Extending (not modifying) commercial routes

[dwgowen5]

Hi everyone

After months, if not years, of procrastination, I've finally decided to have a go at route building for myself. I've read every thread I can find, I've bought the book, I've collected maps and timetables and track plans, and I'm almost ready to get to grips with construction. But there is one possibility I'd like to try first, and that's to extend a commercial route by a few miles entirely for my own use - just to see if it works. Again I've searched the forums as far as I can and the signals I'm getting is that simply extending a route beyond the existing limits of the main route is a bit more straightforward than trying to modify the existing trackwork or other interactives WITHIN the existing route. One of the sources of information I have is a complete set of station track plans of the gap between Bridgnorth (on the SVR) and Shrewsbury (on Cambrian 2). How feasible would it be to try adding a few miles and stations on to the current end of either route without interfering with the track database, and purely for personal use ? If it's likely to be impossible, I'd have to try something else, but Michael Vone's route building guide makes several references to extending existing routes without actually spelling out how to do it?

Any background information greatly appreciated !

All the best

Dave

[mpeffers]

Most commercial route that I've come across have been doctored to stop them from loading in the Route Editor so it may prove an uphill struggle even to find a way to get started. By changing the route, paths (and therefore the activities that use them) may become broken, you may void support from the producer and future patches that may come out might not work correctly so I wouldn't recommend it personally.

If you want to try it, what I'd suggest it copying the files from the route you've chosen and pasting them, so you have two copies. Leave the first as is, and use the second version to make your additions to. You probably want to delete all the paths, activities and services from the second copy to avoid potential problems that could arise with the Activity Editor and bear in mind that if you end up having to run a track database rebuild, all the interactives from the entire route will vanish.

Last thing I'd say is best of luck. Can be a bit of a struggle to get on with the Route Editor from time to time.

[dkightley]

I think you'll find that commercial routes will simply have the .ref file removed...or renamed. This stops the route from opening up in Route Editor.

If this is the case, then you simply need to create a new file by copying one from a default route and removing all bar the header line, or use RouteRiter to create one for you.

Do bear in mind that the suppliers of the original route hold copyright over their work, and that you can only really modify their routes for your own personal pleasure and use. You're unlikely to get permission to publish or distribute any such changed route. And "publish" includes posting screenshots on the internet.

[thenudehamster]

If you do as you would wish you may come unstuck in a number of ways, and not all of them have much to do with legalities.

For one thing, MSTS is not happy about changes to the track database (.tdb file) once all the interactives have been placed; to join two routes would involve creating a new tdb somehow as each existing route would have its own, and the sim can only handle one at a time on a good day.
Second thing is that there's no guarantee that the datum ground level will be the same on both routes - this was what sank any idea of joining a couple of Brighton based routes some time back.
Third is that the geographic location of the routes may not be as pinpoint accurate as it would need to be. MSTS geography is already slightly skewed and this may manifest itself in larger errors when making a joining route;
Fourth is that you may create quite a behemoth that MSTS could choke on.
Fifth is the differing standards of production of routes from differing builder teams. They may not match, is what I'm saying.

The section you're interested in making is comparatively small. Why not just build it as a route in its own right? It could then be used as a 'bridging' section by making a series of activities which would effectively carry over from SVR to 'Welsh Marches' (for want of a better name for now) to Cambrian Coast. By this I mean three activities all using the same consist; one from Kiddy to Bridgnorth on SVR; another from Bridgnorth to Shrewsbury on 'Welsh Marches' and a third from Shrewsbury to wherever - Aberystwyth, Llandudno, Llangollen, or even Blaenau Ffestiniog to connect with the Festiniog route (only guesses as I can't remember where Cambrian goes...) but they all effectively form the same train from Kiddy to the Welsh Coast.

[dwgowen5]

Hi Barry (and everyone !)

Afraid it's all too clear that (a) I would hit all kinds of problems and (b) I probably explained myself badly. I think Barry's (NH) idea of a link between two existing routes is probably closest to the spirit of what I was thinking of. I've already tried running home-produced activities along the Bala Hub route from Ruabon to Barmouth, where stage 1 ends stopping in the station there - then stage 2 on the Canbrian route has the same consist in the same station, starting the run to Pwllheli, and that seems to work well. But in this case much would depend on whether there is any way of copying the overlap point in its most basic form to make the switch across from one line to another convincing. For example, the linking line would need a Bridgnorth and a Shrewsbury to hand over from one line to the other - and would it be possible to copy objects from existing commercial routes, like station buildings and signals, even if the trackwork and terrain was laid again from scratch ? (Again purely for my own use at this stage - if I ever get any good at this, I'd clearly have to do the buildings and signals and other scenery items from scratch before uploading it, to keep everything fair, legal and above board).

One final question - Michael Vone's route-laying book is a bit sparse on the question of installing signals, and there doesn't seem to be a forum dedicated to signalling in MSTS as there is in RS. Does anyone know of a good source of information ?

Once again thanks one and all for the prompt help and advice - and any more pointers greatly appreciated....

All the best

Dave

[systema]

Hi Dave,

Don't be put off by warnings of TDB problems etc.

Extending a route is a great way to learn route building, but don't get carried away too much at first. Just lay a few miles of track from where the original finished to say a new station or yard and see how it goes.

Your first step is to see if you can load the route in RE and if there is a ref file allowing you to select objects. You can use all the original objects and signals if this is the case without further work being required. Each time you save you will get a new TDB if you have modified or added track and/or roads. This is not a problem so long as you make regular back ups of the route in case the TDB does get in a mess. If so you will have to revert to a backed up working TDB and continue from there.

Obviously before you do anything you need to copy the route and probably rename it so it doesn't get confused with the original. Its best to rename all the key files perhaps as svrnew.trk, svrnew.ref, svrnew.tdb etc.

It would be possible to create a new ref file if there isn't one include but this would be very laborious. You would have to create a ref entry for every shape in the shapes folder.

I have successfully altered the TDB hundreds if not thousands of times for the original Mideast while producing Mid East Plus. In fact whatever you do never try a TDB rebuild using the advanced option- this will completely mess up everything. As I say if you get in a mess you will need to revert to a working TDB. Regular saves and backups are strongly advised with frequent intermediate testing of your work in explore mode.

Mick Clarke

[thenudehamster]

Mick; it wasn't extending that I was warning against, it was trying to join two routes and merge .tdb's which I think might produce serious troubles.

Dave, the same basic rules apply to commercial routes as they do to freeware ones; within reason you can use and modify bits of them for your own personal use, but as soon as you try to give them away or sell them then you hit the copyright wall and MUST get permission to distribute; unfortunately, for many commercial routes this is less than likely to be forthcoming.

As for signalling, my route building efforts have never got that far, but I understand from the Route Builders forum that the MSTS tech docs do give you most of the information for at least 'normal' signalling installations. The Steam4Me Tutorials pages are also very helpful. Situations like multiple ground shunt repeaters, 'calling-on' signals and 3-way points might give the sim hiccups, but there are guys out there who know the answers.

[systema]

OK Barry- no probs. Obviously any modifications made to a route especially a payware route are for the owners sole use. Its just an ideal way to get started by adding a bit of your own. You can then see how it all works.

There will be no problems with placing the existing range of signals. The problems only arise when adding different types of signals. It gets quite fiddly but is perfectly achievable. However adding new types of signals at the preliminary learning stage is not recommended.

Mick Clarke

[dwgowen5]

Hi Barry and Mick

Thanks for the prompt and informative replies. It sounds as if it might be worth trying as an experiment and a lesson in route building (and some of the snags to be faced !) on a dipping-a-toe-in-the-water basis at least. If uploading the finished route is to be a long-term objective, I realise that it all has to be completely original, and I certainly don't have a problem with that at all. All I'm trying to do is approach it stage by stage really. Certainly extending the SVR northwards from Bridgnorth would be straight across a bridge into a tunnel which it seems from the book on route building to be quite an undertaking - ironically BATS were going to do this themselves not long before they closed down, as a less ambitious alternative to their wartime SVR route they were developing for a rival simulator (name escapes me sadly) which closed down at the same time. On the other hand, simply stretching the line out of Shrewsbury to the SVR junction and using that as the transition point might be a simpler objective to begin with....

If I manage to get the time to tackle this for real, I'll keep you posted !

All the best for now !

Dave

[thenudehamster]

Dave;
Rather than extend an existing fairly complex route such as SVR as a 'beginner's project', you might do better either to play with a very simple one - Kirkham comes to mind - or build a simple route from scratch. If you haven't already built Michael Vone's test route, do so; it will teach you an amazing amount, and with MSTS there's no better way to learn than by doing. Then you can go on to sorting out DEM data, making marker files and all the other bits and pieces necessary to build a 'proper' route...

An uploaded route does not have to be entirely original; it's just that if it is a modification of, or contains portions of, someone else's work (like buildings) whether commercial or freeware, you MUST have permission from the copyright holders to publish the modified work; that's where the difficulty will arise if you consider extending either SVR or Cambrian. As SVR is actually a model of the preserved line, you may do better making your own version of the line as it was in operational days, though it will mean some research for original track layout and things - although if you set it far enough in the past there won't be many people left who can say, " You got that wrong - it wasn't like that when I were a lad..."

Best of luck, whichever option you choose.

[dwgowen5]

Thanks Barry

What you're saying is making more and more sense than my own over-ambitious objectives I think - presumably if for the moment, I simply copied the track layout from the SVR (by drawing a sketch from the route plan on the Activity Editor) that can's infringe copyright can it ? Unless they have really messed with the layout, I would have thought it was in the public domain anyway ?

Other thing you might be able to tell me - there are occasional references in different posts to 'mini-routes' but I've never been completely clear as to what these are. The implication is that if you want to use a smaller part of a route like Dorset Coast you can ease the pressure on the computer by simply loading up part of it - is that right ? A sort of Dorset Coast Lite if you like, but I wonder if this means taking a shorter section of the entire route or simply losing a lot of the detail - any idea where I can find out more ?

Thanks again for all the help and advice - both indispensable and very much appreciated !

All the best

Dave

[johny]

....
Other thing you might be able to tell me - there are occasional references in different posts to 'mini-routes' but I've never been completely clear as to what these are. The implication is that if you want to use a smaller part of a route like Dorset Coast you can ease the pressure on the computer by simply loading up part of it - is that right ? A sort of Dorset Coast Lite if you like, but I wonder if this means taking a shorter section of the entire route or simply losing a lot of the detail - any idea where I can find out more ?...

Bit of a misnomer, a mini-route is where a route stands alone from the main MSTS folder. MSTS with its six routes is still required to be installed for registry purposes. See http://www.train-sim.com/howto/miniroutes/mini.htm

John

[thenudehamster]

Thanks Barry

What you're saying is making more and more sense than my own over-ambitious objectives I think - presumably if for the moment, I simply copied the track layout from the SVR (by drawing a sketch from the route plan on the Activity Editor) that can's infringe copyright can it ? Unless they have really messed with the layout, I would have thought it was in the public domain anyway ?

This is one of those thorny not quite black-and-white areas. The track layout of the railway actually belongs to the Severn Valley Railway, but as you can make a representation of it (not a copy) just by looking at it and drawing it there's no infringement issue. With the MSTS add-on, it's a little more difficult, but the same basic rules apply; provided that you don't directly copy the layout from the SVR add-on, but just make an approximate drawing of it, I don't think you infringe copyright, but these areas are very grey legally and I'd hate to think I was giving you bad advice. My own way around it would be to map the line from photos, map sites, etc, and make a reasoned guess as to the track layout; that way, your version is an original creation, and you hold the copyright. If it's not inch-perfect, even better.

[dwgowen5]

Hi Barry

Think I may be OK with the track layout as I now find I have a series of station sketch plans in the same booklet as those for the Wellington-Crewe line I was originally going to begin with. These all date from around 1928 and are not strictly to scale but would be a useful guide. Also I don't have precise diagrams and locations of signals or of station buildings so these are going to have to be from logic, memory or in one or two cases from photographs of similar stations on the GW system, so I think I'm probably clear so far as copyright goes. Going to be quite an uphill climb though.....

Thanks again for the information

Dave

[salopiangrowler]

it took 8 years to do PRR Eastern and that involved joining 3 or 4 routes together.