Spring switches

[Tumble Trash᠌ ⁧⁧ Official]

This is something that would help, I know they said they wouldn't be added for historical reasons, but for game play reasons it would be super nice and get rid of a lot of stress. Could be made toggleable.

[bendigo (1983-2023) RIP]

Honestly it really isn't that bad. If you pay attention switches are not bad.

It would be nice if they could make the switches easier to see though, the way they are now, they can be hard to see from a distance. And the folors do not relly make sese on some of them. The red should be on the turning side but on some of them the red is on the straight side making things confusing sometimes.

[Solid Snack]

I don't get the "historical reasons" thing. If a train came from the opposite end, the wheels would always flip the switch in the direction it was coming from. Spring switches were created to reduce stress and damage on the switch itself, not because it would "derail" the train. If anything, the fact that your train derails when entering a switch that's set to the opposite track is immersion breaking due to how unrealistic it is - physically AND historically.

Though I might be confusing what exactly we are talking in this thread - if we are talking about spring switches that self-reset after the train passes over because the spring pushes the tracks back to the set position, then yeah, that's a different kettle of fish - anyone in the know with what the devs said exactly? Because it makes no sense if they purposely made switches static the way they are - I just assumed they haven't added switch physics in yet....

[Knsgf]

Originally posted by Volkier:

If a train came from the opposite end, the wheels would always flip the switch in the direction it was coming from.

More likely, wheels would bend switch points and snap them off the lever, rendering the whole turnout unsafe and unusable until repaired.

[Solid Snack]

Originally posted by Knsgf:

Originally posted by Volkier:

If a train came from the opposite end, the wheels would always flip the switch in the direction it was coming from.

More likely, wheels would bend switch points and snap them off the lever, rendering the whole turnout unsafe and unusable until repaired.

Not really - physically the lever is significantly lighter than the rails, and they didn't have any sort of hydraulic or mechanical aspects to a switch. You could set the whole thing with a crowbar if the lever wasn't available.

[Schlappspaten]

All about switches depends a lot.

Stub switches for example will absolutly derail anything coming from the wrong side. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railroad_switch#/media/File:ThreeWayStub.jpg). The switches in the game don't resemble stub switches though.

Harp switch stands like those in the game had locking mechanisms to prevent the blades from moving when vehicles were passing over it. At least those switches in yards and mainlines. There may have been switches that were used in the direction frog-blade only which don't need any securing, but in general it is save to consider most switches as locked. If you run into such a switch the wrong way you most likely wouldn't derail but damage the mechanism (and render the switch useless until repair). In real life you'll have to report and most likely getting disciplined by the foreman or boss.

For playablity a simple derailment is an much easier penalty than to block a switch for hours to simulate repair time. Many of you would be the first to cry "I can't play for 8 hours, because I ran against a switch, that's no good gameplay".

So accept it: If you run a switch in the wrong direction, there is a penalty, like in real life. And for "safety first": Railroads aren't formula one, you must not do anything in a haste, because this endangers lifes and values. If you can't see the position of the switch: stop, check, continue.

[Ghost666]

Originally posted by TB6 ☭Beef Chungus☭:

This is something that would help, I know they said they wouldn't be added for historical reasons, but for game play reasons it would be super nice and get rid of a lot of stress.

Just wait until they add mod support... the community will make this game epic

[Tumble Trash᠌ ⁧⁧ Official]

Originally posted by InsomniacBrit:

Originally posted by TB6 ☭Beef Chungus☭:

This is something that would help, I know they said they wouldn't be added for historical reasons, but for game play reasons it would be super nice and get rid of a lot of stress.

Just wait until they add mod support... the community will make this game epic

yeah, thats what I am hoping for

[Knsgf]

Originally posted by Volkier:

Not really - physically the lever is significantly lighter than the rails, and they didn't have any sort of hydraulic or mechanical aspects to a switch. You could set the whole thing with a crowbar if the lever wasn't available.

Wrong. The lever has to be mechanically locked to ensure switch won't throw itself as the train passes over.

Originally posted by tenderloveheart:

These switches, which are accurate, are also locked in place, and would derail any train that ran over the frog from the wrong direction, due to the lock plate across the frog.

Also wrong. Switches we have in RRO have fixed, non-movable frog. Movable frog switches are expensive and only viable on mainlines; yards and industrial branches never used them.

By the way, guard rails on RRO switches are not where they realistically should be. They need to begin before the frog, not after.

[RUEZ69]

As someone who's driven over a switch that wasn't lined properly I can confirm you will not derail. Unless the points are damaged and you try to back up over that same switch.

[Grumpka]

Originally posted by RUEZ69:

As someone who's driven over a switch that wasn't lined properly I can confirm you will not derail. Unless the points are damaged and you try to back up over that same switch.

Umm, I derailed yesterday on switch. It was just installed and first time I was driving over it.

There is a line of 'game' vs 'sim' The very nature of making a train game, will attract the sim folks (like me). Having a way to remotely control switches, and even the engines would be just another amazing avenue to go. It adds a lot of potential users who don't want to game, but just sim and design. Why not? These features increase potential income avenues for the devs! Nothing to do with historic or not. Everything can have toggle switches in the option settings (turn remote panel off or on) etc. Auto place ground/tracks together. Etc. No wrong answer or request. All a matter of what the Dev has imagined. If he/she is open minded, you gain more respect and audience by adding outside the box features to your product! If you choose to ignore them or dis them, well, we know how that goes.

[RUEZ69]

Originally posted by Grumpka:

Originally posted by RUEZ69:

As someone who's driven over a switch that wasn't lined properly I can confirm you will not derail. Unless the points are damaged and you try to back up over that same switch.

Umm, I derailed yesterday on switch. It was just installed and first time I was driving over it.

There is a line of 'game' vs 'sim' The very nature of making a train game, will attract the sim folks (like me). Having a way to remotely control switches, and even the engines would be just another amazing avenue to go. It adds a lot of potential users who don't want to game, but just sim and design. Why not? These features increase potential income avenues for the devs! Nothing to do with historic or not. Everything can have toggle switches in the option settings (turn remote panel off or on) etc. Auto place ground/tracks together. Etc. No wrong answer or request. All a matter of what the Dev has imagined. If he/she is open minded, you gain more respect and audience by adding outside the box features to your product! If you choose to ignore them or dis them, well, we know how that goes.

I'm talking about real switches on an actual railroad.

[internalvoice]

Originally posted by Volkier:

I don't get the "historical reasons" thing. If a train came from the opposite end, the wheels would always flip the switch in the direction it was coming from. Spring switches were created to reduce stress and damage on the switch itself, not because it would "derail" the train. If anything, the fact that your train derails when entering a switch that's set to the opposite track is immersion breaking due to how unrealistic it is - physically AND historically.

Though I might be confusing what exactly we are talking in this thread - if we are talking about spring switches that self-reset after the train passes over because the spring pushes the tracks back to the set position, then yeah, that's a different kettle of fish - anyone in the know with what the devs said exactly? Because it makes no sense if they purposely made switches static the way they are - I just assumed they haven't added switch physics in yet....

I agree, I routinely slam the points on the switches on my model railroad, while it can cause the odd derail, if you have enough momentum and weight the points have nothing to do other than move out of the way of the wheel flange. entering the switch the other direction, well you just end up going the wrong way and have to back up.

[internalvoice]

Originally posted by Knsgf:

Originally posted by Volkier:

Not really - physically the lever is significantly lighter than the rails, and they didn't have any sort of hydraulic or mechanical aspects to a switch. You could set the whole thing with a crowbar if the lever wasn't available.

Wrong. The lever has to be mechanically locked to ensure switch won't throw itself as the train passes over.

Originally posted by tenderloveheart:

These switches, which are accurate, are also locked in place, and would derail any train that ran over the frog from the wrong direction, due to the lock plate across the frog.

Also wrong. Switches we have in RRO have fixed, non-movable frog. Movable frog switches are expensive and only viable on mainlines; yards and industrial branches never used them.

By the way, guard rails on RRO switches are not where they realistically should be. They need to begin before the frog, not after.

I have never actually paid any attention to the guard rails on the switches, but yes they must begin before and run up along side the frog for them to be effective. If they don't start before the frog, you wind up with the possibility of a wheel flange catching the wrong side of the frog and derailing.

[Schlappspaten]

Originally posted by RUEZ69:

I'm talking about real switches on an actual railroad. [/quote]

Did the same few years back with an 128 ton loco. Engine and switch survived... ;)

But I won't dare to compare modern day switches with those harp switch stands of a narrow gauge railroad in the early days. If you look closely at the switchstand (in the game or at a musuem) you can see the notches, were the locking lever must be placed to avoid inadverted moving of the blades from passing trains. If you run such a switch with a light vehicle (i.e. a pushed flat car) it might derail the car, and if you do it with a heavy engine you will damage the switching mechanism instead of derailing.

[schutt]

Actually the behavior running into a closed switch changed a lot in the beta, now the locomotive wont go into the silly stop immediate but derail with still forward movement, sometimes eaven rerailing itself since it still has the movement in the right direction and since there is no instant stop not the whole train derails only a couple of cars. Fair penalty for forgetting to set the switch, just rerail and get on with buisness. Since there is no "damage" to rails or vehicles the devs want some incent to set the switches right, fair enough.