# User talk:Nanepiwo

Thanks for all your efforts into improving my Line 2 wiki pages, especially around your area Onionland! --Blockhead (talk) 03:04, 3 July 2019 (CEST)

Thank you for all your efforts into writing the subway pages! Later I will add information on the line diagrams about transfers. Also, I think that Local Lines (such as S1) should maybe be a different style than subway lines. I will see how that can be done. --Nanepiwo (talk) 02:10, 4 July 2019 (CEST)

## Interlocking

Nanepiwo,
I'm sorry for arguing about interlocking at Ehlodex, and I didn't consider some factors.
So this is what I was trying to explain about Ch. Segfault:
Signal lamps have an influence point and a point where the train gets "safety override" when the light is red (what I call "brake point"), and at the other tracks there is a TCB. Therefore, we can use:

• ${\displaystyle t_{\text{termius}}}$ for the time from the train entering the section to the train leaving the section (TCB at the other side).
• ${\displaystyle t_{\text{brake}}}$ for the time needed for the train to apply the brake and stop in front of the red lisht.

At the same time, the frequncy of the train can be calculated using ${\displaystyle \delta _{t}={\frac {t_{\text{ln2}}}{n}}}$ where:

• ${\displaystyle \delta _{t}}$ stands for the train arrival frequency i.e. he time it takes for the second train to depart after the first one departed
• ${\displaystyle t_{\text{ln2}}}$ stands for the total time needed for the train to complete one cycle.
• ${\displaystyle n}$ stands for the number of trains running on the route.

With LuaATC it is possible the the ${\displaystyle \delta _{t}}$ value between two trains are the same, since ${\displaystyle t_{\text{ln2}}}$ and ${\displaystyle n}$ are static. Therefore, if ${\displaystyle \delta _{t}>t_{\text{brake}}+t_{\text{termius}}}$ then the train do not have to wait, and I think this is the case in Ch. Segfault.
Also, I wouldn't call my interlocking a "mess": the interlocking system that I use is known to work with multiple trains, and the problem is simply simplicity - 2 TCBs vs 5TCBs. I didn't "incorrectly" interlock the tracks either - the interlocking won't work if it's incorrect. As you've chosen to use User:Smacker's interlocking, I won't be responsible if the trains mess up there.
Please take into account that I had to make sure that the train's don't mess up after I set up the interlocking system because unlike mods, I can't teleport all around simply to fix such mess. Therefore, I used 5 TCBs to make sure that it would be absolutely safe unless there's a bug in advtrains. Remember: I'm not like orwell, and I'm not so experienced with advtrains interlocking like Smacker, so I can't use this as my "interlocking test section", and I have to use the "most stupid" way that keeps the train safe. --Yw05 (talk) 06:47, 5 May 2019 (CEST)

Ywang, I understand the benefit of having trains never wait. But I have seen trains wait to enter Chasm, so that is a moot point. Besides, nothing in the subway lua code enforces any such delay interval, even though it is possible in theory.

Smacker was the one who called your interlocking a mess, and I defer to his superior knowledge on how interlockings work. He complained, in particular, that you had several TCBs unnecessarily associated with several signals. As a result, it was difficult to remove the extraneous TCBs.

I don't see how 5 TCBs is any safer than 2 TCBs, except for you being more comfortable in making the system with 5 TCBs. It is still prone to the same advbugs. In fact, 5 TCBs is much more painful to debug if something goes wrong.

Why do you edit the wiki under your alt Yw05 rather than ywang? --Nanepiwo (talk) 12:32, 5 May 2019 (CEST)

Nanepiwo,

1. Yes, I edit the wiki using Yw05. I prefer "yw05" because it is shorter.
2. 5 TCBs are more painful to debug - I believe I have explained my interlocking clear enough for you to understand what each section does. If it goes wrong, simply mail me - I am usually online at aroung 18.00-21.00 CST/GMT+8. I am responsible for what I do, if that is what you are asking for.
3. I'm more comfortable wih 5 TCBs - yes. I can only use the interlocking system I trust. I have never used the 2-TCB interlocking system before, so I can't be sure that it works. I can't deploy a ystem that I don't trust.
4. Advbugs - that can't be avoided if you work on trains. If you want to avoid advbugs the only way is not to use advtrains, which is not what you want.
5. My interlocking system is designed in a way that is harder to remove because normally you don't have to remove them. Instead, simply reconfiguring them may be easier. For example, if you have more route, simply add them to the signal.
6. Unnecessary TCBs - ok. I'm more comfortable with 5 instead of two. Again, I can make sure it works with 5.
7. You asked me to set up the interlocking there, and of course I would do it in a way that is comfortable for me to manage - I wouldn't expect anyone else to change it unless necessary.
8. As for calling it a mess - I have to say it depends on what you call a mess. There is currently no way to judge if a interlocking system is a mess. I would say that it depends more on personal opinion, but thw Wiki is more about facts. Smacker removed the TCBs without unassigning the TCbs and the signals, so of course that is why it became a mess - in singleplayer I always amke sure TCBs and signals are unassigned and removed from track sections before removing them.
9. And for the Chasm rail - what I wrote you is my way of understanding it. As I do not have access to the LuaATC code or the interlocking system, I can't be 100% sure it works like how I think it works. If you want to know how the interlocking works there, ask gabriel.

--Yw05 (talk) 13:03, 5 May 2019 (CEST)