WCML North

[keithmross]

At last...



but, oh my, is it worth the wait!!

Congratulations to Ben - a real triumph.

Time to resume construction methinks!!

K

[msey0002]

390 looks right at home on your route mate

[Darpor]

It certainly does look at home albeit looking a bit different than it should. I am sure that will be remedied in due course.

[TractorBasher]

At last...

but, oh my, is it worth the wait!!

Now we just have to wait for WCML north to be completed.

[RCH37401]

Looking good Keith!

[JunGRail]

How come its not in Virgin colours

Licensing i guess. Looks great though! More modern stock for Railworks please!!

[trains06]

How long do you think it will be now Kieth?

(Not to rush, of course )

[Darpor]

It will be ready when it is ready Connor.

[trains06]

Sure - I didn't really explain my question well enough. What I meant was where are you progress-wise

[keithmross]

Hi guys,
I've been a bit quiet on this one as I am in a dilema for a few reasons.

I really want to share the route with you, so I may need your views on how to move forward.

One thing that has been bugging me is the large asset depencency list - W&B has demonstrated how much of a problem this can be.
So, I was lookling into packaging some of the more awkward stuff alongside the route to make life easier.
This highlighted a major issue with one particular set of items. The French catenary assets I have used (and have become an essential element) and being redeveloped.
This is good news as I understand the new versions will include LODs and be easier on FPS. However, the updating of this enormous pack will take a while and the new assets will not overwrite the existing ones.
So, do I wait and replace the catenary to improve performance or release the route as it is and force everyone to track these down and suffer the FPS drop or find someone to build some UK based assets?
I would love to build a set of UK catenary types but simply don't have the time (or talent) to get this done.
Does anyone have anything in the pipeline?

The next issue is related to the current state of progress. I have basically stopped work on it - mainly because I've lost a bit of direction and been significantly sidetracked by the Route Building Challenge and consequent work on The Port Road route - which I am enjoying more .
The loss of direction is also a consequence of the GARL project which came to light a few weeks ago. This features a rivet-countingly-accurate reconstruction of Glasgow Central and the lines to the south. Obviously I can't incorporate this wholesale into my route, but I could potentially include assets from it. This potential is still unclear, therefore so am I when it comes to doing the Glasgow area.

While I can do much with the default assets and great freeware items I cannot manage to create Glasgow Central. Nor do I want to waste weeks doing an approximation of the station approaches and throat trackwork to find later that I can eventually use the new payware assets to do it properly.

So, please tell me if you want a beta version that will be awkward to install and possibly run or wait for an unspecified length of time for something more complete.
That is not a sarcastic or retorical question! - I really need to know!

The route is currently 80 miles of completely sceniked mainline from Carlisle (Upperby) to Lanark Junction (north of Carstairs) - including a mile or so long spur of the GSW mainline to Gretna Green. There is also a lot of additional track in place but needs much work and signalling.

Let the debate begin...

Keith

[Horgy]

Keith,

This is a dilemma facing me too. I want to get started but want to create a lot of my own assets. Do you know if the new catenary includes new shape files, or just updates to the existing ones? You could look at renaming the new ones in the package when they are released and fiddling with the xml/bin files so you could drop them in, just bodge the package to work with the existing arrangement.

I haven't looked in detail at the french catenary stuff, can you provide a link? I might be able to bodge some UK catenary together - I need it for a short stretch of the WCML that will be in something i'm working on anyway.

Horgy

[trains06]

Hmmm... Catenary wise you could see what Horgy comes up with and try and get that in there?

On the subject of Glasgow Central could you put together a simple and inaccurate version, same number of platforms, not great scenic wise but somewhere to terminate ?

Alternativley - you could instead go South a bit more to compensate for the lack of Glasgow?

[nobkins]

I think your dilema is one many route builders have difficulties with. I have emailed Matt (UKTrainSim) just after xmas to ask if it would be possible to add an option when users upload files. Something along the lines of a checkbox to say the asset is usable under a GPL agreement (free to user/distribute/modify etc). Then it would be clear which could be used and distributed as a single package.

One of the big frustrations I think many people have is the long list of downloads required for routes etc. This is one of the big bonuses of the Challenge routes as you can install them with the minimal amount of hassle.

I know this has come up before (2006 I think) on the forums about the use of other peoples assets. I haven't found the thread myself but I assume it was along the lines of some users being unhappy about others using their assets.

I am working on the Leeds - Harrogate - York loop with Scarborough Extension. I have not decided what to do about 3rd party assets yet, the GPL agreement option above would make the decision a lot easier.

So... To answer your question. Despite the fact I would love to get my hands on your route I would be tempted to say I would rather wait for an easy to install version. There is the risk with a beta release that is tricky to use that people will be put off and after all the work you have done this would be a real shame.

Can I ask a question. Could a 3rd party asset be modified so that it was named slightly different.
Advantage: This would make it a seperate asset from the original so that when the original was updated your route would not overwrite the 3rd party asset with an older version if installed. (Adds stability to your route and the 3rd party asset)
Disdvantage: Your asset would not be updated with a newer 3rd party one.

To me the advantage outways the disadvantage. What do you think?

[crowman]

Keith,

This is a dilemma facing me too. I want to get started but want to create a lot of my own assets. Do you know if the new catenary includes new shape files, or just updates to the existing ones? You could look at renaming the new ones in the package when they are released and fiddling with the xml/bin files so you could drop them in, just bodge the package to work with the existing arrangement.

I haven't looked in detail at the french catenary stuff, can you provide a link? I might be able to bodge some UK catenary together - I need it for a short stretch of the WCML that will be in something i'm working on anyway.

Horgy

You could try a persuade g0fthick to resurrect his caternery item?

http://forums.uktrainsim.com/viewtopic. ... a&start=30

Paul

[haddock1000]

Keith,

why don't you put out an appeal to everyone to allow you to upload the scenery items with your route, or maybe stick them on a CD, or just put up the list of assets required, and ask for permission? With the french catenary, would it be possible for you to just re-direct the bin/xmls to the default set? Or just put a direct link to the french catenary? Pesonally, relaying the catenary is the better option. As with the GARL issue, why don't you do a different era (they're doing present era, you could do 90s). The route is a great one, and i'll definitely be downloading it, whenever it is released.

thanks,

chaddockdk