affect of congestion

[Gwizz]

On the Alaska coal mine II map, I have 2 single tracks running through restricted territory (no double track allowed)

There is enough cargo for about 5 trains to haul on each line. 

Two trains and more cause congestion.

Is it possible to add enough trains to haul all cargo?

Or does adding many trains just cause grid-lock.

Congestion does reduce cargo value down to as much as 50%.

But, The train with the most valuable cargo goes first.

So where does grid-lock began?

Each station has some double track.

The 2 lines each run on one leg of a Y.

So, each line has one station of its own and shares one station at the bottom of the Y.

[loco_motive]

Well there's not much to be done for the southern strip, but the north strip presents the possibility of a storage depot at the boundry. Unfortunately that has to be rejected as it destroys getting a cargo count from the dock area.

I developed 2 iron, 2 logs on the north side and 1 iron, 2 logs on the south side (and 1 iron across the river). Part of my plan was to not overdevelop the areas, but to meet the haul requirement as closely as possible.

My solution was to double track every stick I could, so the length of congested track would be about the same in both north and south areas. I used 4-car trains, 3 trains to run iron and logs into the mills and a second set of trains to run lumber and goods between the docks and the mills, getting pretty much my entire miner count from the coal mines side. I found 4 trains on the north and 3 trains on the south running back and forth between the mills and 2 separate docks setups worked fine, but evenso was not entirely pleased with the setup and certainly would not have liked to have to run 5 trains on the north side. I was actually more concerned with congestion at the dock than on the single track.

As to which might work better, for example; 4 trains with 3 cargo each or 3 trains with 4 cargo each, that might be an interesting test for someone to do (but not me :) ).

We're sure spreading out our threads, aren't we.