Monon II route Options

[dgionet]

Hi to all,

Has someone taken a look at the recently released Monon II route with its massive files to find out if the sidings are well tagged for a template?


Thanks

[Rick116]

Hi all
This is Rick
Author of MONON-2
Just uploaded version 8 and am planning to template.
What are you all talking about the "Yards not good for templating"
All Yards Have Siding Markers except where static yard track and cars are except up in Chicago itself.
From IHB yard in Southern Chicago to Louisville, every siding has a Name.........except static tracks....

Someone explain what you are referring to, please......

[jrmeindl]

Hi all
This is Rick
Author of MONON-2
Just uploaded version 8 and am planning to template.
What are you all talking about the "Yards not good for templating"
All Yards Have Siding Markers except where static yard track and cars are except up in Chicago itself.
From IHB yard in Southern Chicago to Louisville, every siding has a Name.........except static tracks....

Someone explain what you are referring to, please......

Hi Rick,

In my original post, I noted that the Chicagoland portion is the only section that is not suited for AG. There are very few siding markers in that section of the route. This would make that portion impossible to make switch lists for. In order for AG to work, you need a marker on those sidings. The rest of the route is marked, so it would work with AG. I suppose with some of AG's options, you could start a whole train in Chicagoland and not start switching until you move to one of the other sections. You just couldn't switch in Chicagoland. As for the tracks with static cars. While making the template, you would have to remove them, if any, from the *.csv files to keep AG from generating any work there. I did use some siding in Cajon that had static cars, but you need to make sure that there is some room for you to place a marker car and then you would have to limit the number of cars placed there.

Jim

[Rick116]

The static tracks should not be an issue.
They do not show up in Route Editor because they are scenery objects in reality, not real tracks or cars..
Do you agree that scenery objects do not show up?
The static scenery yard cars are on static scenery tracks.....................scenery objects just like a tree...
Am I wrong or do I need to adjust something before templating.....?

As for Chiland, I consider that a Passenger route only, because it was built that way. Does everyone want switching on Chiland areas? I can add markers and delay Version 8 release...

Let me know what you think.
Thanks

Hi Rick,

In my original post, I noted that the Chicagoland portion is the only section that is not suited for AG. There are very few siding markers in that section of the route. This would make that portion impossible to make switch lists for. In order for AG to work, you need a marker on those sidings. The rest of the route is marked, so it would work with AG. I suppose with some of AG's options, you could start a whole train in Chicagoland and not start switching until you move to one of the other sections. You just couldn't switch in Chicagoland. As for the tracks with static cars. While making the template, you would have to remove them, if any, from the *.csv files to keep AG from generating any work there. I did use some siding in Cajon that had static cars, but you need to make sure that there is some room for you to place a marker car and then you would have to limit the number of cars placed there.

Jim

[jrmeindl]

The static tracks should not be an issue.
They do not show up in Route Editor because they are scenery objects in reality, not real tracks or cars..
Do you agree that scenery objects do not show up?
The static scenery yard cars are on static scenery tracks.....................scenery objects just like a tree...
Am I wrong or do I need to adjust something before templating.....?

As for Chiland, I consider that a Passenger route only, because it was built that way. Does everyone want switching on Chiland areas? I can add markers and delay Version 8 release...

Let me know what you think.
Thanks

I think you meant the Activity Editor. Cars on static tracks, they will show up in the RE, but not in the AE. They won't be an issue as long as you don't place any marker cars on those sidings or if they just don't have siding markers (static scenery tracks) they definitely won't be an issue. (I don't remember which of the tracks that had static cars.) If they do have siding markers, you just need to make sure that they don't show up in any of the *.csv files. Even if there are no marker cars, AG can call for setouts on those sidings if someone were to chose them. That only will happen if they show up in the work check list. Reason for deleting those entries in the SWLTDB??.csv (track database) file.

Chiland being passenger only would be fine for me. AG just can't generate passenger activities. With that said, when AG generates your starting files for the templates, it will include any siding or track that is marked in Chiland. Those should be deleted from the SWLTDB??.csv file so no one can chose them for any work.

The rest of the route is definitely set up properly for a template.

Jim