IRC logs for #openttd on OFTC at 2016-02-22
⏴ go to previous day
00:05:42 <_dp_> the more I think about economy setting, the more I want to change %)
00:08:52 <_dp_> oopsie, spooked frosch xD
02:23:49 *** AdmiralKewl has joined #openttd
02:50:45 *** Clockworker__ has joined #openttd
03:28:23 *** supermop has joined #openttd
03:40:38 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai
03:41:38 *** ConductorCat has joined #openttd
04:40:50 *** Biolunar_ has joined #openttd
05:45:14 *** ckraniak has joined #openttd
05:54:06 *** skybon is now known as skybon_
08:16:51 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd
08:40:26 *** Ketsuban_ has joined #openttd
09:26:25 *** Ketsuban has joined #openttd
09:49:35 *** liq3 is now known as Guest5087
09:55:29 *** liq3 is now known as Guest5089
10:18:10 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
10:18:49 <andythenorth> repainting NARS sprites
10:20:15 <Wolf01> just wow, lot of details
10:20:31 <andythenorth> mostly just patterns of pixels
10:20:35 <andythenorth> details not really there :)
10:21:38 <Wolf01> I can see the little engineer waving his hand from the window... or better, it's static because not a gif, but he's there
10:56:31 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
11:06:05 *** Quatroking has joined #openttd
12:10:41 *** tokai|noir has joined #openttd
12:10:41 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai|noir
12:24:08 *** drac_boy has joined #openttd
13:00:05 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
13:20:27 *** founder has joined #openttd
13:20:28 *** founder is now known as openbu
13:31:31 *** Clockworker has joined #openttd
13:32:10 *** Supercheese has joined #openttd
13:45:49 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
14:06:03 *** Kurimus has joined #openttd
14:09:58 <argoneus> good morning train friends`~~
14:11:30 *** founder_ has joined #openttd
14:27:28 *** founder__ has joined #openttd
15:04:33 <Wolf01> meh, no C&O H8 or M1 for trainz :(
16:01:09 *** sim-al2 has joined #openttd
16:08:01 *** Kurimus has joined #openttd
16:18:00 *** Alberth has joined #openttd
16:18:00 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o Alberth
16:31:20 *** _johannes has joined #openttd
16:45:38 <Wolf01> mmh, something does not match between my instructions and the pieces of the software :|
16:48:13 <Alberth> unfortunately, not the exception to the rule, I am afraid
16:50:36 <Alberth> oh, great andy, a nicely coloured engine
16:51:06 * andythenorth had fun drawing that
16:52:09 <Wolf01> software curves have the wrong radius
16:53:46 <Wolf01> or the 2 pieces with the connections have the wrong length
16:58:19 <Wolf01> meh they use facebook as a support forum :|
17:09:50 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd
17:23:28 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
17:24:31 *** AdmiralKew has joined #openttd
17:24:44 <Wolf01> "In general, most of the track plans that are published in books or magazines (especially old ones) are initially assembled with real tracks and then are transferred to paper drawings."
17:25:17 <Wolf01> so, I can't do anything else than fix the layout by myself
17:26:28 <Alberth> find some real tracks, and assemble the layout :p
17:26:38 <Wolf01> also, next time (never) I should purchase a well known brand, and not one which seem to have made only my one :P
17:27:23 <Alberth> might give better value for money
17:28:10 <Wolf01> this one could have my age, and if not, at least 25 years
17:39:04 *** Progman has joined #openttd
17:43:06 <andythenorth> Wolf01: what are you doing? :)
17:43:38 <Wolf01> digitalising my diorama
17:44:55 <Eddi|zuHause> my experience is that physical tracks are way more forgiving with inaccuracies than the programs allow ;)
17:45:23 *** TheMask96 has joined #openttd
17:45:50 <andythenorth> based on what my kids are doing
17:45:50 <Wolf01> yes, but it's off by 3cm :P
17:46:01 <andythenorth> use brio, that can handle 3cm gap :P
17:46:03 <Wolf01> and the diamond crossover does not fit
17:46:35 <andythenorth> Wolf01: now you are making me guilty :P
17:46:38 <Eddi|zuHause> 3cm sounds about right :p
17:46:43 <andythenorth> I had a plan to build a small switching layout
17:46:54 <andythenorth> so I carefully bought a lot of ebay ‘bargains'
17:47:09 <andythenorth> which now go round and round on my kids circle track
17:47:19 <andythenorth> HO american trains
17:51:29 *** oskari89 has joined #openttd
17:55:33 *** gelignite has joined #openttd
18:05:30 *** Clockworker_ has joined #openttd
18:19:46 *** qwebirc44411 has joined #openttd
18:20:27 <Wolf01> uhm, now that I noticed... where's __ln__?
18:24:06 *** smoke_fumus has joined #openttd
18:24:20 <qwebirc44411> Currently every train i have is ran by 2 SH40 engines, and I just learned to make the T.I.M engines. Using autoreplace, I seem to get 2 pairs of T.I.M engines, lengthening all my trains by 2 wagons. Is there any way to replace all my trains in a way that sells off the 2 SH40 engines and replaces them with one pair of T.I.M engines?
18:26:45 <qwebirc44411> alrighty, i'll start doing it manually
18:27:38 <AdmiralKew> I'd add more cargo wagons and lengthen the platforms and just keep the 2x TIM engine pairs
18:29:39 <V453000> qwebirc44411: in the autoreplace window, there is a button "remove wagons"
18:29:55 <V453000> it will remove any excessive wagons
18:29:56 <qwebirc44411> yeah i want to remove engines rather than wagons though
18:30:06 <andythenorth> rule based replacements :P
18:30:21 <andythenorth> for vehicle type x, add n vehicle of type y
18:30:28 * andythenorth often wants that
18:30:50 <Wolf01> like when I wanted to convert all my steam trains to diesel... I cursed a lot because of cabeese
18:31:14 <andythenorth> I tried handling that in Iron Horse, but replacing cabeese is meh
18:31:17 <andythenorth> can’t remember why
18:31:27 <andythenorth> can’t replace if cargo bits don’t match
18:31:44 <V453000> I dont believe that is the case
18:32:14 <V453000> you only can't replace if coal wagon wants to replace to a wagon which can't carry coal
18:32:17 <Wolf01> and I couldn't even trim the wagons because diesel engines were shorter than steam locos+tender
18:32:20 <V453000> but caboose -> coal wagon works I think
18:32:21 <andythenorth> e.g. Cabeese -> Coal Hoppers, no dice
18:32:28 <andythenorth> maybe I did it wrong :D
18:32:40 <andythenorth> dunno, I could look in logs for Frosch telling me not to be silly
18:33:08 <V453000> I thought in NARS it worked, but maybe it was not autoreplaced, it was always removed by the remove wagons function
18:33:21 <V453000> but the remove wagons removes from the front and I always put cabeese at the end, so idk
18:36:28 <_johannes> http://imgur.com/jZZ1fZy -> I still don't get how YAPF works. If a train is in 'Paderheim', with its nose towards 'Paderheim Ost', and should drive to the left of Paderheim, YAPF says there is no such path
18:36:41 <_johannes> I guess it's because A* does not go back?
18:36:42 <andythenorth> remove wagons usually works for me
18:36:51 <andythenorth> seems magical, but I don’t ask
18:38:30 <_johannes> michi_cc do you know ?
18:38:54 <V453000> when I played with original trains and used short trains in the start, for 5 tile trains with 2 engines I always built engine - 5 wagons - engine - 3 wagons
18:39:16 <V453000> after autoreplace it becomes engine head - 3 wagons - engine head - engine head - 3 wagons - engine head
18:39:21 <V453000> so, from the front :)
18:42:43 <V453000> that sounds weird _johannes ... did you check if all parts are electrified or something?
18:42:57 <_johannes> V453000: yep, all electrified
18:43:38 <_johannes> V453000: of course, the train found the way back ingame (it calls YAPF in both directions), but imo YAPF into the right direction should also lead the train into the left direction, finally
18:43:40 <V453000> does the train say there is no path, or does it just proceed the other way as in doesn't reverse in the station?
18:44:14 <_johannes> the train reverses with no problems, just the algorithm does not :-)
18:45:06 <V453000> too deep for me to understand :P
18:45:54 <NGC3982> I for some reason put "too deep" as a hilight trigger
18:46:24 <_johannes> I wonder why the A* does refuse to turn around in stations...
18:46:28 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
18:46:29 *** Clockworker__ has joined #openttd
18:46:40 <_johannes> instead, the algorithm is being called twice in each station, which makes it slow
18:51:50 <Alberth> trains only leave once at each station
18:52:16 <Alberth> it's way more expensive if you run backward computations all the time
18:55:48 <_johannes> Alberth: you mean the path finder only leaves once?
18:56:34 <Alberth> a train starts running from a station exactly one time, before arriving at the next station
18:57:06 <Alberth> so at the very first tick, you have 2 searches
18:57:27 <_johannes> yes, by calling YAPF twice
18:57:55 <Alberth> now compare that with a double search every tile or every tick (I forgot how often it gets called) while the train is on route
18:58:20 <_johannes> no no, I don't mean that
18:58:27 <_johannes> only on every station
18:59:10 <Alberth> I don't see the problem tbh
18:59:46 <_johannes> currently, Yapf checks only one direction if it arrives on a station
18:59:52 <Alberth> instead of A* itself doing both sides, you call it two times, ie you moved the direction decision out of the loop of A*
19:00:06 <_johannes> why does it not take the reverse direction into account?
19:00:35 <Eddi|zuHause> because YAPF is run way more often outside of stations than inside
19:00:47 <Eddi|zuHause> where reversing is never an option
19:01:00 <Alberth> and deciding not to do reverse search also takes time
19:01:08 <Eddi|zuHause> so you special case the rare situation, not the common situation
19:01:18 <_johannes> Alberth: no, I'd like to call it once instead of twice
19:01:50 <Alberth> void DoAStar() { Call(false); Call(true); } ?
19:01:56 <_johannes> Eddi|zuHause: yes, but sometimes, reversing at a station is neccessary
19:02:12 <Eddi|zuHause> _johannes: yes, hence that is the special case.
19:02:52 <Alberth> trains are practically never leaving the station
19:03:24 <Alberth> they are either moving on the tracks with a direction, or they are stopped for loading
19:04:15 <Alberth> but just add a wrapper that calls A* twice if you're so desperate to hide the directional search
19:04:44 <Eddi|zuHause> _johannes: for every time the train is leaving the station, it's calling YAPF twice. during moving, it calls YAPF 100 times. so if over the course of the travel, it calls YAPF 101 or 102 times does asymptotically not matter
19:05:46 <Eddi|zuHause> _johannes: if instead YAPF always checked backwards, and had to filter out 100 of the 101 times for bogus backwards results, that's much more expensive calculation-wise
19:06:34 <Eddi|zuHause> thus, the current solution of calling YAPF twice for situations allowing reversing, is the optimal solution
19:07:50 <Eddi|zuHause> (also, reversing in stations may be disabled in settings)
19:08:11 <_johannes> Eddi|zuHause: So the idea is that reversing a train usually makes no advantage, and thus, this calculation is not being done in order to save time?
19:08:23 <_dp_> ehm, how're you even going to check that backwards? what if there is more than one station along the route?
19:08:56 <Eddi|zuHause> _johannes: no, reversing a train usually CANNOT happen, and thus the caclulation is only being done where it CAN.
19:09:03 <Alberth> if you run 230km/h, what use is a backward search path?
19:09:10 <_dp_> it's possible to do with single call by adding fake rail for reversing
19:09:23 <_johannes> Eddi|zuHause: wait, reversing CAN happen
19:09:39 <Eddi|zuHause> _johannes: YAPF is run at every path signal and every switch along the train's path
19:09:41 <_johannes> it does happen regularly in some stations
19:09:49 <Eddi|zuHause> _johannes: reversing cannot happen in those situations
19:09:58 <Eddi|zuHause> _johannes: stations are a VERY RARE EXCEPTION
19:11:03 <_johannes> hmm but why did you call YAPF twice in that rare exception, instead of calling it in two directions?
19:11:14 <_johannes> that would probably have been easier and even faster
19:11:46 <_johannes> currently, if you call yapf twice, yapf can not use the cached results from the first call, so it's an overhead
19:11:58 <Alberth> because it implies you have code to disable the second direction
19:12:07 <Alberth> that code also takes time
19:12:10 <Eddi|zuHause> no, it would not, as that would impact the performance of EVERY call to YAPF, even the ones that CANNOT allow reversing
19:13:03 <_johannes> Eddi|zuHause: no, nodes at path signals would only have one direction to advance
19:13:13 <_johannes> I'd set up two edges per track
19:13:24 <Eddi|zuHause> _johannes: it's a simple statistical concept: you multiply the performance impact with the probability that the event occures
19:13:26 <_johannes> and these edges would only share a node at a station or depot
19:14:06 <Alberth> nobody builds tracks without junctions
19:14:14 <Eddi|zuHause> whichever product is smaller, is the better solution overall
19:14:32 <_johannes> I just start getting why it's a rare exception though...
19:17:04 <Alberth> if you have a 1000 trains running, you don't want to know how often yapf is called every second
19:17:27 <Alberth> every fricking nano second gain is needed
19:18:00 <_johannes> it's called so often because some trains might start blocking other trains now, right?
19:18:39 <Alberth> ever tried adding a new connection that's shorter, just in front of a train in a block signal segment?
19:18:56 <Alberth> it immediately finds the better route
19:19:08 <_johannes> yes, and sometimes, it even hangs very shortly
19:19:25 <Alberth> that's usually the save game copy
19:20:09 <Alberth> you need to copy the entire map, while nothing moves
19:20:22 <Alberth> at big map sizes, that's a lot of cpu cycles
19:20:58 <_johannes> well, it could be done multi-threaded :P but I don't complain
19:21:40 <Alberth> also, trains react on other trains, it's a sequential process
19:22:10 <Alberth> even though it look parallel
19:22:44 <_johannes> I just thought calling save routines could be moved to a thread...
19:23:15 <Alberth> but you need a fixated copy of the map
19:23:34 <Alberth> so you need to make a copy, but during that time, nothing can move
19:24:18 <Alberth> after copying is done, game continues, and the save thread writes the data to disk
19:24:42 <_johannes> anyways, how to solve my graph problem? I guess I'll just call YAPF like it it, but try reversing on every station... this gives me a graph of stations where I can run my own A* on... probably the easiest solution?
19:26:21 <_dp_> _johannes, I don't think that problem can even be solved precisely for some cases
19:26:47 <_dp_> _johannes, with pf trap for example train won't ever go the way pathfinder shows if you call it from station
19:31:51 <_johannes> _dp_: what do you mean by "pf trap" ?
19:34:50 <_johannes> _dp_: that thing is really cool
19:37:21 <_johannes> in the right image, the train first thinks that the shortcut is faster, however, when it comes to reserving that track, it sees that it can not advance via the red signal and takes the left route?
19:38:40 <_dp_> _johannes, yep, at least that's how I understand it too
19:39:07 <_dp_> _johannes, also check SRNWs, they usually abuse pathfinder heavily xD
19:45:30 *** HerzogDeXtEr1 has joined #openttd
20:24:36 *** Wormnest has joined #openttd
20:36:47 <Wolf01> mmh I must understand how real signals work, spread them like OTTD doesn't seem to work
20:40:55 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
20:44:37 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd
20:47:08 *** Wormnest_ has joined #openttd
20:52:11 *** drac_boy has joined #openttd
20:55:42 <frosch123> it's time again to make fun of the two-intials-grfid-rule :)
20:57:04 <drac_boy> frosch you talking about that recent forum thread re someone almost going crazy till he realized his initials existed elsewhere? :)
20:57:38 <andythenorth> am I on different forums?
20:57:39 <planetmaker> hehe... drat. That possibility totally didn't occur to me :)
20:57:43 <planetmaker> andythenorth, nope :)
20:58:17 <drac_boy> frosch well I think thats also the problem with just handing out random grfids with no kind of tracking too :)
20:59:41 <frosch123> drac_boy: if they were truely random we would not have any problem ever :)
21:00:16 <andythenorth> hash them with your public key or something :P
21:00:33 <frosch123> andythenorth: you meant to say "private key"
21:01:03 <andythenorth> it’s all just crypto to me :P
21:02:58 <andythenorth> quite pleased with these sprites, if I say so myself
21:03:03 * drac_boy is glad my possible grfid isn't in use yet per crawler/forum check
21:03:06 <andythenorth> 1) think it looks ok 2) fun to draw
21:03:17 <andythenorth> I have stopped re-lighting the reversed angle
21:03:23 <andythenorth> much more satisfying
21:03:36 <frosch123> why is it called "boat"?
21:03:38 <andythenorth> I just knock the shading of the CC down by 1 or 2
21:03:59 <frosch123> oh, it's a type, yuo meant "big boar" :)
21:04:25 <andythenorth> I made ‘baby boat'
21:04:32 <andythenorth> so the big one had to be ‘big boat’
21:05:45 <andythenorth> company colour? :P
21:06:30 <andythenorth> doing sprites with wrong lighting might actually look better
21:06:41 <andythenorth> especially in – view, which is all most people really look at
21:14:40 *** drac_boy_ has joined #openttd
21:14:54 <drac_boy_> sorry bit of server issue
21:15:51 *** drac_boy_ is now known as drac_boy
21:20:25 *** Clockworker__ is now known as Clockworker
21:28:47 *** sim-al2 has joined #openttd
21:29:02 <drac_boy> sim-a12 :p anything good? ;)
21:34:31 *** Ketsuban has joined #openttd
21:35:27 <drac_boy> and either way do you recall I mentioned about a lone german diesel locomotive in canada before?
21:35:41 *** Kurimus has joined #openttd
21:37:06 <drac_boy> probably the only diesel-hydraulic ever in canada (usa at least had a few if you remember we even talked about SP's too)
21:38:40 <drac_boy> oh and on a slight less unusual note did you perhaps know that canada did actually have two emd E units in an all-F-units country? they were bought for montreal<>ny service or something to that effect
21:39:33 <monsted> for train nerds, you might enjoy Michael Portillo's "Great <something> Railway Journeys". they just finished an american trip.
21:40:46 <frosch123> sim-al2: what's that?
21:41:04 <monsted> looks like mechanical switchgear on an electric train
21:41:11 <sim-al2> Apparently they ended up in CP ownership towards the end, probably a good thing
21:41:12 <drac_boy> I imagine when the service ended (or moved to amtrak/via) these units went nowwhere ... can't think CP would want to bother trying to put an E and F units together or did they
21:41:41 <sim-al2> They will work together ok, assuming similar gearing
21:42:23 <sim-al2> frosch123: It's the camshaft controller of a JR emu, the big shaft places resistance in the circuit and knocks it out as it advances
21:42:59 <sim-al2> The small contacts I think are for weakfield control
21:43:49 <sim-al2> And the contacts shown at the beginning I assume are the main breakers for the whole unit
21:45:37 <sim-al2> For a train running off DC, this kind of camshaft controller was very common from ~1920's to the 1980's, but it could be found on AC units too
21:47:30 <drac_boy> you can see theres probably at least two commuter CN coaches in the consist too
21:48:35 <sim-al2> I have to say, the Alco FA nose is my favorite, even more than the F-unit nose
21:49:27 <drac_boy> heh I sorta like alco for most part yeah ... doesn't help they'll smoke like steam sometimes *whistles and looks somewhere else*
21:50:25 <sim-al2> Yeah, the Alcos are so known for it, but all diesels did then, pre-emission standards the only limiting factor was appearences
21:52:16 <sim-al2> The Indian railways has actually been building and upgrading Alco-engined units for a long time, they even have an EFI version
21:52:24 <drac_boy> reminds me of a short article where a ex-shopforeman actually mentioned that in term of baldwins "if they're not constantly leaking oil then theres something wrong!" ... talk about finding that funny
21:52:52 <sim-al2> I think it's mostly the older or less-maintained units that make the Youtube video clouds
21:53:10 *** andythenorth has left #openttd
21:55:07 <drac_boy> sim-a12 not related to oil smoke but theres another kind of smoke I sometimes just like to point out, one sec...
21:58:18 <sim-al2> Well, only that little boiler to run the steam heating
21:59:17 <drac_boy> sim-a12 as one magazine wrote.. the GG1 was a little more alike to steam tech than diesel tech .. and the editor had a point
21:59:41 <sim-al2> As I recall, the boiler and the main transformer are both in the middle space, leaving the crew with a somewhat tight cab
22:00:00 <drac_boy> steam-style boiler (but later refitted with diesel era boiler), spoked tires, idler axles (only 1 or 2 other diesels had it), iron bell, being built at a tender company, etc
22:00:54 <drac_boy> oh and even GG1 name itself was a steam hangover too (G class is a 2-6-0 .. figured didn't that)
22:01:37 <drac_boy> you're right about the tight cab, just enough space for 2 people
22:03:28 <sim-al2> There were some competitors, like the P5A class, a 4-6-4 that wasn't powerful enough, and the R1 prototype, a 4-8-4, but one that suffered from some wheelbase problems
22:04:09 <sim-al2> But the GG1 had more power and better tracking qualities, thanks to it's articulated drivers
22:04:37 <drac_boy> sim-a12 as I recall the number 4800 initially went to a non-articulated unit (was like 2-D-2 I think?) but it was a bit wanting
22:05:07 <drac_boy> funny enough the one lone unit still lasted a few years as I think was quoted
22:05:48 <drac_boy> sim-a12 well as it was already built and shared same service components I can see why they didn't bother scrapping it till it really wasn't useable
22:07:12 <drac_boy> its been a while but I think the GG1 #4800 was the only one with its body being rivetted ... and some museum still had it minus enviromentally-gutted transformer internals
22:08:10 <sim-al2> Note that these early "straight AC" locomotives often had two traction motors per axle, a way to get around the disadvantages (i.e. poor torque)
22:08:38 <drac_boy> sim-a12 the only problem with GG1 was ... a little happy to slip ... that explains the frequent doublehead on some freight duties :)
22:12:01 <drac_boy> still find it interesting that of the three (could had been there were more but I'm going by the editor's note) GG1's still left in NJT service one was washed down well and took a special excursion service but sadly had some problem on return trip so a drowsy black GG1 was dispatched to bring it in .. that was the very last corridor GG1 train ever I believe
22:12:34 <drac_boy> NJT at least knew a good thing when they saw one (not to mention that tickets were only $1)
22:12:41 <sim-al2> It's a shame that none can run, but with so many years of PRR and PC neglect, they were run into the ground
22:13:22 <drac_boy> well thats only half of the problem..the other half is that the transformers wouldn't be accepted and that would be expensive to replace .. plus other fact is trying to push that old cracks-filled chassis at 140mph would be a bit harsh
22:13:30 <sim-al2> Not to mention the frame-cracking problem that was never fully solved
22:13:54 <sim-al2> Ehh, 140mph? GG1 Vmax was 100mph
22:13:59 <drac_boy> and all these silly "just replace internals with one from the AEM7" talks don't have much clue about reality either!
22:14:12 <drac_boy> sim-a12 .. corridor services wouldn't slow down for the GG1 .. hence why I mentioned that
22:14:32 <sim-al2> Yeah, the AEM7 system is completely different, but NEC speed is 125mph
22:15:07 <drac_boy> well still .. could a GG1 keep up with standard Acela timings? thats the first drawback
22:15:45 <drac_boy> mind you britian is going through a bit of similar problem with even the faster steam locomotives getting less chances to run on mainlines due to ever-increasing route speeds
22:15:52 <sim-al2> Not really, but the GE E60Cs that were supposed to replace them were limited to 80mph or 90mph at times
22:16:09 <sim-al2> Long distance trains even now rarely run above 90
22:16:22 <drac_boy> and steam at King Cross? in your dream :) (figures doesn't it heh)
22:17:32 <sim-al2> If anything, the real crime is that MARC seems dead-set on replacing their electrics with diesels, so that they can be clog up the corridor around Washington DC
22:19:44 <sim-al2> The higher speeds allowed now are a recent phonomenon, throughout the 70's and 80's speed restrictions were everywhere, which is how the E60s survived so long
22:20:17 <drac_boy> btw I did a check .. the Acela does actually get to go over 130mph ... and after 2016 there would be some 160mph spots too
22:21:08 <sim-al2> Current Acela max speed is 150mph through an area in Rhode Island (the extension from NY to Boston), but they have tested it on the corridor at 160
22:22:05 <sim-al2> The damn tunnels around Baltimore seem a bit more pressing, but that project has been crawling along for decades now
22:22:25 <drac_boy> for you...it does seem like MNR has the new haven to new york commuter route posted for 90mph or 60mph
22:22:47 <drac_boy> even then theres probably very little headway between trains .. a GG1 *may* be ok there with a light consist, no idea tbh :)
22:23:13 <sim-al2> I don't know too much about MNR (too far away for me), but they seem to run at 80 or less most of the time
22:24:01 <drac_boy> btw about MARC ... ummm ....
22:24:14 <sim-al2> the GG1 had good power, even if they had been in good shape the mainteance would have done them in, the control system is primairly moving contacts inside the transformer under load
22:25:13 <drac_boy> well last I recall I think a lot of the MARC trains often had some routings away from the corridor hence the frequent use of diesel push-pull
22:26:44 <drac_boy> mind you GO Transit tried inquiry about some electrification at least once but so far they're running on MP40 locomotives most of the times with just still occassional uses of the older F40PH
22:27:09 <drac_boy> ehh...no not the F40..just can't recall the next number
22:28:39 <drac_boy> GO Transit is a bit funny .. all locomotives always point in one same direction for ease of scheduling .. but sometimes the rare one does sit outside shop facing wrong direction
22:33:00 <sim-al2> They are rebuilding those MP40s into MP54s for more power though
22:34:05 <sim-al2> And the F59s are being sold into US commuter lines now, Chicago finally has a commuter locomotive with an engine design only from the 80s/90s instead of the 60s
22:35:19 <sim-al2> You're right about MARC having a lot of diesel line service, but the electric line is seperate now, and slowing down the trains will piss off Amtrak to MARC's peril
22:36:08 <sim-al2> There seems to be a high chance of MARC leasing/buying the AEM-7ACs as they get replaced by the ACS-64 though
22:38:52 <sim-al2> the ACs are seemingly still in good shape, and subsitute for the 64s while the buys are worked out, whereas the DCs (what MARC, Septa) are pretty worn out, and parts not really avaliable
22:40:16 <sim-al2> NJT had a fleet of similar locomotives, the ALP44, but parked them in a yard somewhere as the ALP46A's arrived, apparently the 44s had problems even before the DCs did
22:40:18 <drac_boy> anyway have fun trying to talk to someone else ok? I'm going off for now sorry :)
22:40:34 <drac_boy> bye mr.trainwatch :)
23:31:59 *** Biolunar has joined #openttd
23:38:16 *** Biolunar has joined #openttd
continue to next day ⏵
