the MRH Forum

Finally Checking out JMRI-Operation Pro Operation and maintenance
Reply
Prolific poster 1,167 posts George Sinos gsinos Prolific poster 1,167 posts
George Sinos gsinos

My small switching layout is running like a top, driven by car cards and waybills.  I've been reading the docs on JMRI OpsPro for quite some time, trying to determine if I would like it and make the switch. 

OpsPro is complex, with lots of configuration options and I know this would be a "learn by doing, the doing again" experience for me.  I operate my layout almost every day and was reluctant to disrupt my status quo.

A few days ago it occurred to me that I've been using Auran's Trainz simulator for a couple of decades.  Over the weekend I built a small Trainz layout with enough features to explore OpsPro. By Monday afternoon I was running trains and had answered a few of the questions that had been in my mind for months.

This is probably going to be an exploration process that takes several weeks.  But when I'm done, I'll be confident that I've made the decision to change (or not change) will be based on something solid.  

The image doesn't convey any special insight, it's just a screen shot of one of the small yards in the simulation.

gs

Pro-test.JPG 
Reply 1
z4driver Active Member 38 posts
z4driver

Interesting way..

..of testing out JMRI Ops. I'll have to look into this. Ihoping to start building my layout next year after a pending house move so I've been playing about with JMRI Ops. Without a layout it can be quite difficult to visualise what's going on. I own Trainz so this mught be the way to go. How have you been getting on with it?

 

Lee
Reply 0
George Sinos gsinos Prolific poster 1,167 posts
George Sinos gsinos

Using the two together worked

Using the two together worked very well.  I'm guessing it cut, at least, a couple of weeks from the decision process.

It certainly makes making illustrations for an up-coming presentation easier. No fussing with lighting for decent photos.

As it stands today, I'm mostly convinced that I'll stay with car cards and waybills for the physical switching layout.  Given the Car Cards and Waybills already exist, and the layout runs fine in that mode, It's unlikely I'll go through the trouble of converting.  If the CCandW didn't already exist it would probably be a different story.

However, the big revelation was how well Trainz and OpsPro work as a pair.  I'm working on a new Trainz simulation of a bigger layout that takes advantage OpsPro.  OpsPro definitely gives a Trainz simulation another, more realistic, dimension.

gs
Reply 0
Milt Spanton mspanton Super User 979 posts
Milt Spanton mspanton

Hah! Very interesting that I

Hah! Very interesting that I have just been exploring Ops, and have almost everything working as desired.  If I can help, let me know. ....With the caveat that I am NOT an expert.

- Milt
The Duluth MISSABE and Iron Range Railway in the 50's - 1:87
Reply 0
George Sinos gsinos Prolific poster 1,167 posts
George Sinos gsinos
A bit over a year later - a change of mind...

At the end of the experiment in 2020, the physical layout with CC&WB was working very well.  Although there was a lot to like about OperationsPro I didn't want to go through the work of the conversion.  So, I continued to operate the physical layout with CC&WB. 

In the meantime I also operated the simulated layout with OpsPro.  As questions or ideas popped up I would use the simulation for testing and exploration.  Finally, a few weeks ago, I decided to go ahead with the conversion of the physical layout.

I think the biggest thing holding me back was the actual conversion process.   In the end, I decided to convert one customer at a time.  (The switching layout is basically an industrial park with a few customers.)

This had a couple of advantages.  I only needed to do the data entry and debugging for one industry at a time.  It also broke up the rolling stock data entry task into smaller bites that could be achieved in short work sessions.

I have way more cars than are actually needed to operate the layout. So I only entered what was needed to service test one customer.  As that proved to work I added more.

At this point the bulk data entry is done.  Most of the basic operations are running and the fine tuning has started.

I've noticed a couple of advantages -

Staging a train to move onto the layout (form storage) is faster.  Not a huge difference, but about 3-5 minutes, down from 5-10.  Doesn't sound like a lot, but the process is a lot smoother.

At the end of an operating session I don't need to visit all of the card boxes to flip the cards.  Again, it's only a few minutes, but it no longer needs to be done.

The interesting part is OpsPro seems to be managing the storage drawers better than I did.  It thinks each drawer is a yard track.  It knows the length of the "track" and the length of the cars.  So it can put a car where it will fit.  Next time that car is needed for a train, the location is listed on the manifest.

I can also remove the card boxes from the fascia.  That's a lot of clutter that goes away.

The whole experiment has taken quite a while, admittedly most of the time was spent thinking about it.  But it has been enjoyable and I like the way it's turning out in the end.

If you're just thinking about using OpsPro, I think starting out with a small virtual layout is definitely the way to get your feet wet.  If you don't like the idea of a virtual layout, pick a small part of your layout for the test.  Otherwise, I think the task can look so large it may look discouraging.

gs
Reply 5
sunacres Frequent poster 700 posts
sunacres
I missed this when you first posted George, very interesting idea.  I'm a big fan of simulators like Trainz and always create virtual versions of key scenes or whole layouts before cutting wood. But it never occured to me that this might be a good platform for exploring car forwarding mechanisms. I'm in the early stages of designing a new layout and this might be another avenue to explore for me. My spreadsheet based waybill system is lots of fun and I like the fact that it requires thinking about what's in the cars and why, but it means that there are no surprises. 
Thanks for the update, and great tip on starting small. 

Jeff Allen

My MRH Blog Index
Reply 0
George Sinos gsinos Prolific poster 1,167 posts
George Sinos gsinos
Jeff -

For me, using the Trainz simulated layout helped make the learning process go much faster.   

The ability to save the state of the simulated railroad and OpsPro, then test a scenario, then restore the starting state of both made iterative testing a snap.

It went like this:

      Save the state of the railroad in Trainz.
      Backup Ops Pro
     Make and test some changes in OpsPro

If the changes were successful I could proceed to the next test.

If things didn't go so well, just reverse the process.

    Reload the starting state of the railroad in Trainz.
   Restore OpsPro from the backup.

Sure - this could be done on the actual railroad, but resetting physical cars to a previous state would take time and good record keeping.   Doing it with the simulator only took a few seconds  for the backups or restores.   That leaves me many more brain cells to concentrate on making and testing the changes.

gs


     
Reply 0
David Husman dave1905 MRH Author 9,794 posts
David Husman dave1905
This may be a silly question but what is the advantage of using Trainz or why even use Trainz?  JMRI-Ops tells you where each car went (or with the case of most problems, didn't go).

I set up my layout to use JMRI-Ops as a test to see if it would work and didn't use a simulator or set foot in the layout room.  As soon as JMRI generates a switch list or manifest you know if it worked as far as cars going to industry.   If the cars aren't on the list or they show the "wrong" destination, then that means something has to be adjusted.

Granted it might be more fun to use a simulator.

Dave Husman

Visit my website :  https://wnbranch.com/

Blog index:  Dave Husman Blog Index
Reply 1
George Sinos gsinos Prolific poster 1,167 posts
George Sinos gsinos
David Husman  dave1905 wrote:
This may be a silly question but what is the advantage of using Trainz or why even use Trainz?  JMRI-Ops tells you where each car went (or with the case of most problems, didn't go).



The advantage, for me, is the visualization.   I can understand it better when I can visualize the actual scene rather than look at a text list of cars.   gs
Reply 1
Reply