Train Irregularities (Bug?)

[Fireside]

I've been observing and testing the rail network for quite some time now. (About a month of dedicated study just this year but I have notes from even two years ago) And I've come to the conclusion that rail really needs a lot of fixing. Of course I'll send a bug report, but I'd like to know what you guys do (or fail to do) to get around these issues. --- Most urgent issue: Bridges. Not only are the inclines insanely steep for adhesion railroads, but the randomly generated nature of them seem to smite any unfortunate locomotive traveling over them and nearly any speed at seemly random moments. It makes the invisible track (the one the wheel assemblies are glued to) "jump" violently and cause all sorts of havoc. The recent addition of bridges is seriously affecting any and all game-play involving trains to the point where its near mandatory to have vehicle damage off. - I've tried vertical articulation of my bogies to potentially avoid this problem, but it seems its too powerful of a jump for my system to overcome. --- Second pressing issue: Sharp track. Track generated over islands is way too sharply curved for trains traveling at a speed reasonable for reaching the arctic. Multi-train wheel assembly locomotives (4 or more wheel assemblies) suffer the most, but even two wheel assembly locomotives can swing far enough to hit the walls and explode. - I've presently gotten around this issue for the 4x or greater wheel assembly locomotives by slapping on more robotic or velocity pivots to keep the swaying down. --- Third issue: Wheel assembly efficiency/strength. I'd say this is less an issue of the wheel assemblies themselves and more the issue of weight. Trains are very dang heavy, some diesels greater than 200, or even 500 tons. this weight is what enables them to be so powerful though. Unfortunately, Most locomotives on the workshop barely reach 50,000 weight. Let alone 200,000 or 500,000 and that's with packing in as many weight blocks or even battle cannon barrel extensions as possible. - Utilizing an XML edited workbench, I packed some 400,000 weight on top of one of my locomotives and it had about the same performance as one would IRL. No needing to create a congo line of locomotives to get just a few cars moving. Unfortunately the tunnels aren't equipped for a locomotive that puts the Harry Potter Knight bus to shame, so I've been on the hunt for an XML edited Train Wheel assembly or Weight block with more weight edited on. A suggestion to the developers on this issue would be to set each train wheel assembly to say 100,000 weight, that way it'll only effect trains. ---- Of course, I'll incude this all in the bug report, but I want to hear what y'all have done. Thanks for reading this.

[pontfogel]

I happily live with any problems the bridges causes for my trains as long as my ships can finally get around the map without having to go around Sawyer...

[Fireside]

Originally posted by pontfogel:

I happily live with any problems the bridges causes for my trains as long as my ships can finally get around the map without having to go around Sawyer...

I'm just really annoyed though as while some ships had issues, it was only SOME ships. You could design around that problem at a bare minimum. With the state trains are in currently, literally every design is void and at risk at crossing the bridge.

If the bridges made life easier for ships and only broke a couple of trains, I'd be fine. But after testing 12 of my own locomotives, and 78 workshop locomotives, the bridge will randomly smite them all.

[pontfogel]

It was 80 percent of my vessels. It couldn't be massively complicated for the developers to keep the bridges but make them less steep, could it?

[Fireside]

Originally posted by pontfogel:

It was 80 percent of my vessels. It couldn't be massively complicated for the developers to keep the bridges but make them less steep, could it?

That's what I'm wondering. The inclines need to be extended by 2-3x times what they are currently and the track needs to be smoothed out. Why did they release the bridges without ensuring complete compatibility and smooth operation with the existing train system?

I'm happy they were considerate to give more room for big ships, but at the price of sacrificing an entire mode of locomotion?

I like building big ships too, but many of us, including myself, don't have computers powerful enough to run them smoothly. A couple train cars is more than happy with a lot of our rigs.

What I'm trying to say is that I'm frustrated that it caters to the needs of the few fortunate enough to be able to make big awesome ships while decimating an entire section of the game that near anyone can use with even the most potato of computers.

Trains are an amazing way of introducing someone to the complexities of stormworks. You've got limited options on how badly you can screw up, and problems are easy to spot. But at the same time, you can add on so many complexities to your hearts desire that aren't necessary for basic functionality, but quality of life.

[pontfogel]

Originally posted by Reesecraft28:

Why did they release the bridges without ensuring complete compatibility and smooth operation with the existing train system?

In case you're not joking, that's how Stormworks development works.

My CPU is 12 years old and my ships are very lightweight (in performance, not in mass) for their size.

Of course I agree with you, both trains and ships should work as intended.

[RadialVolcano27]

Odd, I recently built a train and my friend did too and we were doing 40 (insert default unit for linear speed sensor) and we were fine. On on of the train we weren't even in a seat and nothing happened.

[Dragon]

I actually never have issues with my trains. The locomotives and carriages I use travel at a speed of 260 kph through any bend and over any bridge without issue.

The locomotive is also one with 4 bogies, with the outer ones on rails for sideways movement. It can go through the tight bends of the salvage yard in the Arctic at full speed, with a slight bit of wheel slip through the bend.

I never needed the bridges (I add collapsible masts to large ships for passing under the railway viaducts) but, I don't get bugs from them so they don't bother me. Am I just lucky with my map seeds?

Maybe we can do a test. Below is a link to a train addon of mine, I have no problems when using this specific train. Try it out. If it works, then it's down to how a train is built. If you still get the same bugs, then it can be something to do with map seeds or physics detail. I play with high physics detail so that could be a factor as well.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2785016035

I don't have more locomotives and carriages to test, maybe other players can also link some more working examples.

[NiceGuy]

I have no issues with my train. It also has 4 wheel sets. All I had to change was my container car, I had to get the floor up by one block so it does not touch ground on the bridges peek. But I do not consider this a bug.
It's the same with sharp bends. The train track is as it is and YOU have to build your vehicles to master it. How about slowing down before a sharp bend or a hill 😉
Do you race your car in rl at high speed over speed bumpers or into sharp bends?
And if your train ist plain to long for the bends YOU need to fix your problem not the game.

[pontfogel]

I actually built a basic locomotive to see for myself what it was like to go over one of the bridges and I have to say that it was surprisingly gentle. I don't see how it could cause any major issues. Maybe it's your design that needs to change a bit? Are your trains very low to the ground or something like that?

Edit: I was only doing 110 km/h. I'll fix the gearing and test it at a higher speed.

Edit 2: 315 km/h and no issues. Going through the the tight bends on the islands still looks ridiculous, though.

[Fireside]

Who knows, perhaps I was just unlucky with my map seeds and it must be an amazing coincidence if all 12 of the maps I generated face this problem. I’ll need to check if that’s the issue. The other part is that I play on low physics detail, so this issue might only effect low physics. Which is both really weird and super annoying if you want to haul a large amount of freight cars and your PC is struggling.

[Fireside]

Originally posted by pontfogel:

Originally posted by Reesecraft28:

Why did they release the bridges without ensuring complete compatibility and smooth operation with the existing train system?

In case you're not joking, that's how Stormworks development works.

My CPU is 12 years old and my ships are very lightweight (in performance, not in mass) for their size.

Of course I agree with you, both trains and ships should work as intended.

Yes I was joking, I’m glad you caught that.

The ships I’m referring too would be the XML workbench ships. I know that regular ships can have problems too, but XML ships are the ones most seriously impacted by the train bridges.

My CPU is about ~14 years old now.

[pontfogel]

Originally posted by Reesecraft28:

Who knows, perhaps I was just unlucky with my map seeds and it must be an amazing coincidence if all 12 of the maps I generated face this problem. I’ll need to check if that’s the issue. The other part is that I play on low physics detail, so this issue might only effect low physics. Which is both really weird and super annoying if you want to haul a large amount of freight cars and your PC is struggling.

I use default physics so that could indeed make a differance. I'm still curious about what your trains look like.
I continued messing around with trains yesterday and built a more realistic (realistic-ish. I'm not very good at building trains) loco which I used to pull three 58000 liter tanker wagons over the bridges to see if that would cause a problem but it's still a very smooth affair.

[NiceGuy]

1. What do you consider a"reasonable speed". A cargo train at 180 km/h which is compared to rl way to fast works well with the train track. I only slow down for the very sharp bends on some of the island.
Setup is one loco 2 container cars each with 6 containers loaded (2 stack of 3 containers)

2. My 4 wheel set loco has no sliders or any other useless stuff to allow it any movement to any direction other than the default rotation. You don't need any of this they only cause problems.

3. My loco has two wheel sets at the front and two and the back. They can only rotate. I have a 3x3 pivot (free rotational) and stick to this are the 2 wheel sets (free rotational). Works very well. If you add additional side or up/down movement for the wheels this causes you only trouble as it overwhelms the physics engine.

This only shows one container car but did it also with two. It depends on the availability of enough containers to the Arctic or back 🤪
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2646182956

[Fireside]

Originally posted by NiceGuy:

1. What do you consider a"reasonable speed". A cargo train at 180 km/h which is compared to rl way to fast works well with the train track. I only slow down for the very sharp bends on some of the island.
Setup is one loco 2 container cars each with 6 containers loaded (2 stack of 3 containers)

2. My 4 wheel set loco has no sliders or any other useless stuff to allow it any movement to any direction other than the default rotation. You don't need any of this they only cause problems.

3. My loco has two wheel sets at the front and two and the back. They can only rotate. I have a 3x3 pivot (free rotational) and stick to this are the 2 wheel sets (free rotational). Works very well. If you add additional side or up/down movement for the wheels this causes you only trouble as it overwhelms the physics engine.

This only shows one container car but did it also with two. It depends on the availability of enough containers to the Arctic or back 🤪
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2646182956

I consider a reasonable speed to be 40 mph ( 64 kmh) or greater en route to the arctic. Though transit speeds between the other islands at 60-80 mph (100 km/h-130 km/h)

Of course I prefer speeds around 60 - 80 mph for the whole network, above a hundred would be ideal.

In general, I want a speed I can set my train to, walk off and get a coffee or sit down and enjoy the low polygons, and watch it run on it's own to the arctic, without worrying it'll detonate.


No I don't have any excess joints or sliders, the same setup as you for my general purpose freight engine. However, I like to haul coal to the arctic and I have a Heavy Duty freight engine with 6 wheel assemblies, 4 are arranged in the pairs you described, while the remaining two are attached to those bogies via additional pivot to allow traverse of the rail-yard. (One additional bogie per pair)

The designs I did do to allow for additional mobility only increased the stiffness of these bogies, reducing the body roll of the locomotive when traversing sharp corners quickly. These seem to have no negative effect on overwhelming the physics engine.

After doing some more testing thanks to the previous comments and suggestions, it seems my main problems are either being on low physics detail, or bad seeds. Now this doesn't excuse my main point on how either of these shouldn't be an issue, but at least there are workarounds now.

It seems the physical model of the railroads are reduced when using a lower physics detail, resulting in sharper turns and elevation changes than is possible for the wheel assemblies to navigate safely.

I am curious though, what's the maximum tractive effort of your locomotive?

My general purpose locomotive can handle around 2 million weight (7 of my largest loaded coal hoppers) at 10 mph (16 km/h)

My Heavy Duty Freight Locomotive can handle around 5 million weight at the same speed.

However, I think my motors are too powerful, and any speed above 40 mph (64 km/h) and it wheel-slips so bad it overwhelms my anti-wheel slip system. What motor setup are you using?

[NiceGuy]

Ok I'm far away from such weights. The most I tried was 14 standard containers which is 35t if I remember it right.
I used 2 big default engines which produces 860 swat with one medium generator, which power 2 medium electric motors at 0.5 throttle.
I switched lately to a modular engine 3x3 size and I think 8 Zylinders but I'm not 100% sure maybe it's 10 Zylinders. But I can not access the game right now to check it. But it generates the same power being a bit more fuel efficient. I use about 4500l diesel for the Arctic run at about 180 km/h.
If I increase throttle over 0.5 I get wheel slip too.