Changing consists, What if I change the consist Options

[prr4ever]

After generating an activity the AG sometimes does not put the rolling stock I prefer on the sidings. I can go in with Con Builder or any other consist builder and change the rolling stock. However I have found then that the cars get renumbered and so mess up the work order. Is there a way to do this and keep the car numbers ? (The MSTS assigned numbers). I also have Activity Master but have not gotten into using it much. Perhaps it can do what I want?

Dave

[jrmeindl]

After generating an activity the AG sometimes does not put the rolling stock I prefer on the sidings. I can go in with Con Builder or any other consist builder and change the rolling stock. However I have found then that the cars get renumbered and so mess up the work order. Is there a way to do this and keep the car numbers ? (The MSTS assigned numbers). I also have Activity Master but have not gotten into using it much. Perhaps it can do what I want?

Dave

I use Activity Master to change out the stock. It will change out stock without messing with the ID's that were originally assigned. However, it will only change out a car type for the same car type, boxcars for boxcars, tankcars for tankcars, or however you have your actual stock set up. It the car on the siding is the wrong type, you could theoretically do it, but it would take some creativity on your part. You would have to fool around with the car types in your setup for those cars to make it work. In other words, if the car is a boxcar such as (US2FREIGHT8 US2FREIGHT8) and you really want a tankcar (USCHEMICAR USCHEMICAR), the car type would need to be changed for the one on the siding. Unfortunately, AM will also want to change out other occurances of that car as well. Or, you could manually edit the *.act file to insert the proper car type if you know how to work with the *.act file in an editor and then run AM.

Jim

[prr4ever]

I use Activity Master to change out the stock. It will change out stock without messing with the ID's that were originally assigned. However, it will only change out a car type for the same car type, boxcars for boxcars, tankcars for tankcars, or however you have your actual stock set up. It the car on the siding is the wrong type, you could theoretically do it, but it would take some creativity on your part. You would have to fool around with the car types in your setup for those cars to make it work. In other words, if the car is a boxcar such as (US2FREIGHT8 US2FREIGHT8) and you really want a tankcar (USCHEMICAR USCHEMICAR), the car type would need to be changed for the one on the siding. Unfortunately, AM will also want to change out other occurances of that car as well. Or, you could manually edit the *.act file to insert the proper car type if you know how to work with the *.act file in an editor and then run AM.

Jim

Thanks Jim,

I know well how to edit most files but looking at the .act files for the consist the uid's don't really describe the actual file name of the equipment in the consist. At least not in a manner I can make sense of.

What I really would like to do is be able to have AG load up sidings with loaded and MT coal such as the Pokey or ERD routes. Ditto on other routes that carry a lot of say TOFC or Tanks etc.

I can edit the consists okay with Con Builder but it does seem to change the car ID's and thus not agree with the work orders. Still as much fun but you will not get an activity completion. It is also a real time consumer editing loose consists which are quite random and often lengthy.

[sgdavis]

Thanks Jim,

I know well how to edit most files but looking at the .act files for the consist the uid's don't really describe the actual file name of the equipment in the consist. At least not in a manner I can make sense of.

What I really would like to do is be able to have AG load up sidings with loaded and MT coal such as the Pokey or ERD routes. Ditto on other routes that carry a lot of say TOFC or Tanks etc.

I can edit the consists okay with Con Builder but it does seem to change the car ID's and thus not agree with the work orders. Still as much fun but you will not get an activity completion. It is also a real time consumer editing loose consists which are quite random and often lengthy.

You shouldn't ADD cars to the generated activity, just change what's there. Then any software that subs one car for another will work, with the caveat that if AG put a hopper car on a siding, it will still think it's a hopper car, not a tank car even if you put a tank car there.

If this is just about having more cars on the sidings, you can increase the number of cars AG places in the "world" using a setting in AG. Note however that there is a limit, and the more cars in an activity the slower MSTS runs. If it wasn't for this MSTS limit, AG could fill every single siding completely. But we had to compromise with filling as many as we could w/o crashing MSTS. On really long routes/templates things can look sparse since AG tries to spread the cars over the whole area covered by the template.

You can play with the "World Fill Settings" in AG and that may give you the results you want. For instance if you only have it fill the areas you actually have work in, it will be able to put more cars in those areas (since it isn't filling other areas). Again, it is a compromise to deal w/ MSTS capacity. Perhaps the new OpenRails will render that a non-issue?

Thanks,

Steve Davis

[prr4ever]

You shouldn't ADD cars to the generated activity, just change what's there. Then any software that subs one car for another will work, with the caveat that if AG put a hopper car on a siding, it will still think it's a hopper car, not a tank car even if you put a tank car there.

If this is just about having more cars on the sidings, you can increase the number of cars AG places in the "world" using a setting in AG. Note however that there is a limit, and the more cars in an activity the slower MSTS runs. If it wasn't for this MSTS limit, AG could fill every single siding completely. But we had to compromise with filling as many as we could w/o crashing MSTS. On really long routes/templates things can look sparse since AG tries to spread the cars over the whole area covered by the template.

You can play with the "World Fill Settings" in AG and that may give you the results you want. For instance if you only have it fill the areas you actually have work in, it will be able to put more cars in those areas (since it isn't filling other areas). Again, it is a compromise to deal w/ MSTS capacity. Perhaps the new OpenRails will render that a non-issue?

Thanks,

Steve Davis

I understand Steve. I misused the word "added" should have said "replaced" I also know I can not replace a string of 40' cars with a string of 70' cars on short sidings.

The problem I found is I don't care if it calls a hopper a tank or vs/vs but it changes the car ID number also which does not allow work order completion. But as the fun is in the switching it is not that important anyway.
BTW , my system is pretty top line so the big fills hardly effect the frame rate, thus I like lots of rolling stock for eye candy. But that is just me. WIN 7 is the frustration!! If only I could get AM to work instead of those input past .....errors. It is a WIN 7 thing I guess.

[jrmeindl]

I understand Steve. I misused the word "added" should have said "replaced" I also know I can not replace a string of 40' cars with a string of 70' cars on short sidings.

The problem I found is I don't care if it calls a hopper a tank or vs/vs but it changes the car ID number also which does not allow work order completion. But as the fun is in the switching it is not that important anyway.
BTW , my system is pretty top line so the big fills hardly effect the frame rate, thus I like lots of rolling stock for eye candy. But that is just me. WIN 7 is the frustration!! If only I could get AM to work instead of those input past .....errors. It is a WIN 7 thing I guess.

"If only I could get AM to work instead of those input past .....errors. It is a WIN 7 thing I guess."

This is directly related to having AM, AG, Train Simulator and other utilities installed in 'Program Files (x86)' folder and not having all the correct administrator properties set. Not to sound like a broken record, but I would recommend anyone installing any Train Simulator program to a folder outside the 'Program Files' folder if they are using Windows 7.

Jim

[prr4ever]

"If only I could get AM to work instead of those input past .....errors. It is a WIN 7 thing I guess."

This is directly related to having AM, AG, Train Simulator and other utilities installed in 'Program Files (x86)' folder and not having all the correct administrator properties set. Not to sound like a broken record, but I would recommend anyone installing any Train Simulator program to a folder outside the 'Program Files' folder if they are using Windows 7.

Jim

ALL "correct" admin/ read/write etc are set in all programs. Everything, all MSTS utilities MSTS etc function fine. The exception is AM as previously stated. Also as previously stated I do not wish to move MSTS outside of the (x86) folder. My MSTS is over 70 GB. To move it and the utilities is simply not worth trying to get one program to work. AG and AM are installed outside of the Program Files folders. If ever I get a new hard drive etc I will install MSTS outside of the x86 folder. However this $2000 system is brand new so not much change in the near future.