Parallel/Gradient track laying issues

[emikob]

I am having difficulty understanding some of the finer points of track laying and would welcome any advice to stop me pulling out my non-existent hair.

Firstly, is there a simple way to create track parallel to existing track?

For example, I already have two lines in parallel and wish to lay a siding. The parallel lines are curved in this particular example.

With the benefit of hindsight, I would have laid three lines at this particular point on the route but I was trying to get the gradients ironed out before getting involved in the complexities of yard work.

I've messed around trying to add the singular line adjacent to the parallel lines but it doesn't seem so exact (maybe this isn't an exact science though).

I've also tried deleting one of the parallel lines and then laying two lines but I can never seem to get the mouse pointer attached to the rightmost track (the one adjacent to the track I'm trying to follow), it always attaches itself to the leftmost one. The notion here was that the snap to track feature would line up the rightmost track and then the left would be suitably parallel.

The above issue is again problematic if I delete the parallel track and try to lay three lines; again I can't select the middle or rightmost track for the mouse.

The second issue that I have is that I can't seem to create additional gradient markers.

Again having laid a length of track, I can select the gradient tool and I get the yellow vertical arrows at the end of the tracks and this allows me to alter the incline. Left-clicking the mouse button at any point between these two markers doesn't generate a new marker as I believe it should.

Any advice on either issue would be most welcome.

[bigvern]

As no one else has responded...

There is no way to lay parallel track lofts - the facility was in the very first version of RS, but the resultant sections couldn't form part of the track network and rather than upgrade it so they could the feature was withdrawn in the first patch. You just have to eyeball it, I'm afraid.

I've never used the gradient tool myself and believe it should be approached with some caution, as it has the ptential to affect all your track network, which cannot be undone. Better to set the gradients correctly at the track laying stage.

[Acorncomputer]

Hi

Generally as Vern says.

With regard to adding additional gradient markers, you should find that in addition to the auto created markers at the ends of each track section, running the cursor along the track should produce an extra yellow marker that you can fix by left clicking. That marker can then be manipulated up and down by moving over it until it turns red, left click and hold and then move it up or down.

Particularly as Vern says, add markers to any loft (track, roads, fences, etc) with extreme caution. Adding one gradient marker and moving it upwards, for example, can lead to the whole network rising as well and the undo button does not work. You may need to install your latest back up to get you back to where you were otherwise there may be a great deal of work to re-instate the track bit by bit.

Before doing anything like this, try it out on some test track first. You can prevent the problem by either adding further gradient markers as stop points either side of the section you are working on or you can cut the track either side of the track you are working on and then re-join it when you have finished mucking around.

Two Points -

Experiment on test track first
Make sure you back up - preferably the whole RailWorks folder - on a very regular basis.

[hertsbob]

As Vern has said, it's generally a matter of trial and error and laying the track by eye.

You may find that you can lay the siding from the other end to get the mouse pointer to attach to the correct track, laying two parallel tracks with one over-laying the main line. Although you'd then need to delete the track that is now sitting on top of your main line to just leave the new siding in place. I've used this method in the past and generally only try it for very short distances until I've got the beginnings of my siding so that I can then lay the remaining yard from that.

(Bear in mind you'd also need to reverse the gradients if you're coming from the other direction)

Could you not simply lay the siding on the wrong side of the main lines and then move it over to the other side once you're happy with the curvature?

Regarding the gradients query, definitely lay the track using the correct gradients in the first place. The only time I recall not having been able to add gradient points to lofts is when I have a decal on the ground.

It is possible to use the gradient point arrows to produce good results but it can be extremely stressful. As long as you set a 'break point' as Geoff said it usually works OK.

Another method of avoiding using gradient points (using your example of a siding) is to lay the end of the siding first at the correct height (which you can amend in the right-hand flyout window). You can then alter the gradients whilst laying the rest of the siding and usually after a couple of attempts you can get it to the point where the snap to track will join up to your end piece.

I echo the comments made about backing-up! Equally, if I find myself having a struggle with laying an area of trackwork I'll always make sure I save as often as possible (usually after every single piece has been laid) - and if it all goes hideously wrong don't forget that if you're running in a window you can close RW by closing the window, at which point you can elect not to save changes to the route. Re-load RW and then you'll be back where you were before it messed up!

Sorry about the rambling nature of this post - it's really hard to explain!

Cheers

Bob

[Acorncomputer]

There you are emikob, some good advice from people who have learned the hard way

[emikob]

Many thanks to all of you for the detailed response.

I've already encountered the full (side) effects of raising gradients markers

The approach I had originally hoped to take was to lay out the triangular section between Wellingborough Station, the old Wellingborough London Road Station, and the intersection of the main line to London and the old L&NWR Northampton to Peterborough branch flatish and then adjust the gradients via gradient markers.

One thing I did notice with specifying gradients per track section was that I always had to lay tracks uphill, never downhill since I couldn't find a way to stipulate a decline if I was heading in a downhill direction. Is there a way to do this? I tried -122 (for example) but no joy.

For those interested, I'm laying the old L&NWR Northampton to Peterborough Branch between Wellingborough London Road & Thrapston. I'm also including part of the Kettering, Thrapston and Huntingdon Branch between Thrapston and Raunds, and the Higham Ferrers Branch via Rushden. The main line south of Wellingborough only goes as far as Irchester.

This gives me the option to extend at a later date to Northampton St John's, Peterborough, Huntingdon, Kettering, and down to Bedford, and include the Oakley/Northampton line as well (all in good time though).

It'll include the Irthlingborough Ironworks, numerous brick and tile works, and a number of ironstone quarries that existed in the area.

There were numerous flour mills in the area and the line followed the course of the River Nene navigation for much of the distance.

It's based around 1900 since it's an historical project and I'd estimate 24 months, or more to complete, I'm in no rush.

The quarries used narrow gauge, with one using an underground electric system which I hope to model as well.

I don't think there's an issue with mixing standard and narrow gauges on the same route. As I understand it, this should be feasible as long as there is no direct connection.

However if someone has run into any issues with this sort of setup, I'd be very interested to hear your experiences.

I heed the advice concerning backing up the route on regular basis, I'm using Acronis for this

Many thanks once again.

[Acorncomputer]

One thing I did notice with specifying gradients per track section was that I always had to lay tracks uphill, never downhill since I couldn't find a way to stipulate a decline if I was heading in a downhill direction. Is there a way to do this? I tried -122 (for example) but no joy.

Putting a minus figure in before laying a section of track should make it fall away from your track laying starting point. Check again that this is not happening (Note that snap to terrain will override this so make sure that is not set).

I don't think there's an issue with mixing standard and narrow gauges on the same route. As I understand it, this should be feasible as long as there is no direct connection.

There is no problem with this at all. The Big Layout has a completely separate narrow gauge section. You can only jump in a free roam scenario from narrow gauge to standard or vice versa if very close to the two locos or start off the free roam on either section. You cannot jump from standard to narrow or vice versa in a standard scenario yet.

Your route sounds excellent.

[hertsbob]

Hi

The route sounds very interesting, especially with the mix of narrow gauge and standard. Very best of luck. I don't believe there's any issue with having a mix of the two gauges, but I've never done it personally so will leave this bit to others who are more knowledgeable. [edit - and there's already been one who has replied]

The approach I had originally hoped to take was to lay out the triangular section... flatish and then adjust the gradients via gradient markers.

This is possible, the one time I found I had no option other than using the gradient markers was whilst I was building a triangular junction on a steep gradient, although I think you'd be better off laying the first tracks with the right gradient so you've got your start and end heights sorted out. It's then easier to marry up the other sides of the triangle with this.

You should be able to enter a negative gradient value in order to lay track down hill. The first thing that springs to mind is that perhaps you may have changed direction at the same time as entering your negative value, which would actually result in the negative gradient being cancelled out. Not sure what other reason there might be for this.

Good luck anyway and I look forward very much to seeing your underground electric narrow gauge line!

Cheers

Bob

[further edit] Snap to terrain is a big no-no in my humble opinion, although I would have thought that if you had this switched on you'd be asking questions as to why your track sometimes points up in the air at peculiar angles!

[Acorncomputer]

Yes, snap to terrain is asking for trouble normally.

Depending on whether you are trying to match DEM data or not, you could lay your triangular section to the specified gradients in mid-air and bring the terrain up to match it afterwards using the magnet tool. It does depend on the circumstances, but this might be the best solution at times.

[emikob]

Regarding snap-to-terrain, the main issue that I recalled having when laying parallel track with this feature turned on was that height wise across the beds, they weren't parallel on a slanting slope or so it seemed to me.

I'll recheck the negative gradient setting since clearly it should have worked.

Thanks for all the advice, no doubt I'm be asking many more questions in the near future.

[OrpheusRocker]

Pretty much all the advice offered in this thread is gold.
I just thought I'd point to some of my ramblings on the subject of gradient markers.

http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/s ... ?t=1103049

[class43HS125]

HI,

Firstly, is there a simple way to create track parallel to existing track?

Simple answer, yes. Copy and paste it. Select the track section you want to copy and use the copy and past icons on the top left fly out. The new track will be both parallel to and at the same height as the original. Then move the new track to the required track spacing and all is well

I would certainly go along with all the "Use with Caution" comments regarding the Gradient Tool. Powerful and dangerous.

I find one slight technicality with gradients. Once the track is laid, anytime the track section is highlighted and the track info appears, the gradient is just a number and does not indicate +or - which causes me slight confusion when returning to work on a section of track at a later date.

Ross
NZ

[hertsbob]

I just thought I'd point to some of my ramblings on the subject of gradient markers.
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/s ... ?t=1103049

I thought your cautionary tales post was very good, although quite how you managed to drop all the track underground will have to remain a mystery! I also think the points Ross made and your suggestion regarding the gradient information displays are very well made. For example, I've more than once had to lay a stretch of track at, say, 1/650 and then zoom alongside the end of it to see whether the track I was lining up with was ascending or descending. It sounds daft, but it can actually be a problem. Just the addition of a '-' sign would be a great benefit.

In respect of the flags showing information regarding the change of gradient; this would be awesome. It could also pave the way/be coupled with the ability to include dynamic gradient signs into routes. I fail to see the point in marking out each mile in a route with a manually amended mile-post if I am unable to add something as fundamental as a gradient sign. I digress...

If there's a top tip in this thread then surely it is this:
If you make a mistake when laying track or if a gradient-change goes awry, and 'undo' starts to go wrong (and it will) - just close the RailWorks window. If you're asked if you want to save any changes then the answer is most definitely NO!!! This way - coupled with regular saves - you'll only lose 10-15 minutes of work, rather than inadvertently destroying weeks' of work.

Copy and paste it.

Doh! Slaps forehead... Can't believe I didn't think of this!

There's a couple of caveats I can think with doing this however:
1) If you're copying and pasting on a curve, then the resulting paste will either be too tight if you're outside the curve, or too wide if you're inside the curve. However, the pasted track will aide your freehand line and when you get to a point in the curve you don't like, start laying track from there where you do want it - it'll form a junction - and delete the portion of the original track you don't want any more. RW track-laying seems to be about laying far too much to start with and then removing the rubbish. The natural human tendency is to build things up and RW just doesn't work like that. It's the opposite!

2) Pasting works well for single tracks, but try doing 15 and you'll find that each subsequent paste is lower than the one before. Because of this you'll need to manually adjust the track height. If you hold the cursor over the end of the first piece of pasted track it shows you the height at the bottom of the screen. Double-click the next piece of track in the same place (i.e. at the end) and there's a flyout box on the right hand side of the screen.

Overwrite the 'Y' value with that of the first track height and your second piece will leap into the air to match the original. OK then, it will move upwards slightly! Repeat the process ad nauseam and the job's done: your 15 tracks are all at the same level. I've found this method to be particularly useful laying yards on gradients.

The gradient tool is most certainly to be treated with the utmost respect! Don't forget you can Ctrl-click more than one gradient marker, so you can move more than one track up and down as one. Also, if you're 'cutting' track, holding the left mouse button and semi-dragging enables you to cut multiple track at exactly the same place, so know exactly where your end-points are.

This is part of the triangular junction I've mentioned before - all laid using gradient markers - the lines drop away to the right and climb to the left.


Same again whilst editing.


Blimey, that went on a bit!

Bob