More lane changers or not?

[Sargas]

Hello everybody,

at the moment I'm planning train stations with a stacker in front of them. There are 2 parallel tracks leading to the stacker. From the stacker to the stations also 2 parallel tracks lead, and after the station the trains can drive over 2 tracks back to the main line.

Would you connect the parallel tracks each with a possibility to change lanes at short intervals for the trains? Or would this reduce throughput because it greatly increases the number of crossings?

Thank you.

[disentius]

Can you post a screenshot?

[Sargas]

I'm sorry, I forgot to post images

[Sargas]

No ideas or suggestions?

[Skeletpiece]

I still don't get it but I would use just 1 lane to enter/exit parking lot (and many stations to unload)

[mmmPI]

It seems like your design allows 2 trains to enter the stacker at the same time, then 3 trains to get ready to load at the same time.

But then only 1 train to be loaded at a time, and then 2 trains to exit the station at the same time.

If your plan was to stack another loading bay above the existing one then I understand your question as ' should i connect my exit lanes more frequently ? '

Because to my eyes the rest would behave as intended when scaled toward north except maybe for some missing rail signal to cut the block just before loading in smaller pieces, having 1 train waiting just behind the one that is being loaded to reduce uptime between 2 loading.

In this case it would not matter if your main network is not congested, you could even use 1 exit lane for 2 stations.

The risk with 2 exits lane for 2 station and not giving trains option to change ever until they merge in the main network is only if main network is congested and allow more train to leave 1 station than the other, in this case you could have some train backlog in one of the two lane.

You could avoid that with only 1 lane change possibilty quite soon after the station = as far as possible as when you enter the main network, so that more of those exit lane would be used as buffer, but that is just some more safety in case the main network is congested , which shouldn't happen, which means it's not too too important to have those lane changers.

[Sargas]

If your plan was to stack another loading bay above the existing one then I understand your question as ' should i connect my exit lanes more frequently ? '

Because to my eyes the rest would behave as intended when scaled toward north except maybe for some missing rail signal to cut the block just before loading in smaller pieces, having 1 train waiting just behind the one that is being loaded to reduce uptime between 2 loading.

That is my plan. I want to add loading bays and stacker to the north as needed when my factory grows.
Behind the currently loaded train only another train waits for loading. I don't wanted to let 2 trains wait for loading. The block is that big because of the space the tracks need.

The risk with 2 exits lane for 2 station and not giving trains option to change ever until they merge in the main network is only if main network is congested and allow more train to leave 1 station than the other, in this case you could have some train backlog in one of the two lane.

You could avoid that with only 1 lane change possibilty quite soon after the station = as far as possible as when you enter the main network, so that more of those exit lane would be used as buffer, but that is just some more safety in case the main network is congested , which shouldn't happen, which means it's not too too important to have those lane changers.

I think I will use one lane changer after every station and then let reality show me if it causes problems.

Thank you for your feedback!