Compromises For Long Routes

[RSAdam]

So we could conclude from the last exchange that 100% accurate signalling might be (or need to be) considered some kind of compromise?

Hiya,

While I am not entirely sure what the above question means, I think the compromise in RailWorks is:

• Prototypical operation needs prototypical signalling
• Prototypical signalling needs prototypical knowledge combined with a clear understanding of how to translate that into RailWorks

So if you are having issues with any of the above then you may have issues running prototypical operations on your route. This is totally irrespective of the route length (be it 1 mile or 100 miles long).

Regards

[hertsbob]

Hi

Agree with your comments, Adam. What I meant was that if you can't get 100% accurate signalling information for the route then there has to be a compromise, although of course it would still be possible to recreate prototypical signalling even if every single signal post isn't in precisely the right spot.

Steve - perhaps I should have worded my thoughts last night slightly differently. Personally speaking, if I were to try and build a long route then it would have to be plain green (at least for starters). If I started terrain painting or getting really involved with placing scenery then I just know that I'd get carried away and it would never end!

A very interesting discussion.

Cheers

Bob

[chrisreb]

So we could conclude from the last exchange that 100% accurate signalling might be (or need to be) considered some kind of compromise?

I wonder whether the very nature of the route builder himself (surely there aren't any girls here?) actually dictates the type of route that ends up being built/released? Does it not follow that if you're passionate enough about the route you're creating to be concerned with 100% accurate signalling that you'd also want the route to actually look like the area it was representing as far as possible? - (I'm being 100% rhetorical, Growler).

I am happily coming to terms with the fact that I have a minor(?) mental disorder, in that whatever route I build (admittedly only two so far) I become absolutely immersed in its creation. As an example, I've just spent over 6 hours trying to re-create a canal system which is effectively invisible from the railway... I just know that I couldn't possibly build a route in any other way: I've tried and failed miserably.

Having said all of that, isn't the Danish route >600km long? I confess I've not driven it, but surely 90% of the route isn't 'green'?

Perhaps any compromise should be in the expectations of the downloader? The bottom line is that you could theoretically knock out the entire ECML/WCML etc. etc. etc. in a matter of weeks, but it would have to be flat, featureless and green (unless KeithMRoss is building it, in which case it would be probably perfect! ).

Just a couple of thoughts...

Cheers

Bob

Yes Bob the Danish route is enourmous - and has perfectly adequate scenery for the line - how they did this much scenery is staggering. Obviously a lot of generic assets but enough special items to keep the interest. Great for longer trips plus has lots of offshoots for slightly slower running.

[hertsbob]

Thanks for that, Chris.

On that basis, then, does there need to be any real compromise for long routes? Perhaps it's just a question of slowly slowly catchy monkey, and we're being too impatient?

Cheers

Bob

[RSAdam]

Hiya,

The opening post hit on the subject of patience. In that If long routes are desired, patience is needed. If not, then accuracy would need to be compromised in light of the speed expected of route building. I think it is being suggested that expectation of route production is pressuring the introduction of compromise.
I say it should be left in the hands of the route builders.
Regards

[moranb]

Patience is indeed a virtue - in the case of route building! I have just this evening reached the 83rd. mile of my Dublin-Cork route - exactly half way to Cork. I began building this route in December 2007 - very shortly after RailSimulator first came out. At this rate I will finally reach Cork in early 2013!! Mind you, I only work on the route for a few hours each week as I also have to earn my bread in the daily job.

BFM

[growler37]

Hi
I have managed to download the speed limit diagrams from the Network rail site and very usefull they are,a real eyeopener! the average speed for the Penzance/Plymouth section is 60 mph,that along with the gradiants changing seemingly every few yards,if you want a fast high speed run then the cornish banks is one to avoid,but just with Track and stations laid it is a very enjoyable and challenging route,no chance of getting bored with this one,even though it is sparse on scenery.
so i guess signal placement will have to be guesswork,and a lot of field trips with camera in hand,another problem is Penzance and most other places in cornwall use these single aspect LED signals were the same lamp changes color,to my knowledge RW has not got this type yet,but at least the route has variations in signaling because of the use of semaphores as well as lights.
Regards
Kevin

[TransportSteve]

Steve - perhaps I should have worded my thoughts last night slightly differently. Personally speaking, if I were to try and build a long route then it would have to be plain green (at least for starters). If I started terrain painting or getting really involved with placing scenery then I just know that I'd get carried away and it would never end!

Cheers

Bob

That's very true young man, and as Brendan has just mentioned that as many of you create and build on your own, your spare time is a premium because of your other duties in life. We cannot possibly expect you to be building all day every day, knocking routes out ten to the dozen, although, maybe a few peeps on here think that you should be doing that..

Cheerz. Steve.

[RSderek]

Question is... Will Vern say 'thank you' for fixing his route.
we wait...


regards

Derek

[paulz6]

Question is... Will Vern say 'thank you' for fixing his route.
we wait...


regards

Derek

Nice one Derek. Will you thank him for creating a route in the first place? He has created a few free of charge.
The 101 is looking so good, it is only surpassed by your interpretation of the Bishop. Good work. Do not dismiss an old hand for his contributions though.
We all fight for the future direction!

[RSAdam]

Will you thank him for creating a route in the first place? He has created a few free of charge.

To be fair, when a statement like this is made:

The ongoing operational and AI limitations of RW continue to put route builders off - if the AI and signalling can't work properly on a simple 10 mile tram route, what's the point of building a 150 mile route (regardless of the final scenic standard) if it's not going to work properly with green signals straight on to red, etc. etc.

which turns out to be user error, at least some acknowledgement is in order. Our direct assistance was provided free of charge as well...

Regards

[paulz6]

Will you thank him for creating a route in the first place? He has created a few free of charge.

To be fair, when a statement like this is made:

The ongoing operational and AI limitations of RW continue to put route builders off - if the AI and signalling can't work properly on a simple 10 mile tram route, what's the point of building a 150 mile route (regardless of the final scenic standard) if it's not going to work properly with green signals straight on to red, etc. etc.

which turns out to be user error, at least some acknowledgement is in order. Our direct assistance was provided free of charge as well...

Regards

To be fair Adam, I can see both points of view. After writing scenarios for default routes, I still get signaling problems. Also, after building routes I know that signaling problems exist when not used correctly. Please do stop fighting. I know that is cheek, but I think we can all agree that we want the best out of this simulator.

[RSAdam]

We all fight for the future direction!

Please do stop fighting.

[paulz6]

We all fight for the future direction!

Please do stop fighting.

It looks like I have answered my own question! I stand corrected.

[Acorncomputer]

Hi

Much of the success of a route in operational terms is very much in the hands of the route builder. I am quite competent using the building tools but when it comes to signalling and writing scenarios I do find it very difficult to get things to work correctly, even when signals are correctly located and the scenario is properly written.

The new style scenario tool is very good and does speed up the process but the inability to save during testing, make changes to the scenario after the save point and then go back in to run the faulty section again, means that each scenario needs to be run from the start and on long scenarios it takes a very long time to test again and then perhaps find you have not fixed the fault. On a long route this could be too daunting so some more improvements to the scenario editor here would be welcome. Perhaps also an ability to save a scenario at any number of points in the scenario and then be able to go back and play any one of those saves as and when you wish would also be a huge help.

The ability to add invisible (to the player) waypoints in a scenario is an excellent idea but does require a marker to be on the route in the first place. I am now adding in markers to The Big Layout in as many locations as I can which I hope will help anyone writing a scenario for the route to be able to path their trains more precisely.