for me.Anybody gettin WORSE handling with the 709 hack?
Hi, Jim!I completely forgot about the N/m/s issue. Must have been ages ago I ran route riter through my rolling stock and never bothered about it any more, or just copied entire good coupler sections from some other files later on.Your July 9 Hack works well on all engines for me, too. It seems to be the solution. I have never experienced such a smooth front coupling before.Anyhow, I think it was crucial for my MSTS to get rid of the bar coupler in the tenders. Otherwise I got some very mean send/don't send upon front coupling if the engine had only one coupler section and hack 709 was enabled. I can't tell for sure, though, whether that was always the case or just sometimes.Jim, is there any official download source for your front coupler hack other than that Train-Sim forum thread? I would like to include a link to it in a pack of replacement eng files for my steam engines I plan to upload soon.Thanks a lot!
No, it's so small I never uploaded it anywhere. Like everything else I post in a thread it is public domain tho, so feel free to upload it yourself (I'm too lazy!), and/or include the zip with your replacement .eng files instead of a link. Considering that 709 seems to be the magic bullet, I'd drop 297 from it completely and just include the 709 hack. PO&N 9 should (KNOCK ON WOOD) be ready for upload in a week or two, and I'll be including just the 709 hack with that.
PO&N 9 final will be out soon... That is one of the greatest MSTS news since a long, long time! The screenshots of the beta were already amazing. Can't wait for the final...Thank you so much for the 709 hack and for making it Public Domain. I think I'll include it in the zip.Michael
Thanks guys.. I'm going to try the one coupler 'trick'...anything to make shunting (aka. switching!!) easier.. And thanks to sniper for the 'fix'..(is MSTS so addictive??)..and PO&N will be just in time to christen my Broadband connection.. I'm a happy bunny...Georges
Curious, this is the first real feedback I've had in over a year on that 709 (named because it was July 9th of 2003!), has anyone done any further experimenting with the default.wag since then? I'm still using the 709 hack simply because it works for me.Anybody gettin WORSE handling with the 709 hack?