How do I get this train intersection to work?

[swisscheese2121]

https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/1831290820519818710/EDAFD0044AFBC327FA66FA0933B9259C413D33BD/?imw=1920&&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

[Arcane]

General rules of thumb for intersections:
- 1. Put rail signal at the exit
- 2. Put chain signal at the entrance
- 3. One way rails should go the right way before and after the intersection. And have signals on the same side of the rail everywhere.
- 4. Space between intersections should be enough to contain your longest train.

Your rail violates rules 1,2 and 4. I recommend to remove all signals and put them again according to the principles above.

Also it is better to use one way rail instead of two-way rail. I.e. you will have 2 rail paths going everywhere like in real world basically. It will be way easier to set up signals for one way rails.

[DCYW]

too many signals, train is confused.

[Hedning]

I can't see any misplaced signals in the intersection itself, but it can be anywhere between its location and its destination.

When you have that many signals and bi-directional tracks it is very easy to just miss one signal and your train can no longer find the path. One easy way to find exactly where this happens is to use the feature to send it to a custom destination. As you move your mouse along the track at some point it will no longer find a path. That's where you don't have the opposite signal.

[Hedning]

Originally posted by DCYW:

too many signals, train is confused.

You can have hundreds of signals everywhere and the train will not be confused if placed correctly.

[Hedning]

Originally posted by Arcane:

Your rail violates rules 1,2 and 4. I recommend to remove all signals and put them again according to the principles above.

His chain signals aren't even bad for a bi-directional track.

Also using a chain signal when you should use a regular or vice versa can not cause a no-path issue. The only problem it can cause is the train stops at the wrong location and blocks another train unnecessarily.

[DCYW]

Originally posted by Hedning:

Originally posted by DCYW:

too many signals, train is confused.

You can have hundreds of signals everywhere and the train will not be confused if placed correctly.

Yeah nah, just kidding.

[Warlord]

EDIT: Oh wait, I think I see it. On the right-hand side of the loop, you seem to have 4 chain signals on the curve that turns west. One of them is NOT paired up with the one opposite it, but is instead paired to the signal on the part that goes east. Without a pair of signals on the north-bound section, that turns that segment into a one-way track that only trains going SOUTH can pass.

This isn't a bad intersection, but it's not any better - really - than a simple T-junction. Having ANY amount of two-way tracks instantly reduces the potential train traffic on a network to a handful of trains. And since you are unlikely to have two trains approach an intersection like this at the same time, making a complex signalled intersection is kind of pointless.

Also, you have a smidge too many signals. It doesn't really hurt anything, but having more signals than you need is a waste of materials and introduces potential for mistakes (as you did here, by having the chain signals too close to another branch).

Why a pair of chains on the left and right curves of the intersection? A single pair in the middle would suffice (even if it's not symmetrical, which I think is why you did this).

[Hedning]

Originally posted by Warlord:

On the right-hand side of the loop, you seem to have 4 chain signals on the curve that turns west. One of them is NOT paired up with the one opposite it, but is instead paired to the signal on the part that goes east.

Yes, you're right. It's really hard to see and easy to miss. To be fair this has happened to me laying unidirectional tracks too, connecting to the wrong track and shutting down traffic.