Atomic Systems

Squatch wrote:

alanch wrote:

Squatch wrote:Right - my line is Leeds to Wetherby, so possibly a little close for comfort.

Think I'll do the sensible thing and use it on my next project (though that was going to be in Lincolnshire, not much use for accurate DEM there I suppose!!!)

Leeds to Wetherby works fine - that's where I have been testing it, for a 1950s version. The 'trench' is just north of Harrogate and Knaresborough.

Ah cool, how far have you got? I've done all the trackwork and some scenery from Cross Gates to Wetherby and a little way towards Thorpe Arch. I've managed to accumulate quite a bit of reference material, including track diagrams and gradients, and quite a few photo's. I'm currently stalled on the scenery, and really don't fancy the signalling, but I'll pick it back up soon, what with the nights drawing in! PM me if you are missing anything and I'll see if I can help, would be good to compare. If you're interested, I'll put some screenshots up, there's a real old thread about it somewhere in here that I'll update.

Matt

Hi Matt

My only progress to date is making the terrain with the new DEM data, and creating a marker in Google Earth for Wetherby to Harrogate. I think my next step will be to buy RW Decal and then play it by ear. I'd really like to extend my ambitions to the Leeds Northern line, and the branch to Otley and the Burley in Wharfedale triangle - and that would lead on to Ilkley and Bolton Abbey and . . . . . If I need anything, I'll be in touch - thanks for the offer.

With a bit of luck, the files will be approved tomorrow morning.

I've had to re-upload them by FTP with a new Readme that includes Ordnance Survey copyright information, so the file numbers have changed.

Invalid File ID [24872]

Invalid File ID [24873]

Invalid File ID [24874]

Hi

Heartfelt thanks to Alan and the others of you have helped to put these files together.

Well done indeed and thanks again.

Cheers

Bob

Hi Matt

My only progress to date is making the terrain with the new DEM data, and creating a marker in Google Earth for Wetherby to Harrogate. I think my next step will be to buy RW Decal and then play it by ear. I'd really like to extend my ambitions to the Leeds Northern line, and the branch to Otley and the Burley in Wharfedale triangle - and that would lead on to Ilkley and Bolton Abbey and . . . . . If I need anything, I'll be in touch - thanks for the offer.

No problem - I've bits and pieces for the Harrogate bit from Wetherby (including the gradient profile I think), and I'll keep hold of anything else I find for that side of things. I've used RW Decal quite a lot - it does make things a lot easier (in my opinion), it'll be good to see the next iteration where you can hide the decals for a minute to see what you're painting!

Like hertsBob said, a big thanks to all those who helped to get these working

The DEM files are now approved, and in the library - links above.

Many thank to all that produced the new data.

First impressions are very favourable, though I had to do a reinstall because I was a muppet and accidentally terraformed too close to my existing route.

Thanks very much to everyone involved, its clearly a great improvement.

Hello

Great work Alan and Colin, I'll be using this DEM info in my RBC2 entry
Thanks also to Longbow for finding the release

Cheers

Mundo

Just want to add my thanks to the guys who have persevered with this.

Well done!

Wow. This stuff makes a massive difference. The terrain is definitely more defined.

I've been re-dem'ing the Woodhead route, and comparing the edges between new DEM and old DEM is very revealing. There are points along this edges which match exactly. At other points along the edge the difference can be several meters (and definitely tree top height through forests). This is both good and bad. I always thought the general terrain was either to low or to high in places when following a gradient profile before, so hopefully this data will rectify this issues. Those with existing routes might find that the trackbed is not were they would like it to be!

I've come across a terrain 'ridge' rather than 'trench' along the longitude -2 E-W boundary running N-S, just west of Dinting. It's the first flaw I've found from east of Sheffield on the way to Manchester. Shame, but it is worth patching up. The definitions of the valleys, and the various ravines feeding into them is simply breathtaking.

paulz6 wrote:I've come across a terrain 'ridge' rather than 'trench' along the longitude -2 E-W boundary running N-S, just west of Dinting. It's the first flaw I've found from east of Sheffield on the way to Manchester. Shame, but it is worth patching up. The definitions of the valleys, and the various ravines feeding into them is simply breathtaking.

I thought I'd seen a problem with the data there when I merged the files in Microdem to see if I had complete coverage, but I couldn't reproduce it. Looks like you have run into the same problem. I hope that quality of the rest of the DEM makes up for it - it already sounds like it does.

If i remove my existing hgt file with my dem data on it then replace with the new will this affect any thing , i know some adjustments will be needed, but is this data that much better?

If you use these new files then yes your terrain will shift slightly because the new data is higher resolution and more accurate. The change will likely be more pronounced in steep hills and valleys. It may leave track and scenery away from ground level, and of course you will need to redo any changes you made to the terrain, including embankments and cuttings.

If your route is well advanced then all this is probably more trouble than it's worth. However if you are starting out I would certainly try the new DEM files and enjoy the better quality terrain - my shots at the start of this thread illustrate.

If you are going to experiment on an existing route then remember to take a back-up copy before starting as there is no Undo for the T key!