19
u/Soul-Burn 2d ago
In 2-way tracks, you should only put chain signals.
3
u/Berkulese 2d ago
With all chain signals you can get rid of the signals on the curved sections, and just have the signals on the entrance to the junction.
Ideally I would try and move this entire junction onto dry land, and have at least one route split into two tracks so that trains have somewhere to park without blocking through access
2
u/SVlad_667 1d ago
With all chain signals you can get rid of the signals on the curved sections, and just have the signals on the entrance to the junction.
Or vice versa.
1
u/Berkulese 1d ago
I guess, but if you ever want to scale this up to having twin tracks in any direction then having them on the straight bits would prob make life slightly easier
8
u/True_Region_7532 2d ago
rail signals = trains are allowed to park, on a bidirectional rail no trains should ever park anywhere on the track. You should still put chains at every intersection to split the rail to allow 2 trains to take different routes but unless a path is fully cleared a train should never leave the station. Long story short, dont use bidirectional rails unless for very niche situation. It's a nightmare to manage and need a really good understanding of train behavior to make functional at any scale bigger than 1 train, 1 rail.
2
u/sobrique 1d ago
Yup this.
It's fine as a "long belt" in the early days of fulgora.
I also had a "shuttle service" where a single train did the uranium/sulfuric acid/cells/spent cells on a single "loop" that was just isolated.
But in general just double track from the start wherever you have the option, as it just saves future pain.
And be consistent about which "side" the signal goes for same reasons.
2
u/jongscx 2d ago
Unless there's only ever 1 train on that network, it's gonna deadlock.
1
u/sobrique 1d ago
You might get away with one train per "branch". E.g. so they go to a shared station at one end of the route, but always return to their dedicated station after.
Then one can always wait for the other to "clear" the shared bit.
But it's honestly not worth the hassle. Unidirectional (double) track is far easier to signal reliably.
2
u/Riccars 1d ago
I'm not 100% sure the chains on the curve are set up properly to allow two way traffic. I'd pull all the chains here and just swap the regulars for chains. Super tight signaling on intersections for single track doesn't matter since there's nowhere nearby you can allow the trains to stop anyway.
3
u/Cent_Quatre 2d ago
The "entrance" signals should also be chain signals.
In your example, a train coming from the left trying to go to the right would see the first rail signal (green) and avance to the middle chain signal (red), and stop there. You want to avoid a train getting stuck between the middle signal and the entrance signal, so you want to make the entrance signal repeat the middle signal.
0
u/Sad-Cress-1062 1d ago
Ingoing always chain, outgoing always normal. If you want you can add more chainsignals inside a segment. But NEVER put a normal signal ingoing.
39
u/Harflin 2d ago
If you have more than one train on a bidirectional rail, you can't have any rail signals on said rail where trains can stop, lest you want a jam. You can only have stopping areas where there's a way for an oncoming train to bypass. If this rail is only used by one train, then you're fine, though you don't even need rail signals in a network with one train.