Atomic Systems

We all know the main problem with route building is only one person can be laying track/scenary at a time, even if it’s a team project you can’t have more than one person working on the route at the exact same time. I’m no route builder myself but I know of some of the limitations.

I know rs.com are forward thinking and the use of the internet is the way they seem to be going, so perhaps one day we may well see something like a web based repository where users can upload a route and people can work on it at the same time.

Confused? OK, I’ll give an example.

Ok, say a group of 6/7 community route builders and scenary makers decide to go for it and create the WCML Euston – Glasgow incl. Liverpool/Manchester/Holyhead – Crewe all linked.

The group would have their own username and login to the repository were the route is held as you don’t want anyone else editing the route, you can have someone laying track from Euston, someone laying track from Glasgow and someone placing scenary all at the same time whilst logged in!
The technology is there to do this, but obviously Railworks would need some major recoding, but I believe something like this is the way forward. RW needs routes to survive, we want routes to remain interested, but building them is a very slow process.

There are of course set backs to this i.e. costs! But I believe the pro’s far outweigh the con’s! Plus you have the added bonus of backup, knowing you won’t lose your data if your HD fails and you never made any other backups.

We used something similar to this when designing our new system and saved alot of time e-mailing coding and backing up data all over the place etc.
Anyway, just my 2p worth, one for the future!

jimmyshand wrote: Just Trains are doing Exeter to Bristol and as welcome as that will be, again it's an incredibly dull stretch of line with more straight line running and no major features or landmarks outside of the main stations. Exeter to Plymouth or Penzance would be much more scenic and engaging I think.

I disagree with this, the bristol to exeter line is excellent, almost unlimited choice of locomotives can run on it for the purists, the Torbay express and many railtours allows mainline steam and heritage diesel running, and loco hauled trains currently used are 57s and 67s plus dmus, HSTs, Voyagers. a fair bit of Freight is in the area as well.

you've got a few inclines, ok not as tricky as some areas, flat out running across the levels then climbing the hills south. also with WSR included upto bishops lydeard, and exeter, it'll link up nicely with existing free routes. also with bristol temple meads modelled made you can then do a route from didcot to link up with the default oxford/paddington route.

personally i can't wait. it'll be an excellent route!

London Kings Cross - York would be a nice run, preferrably in both a modern and steam era to. There is certainly a certain level of dreamy feeling to it, especially in the steam era, I certainly wouldn't mind running a A4 into Kings Cross. I think alot of railworks people, from the UK, will certainly like that route due to in no part of probably already travelled into Kings cross via modern and even potentially steam era, so certainly be something which would be nice to see.

It would also be nice to see the Seattle to Carlise line to in some format. I always remember the documentaries of it when I was younger and the videos of the A4 4468 running that route in the videos, plus the beautiful long stretched stone bridge which is situated on that route.

crumplezone wrote: It would also be nice to see the Seattle to Carlise line to in some format

Come on, surely that's a bit too ambitious?

pspvoyager220 wrote:

crumplezone wrote: It would also be nice to see the Seattle to Carlise line to in some format

Come on, surely that's a bit too ambitious?

Now what route would that take - Seattle to New York, Trans-Atlantic Tunnel, Liverpool to Preston to Carlisle or the more exotic Seattle via Trans-Pacific Tunnel to Vladivostok, Trans-Siberian Railway, then onto the European high speed network, through the Chunnel, etc, etc.

Alternatively, we could start at the old St Pancras, follow the original Midland mainline with a reversal at Leeds, up the Aire Valley to Settle and then over the big hill to Carlisle.

I would like to see more "steam" pre-Beeching routes, similar to the Bath - Templecombe route, where your driving skill is tested, with plenty wayside stations and goods yards, where local goods and passenger trains can be run.
The big problem with that being that the Scenario Editor is not developed far enough to allow authentic train movements to be carried out, still we can all dream...........................

pdeee wrote:I would like to see more "steam" pre-Beeching routes, similar to the Bath - Templecombe route, where your driving skill is tested, with plenty wayside stations and goods yards, where local goods and passenger trains can be run.
The big problem with that being that the Scenario Editor is not developed far enough to allow authentic train movements to be carried out, still we can all dream...........................

Same here Pat, although my interest would stretch to the steam\diesel change over period as well.

I find modern routes and modern operation, mind numbingly boring.

Dave.

I very much enjoyed reading the different views and preferences in this thread but feel even more inadequate after Vern's comment that:-

bigvern wrote:
It can take well over a month just to detail 20 miles of route to basic freeware standards.

I started a "prototypical" route 3 weeks ago and, working on it around 25 hours a week, I've managed about 3 miles so far. That's using DEM, RWDecal and default (and IOW) assets only. Whilst I would love to see some of the major routes modelled I think a fully scenic version of anything longer than 100 miles is going to be left for the full time developing teams.

Does anyone know how long it took Tim Court to do MidEast? I know it was done in two sections and is quite sparse in places compared to some RW routes. Perhaps an indication of the time required to make a good, long route is MidEast Plus, which has taken around 2 years (and counting) by the looks of it.

ghills wrote:I very much enjoyed reading the different views and preferences in this thread but feel even more inadequate after Vern's comment that:-

bigvern wrote:
It can take well over a month just to detail 20 miles of route to basic freeware standards.

I started a "prototypical" route 3 weeks ago and, working on it around 25 hours a week, I've managed about 3 miles so far.

I'm doing the WCML, so far I have scenery done from Tamworth to Rugby. Still working on Rugby. Total route length so far 26 miles, this has taken up to now 6 months

Paul

I'm quite in favour of smaller routes over the big, long distance mainlines.

One of my all time favourite RW routes is the mighty Port Road. It's a real classic that contains about the right mix of everything you would want in a sim route. It's long enough to be varied and interesting, short enough to enable you to become familiar with it (route knowledge), packed with scenarios for all locos and stock, good scenery and it also achieves that elusive quality of being timeless. By that I mean the scenery and buildings within it are able to suit any era, steam, early diesel and modern traction all look right at home on that route.

More routes like the Port Road would be great. Also the often overlooked Crouch Valley is another corker of a route that never seems to get any attention, very few scenarios ever appeared for that route which is a real shame because it's a cracker.

One thing that really really needs to be addressed for large scale routes, is the lack of good operations simulation in RW.

Specifically, RSDL really needs to fix AI coupling/uncoupling. That alone would allow operations to function reasonably well.

Without the ability to have AI running timetabled services, yard work, station pilots, etc, then large routes are never going to be much fun to drive.

I would like to see the S&D extended to Wimborne and Broadstone, with all those lovely little countryside stations and goods yards...... but very little point in doing that as the Scenario Editor cannot cope with running a simple pickup goods calling at a few stations, leave its train on the main line, shunt the yard, couple up to the train, then repeat at the next station.

pdeee wrote:...the Scenario Editor cannot cope with running a simple pickup goods calling at a few stations, leave its train on the main line, shunt the yard, couple up to the train, then repeat at the next station.

Are you referring specifically to the S&D here? I've written two pick-up goods scenarios without having issues. If anything I was amazed at how it just worked without any problems.

Cheers

Bob

Oldpufferspotter wrote:Hi all,
This is just a thought:
In a prototypical route, would it be acceptable to compress any part of the route? I'm thinking in terms of squeezing long sections of plain track and monotonous scenery into a short section between stations. Or is that a non-starter?
regards Ted.

I agree, whats the point in having to look at the very boring sections, its not a "true" rail simulator is RW where you
must have everything in the route, if people want that then they should buy a true simulator that the Train companies use.

Though the RW (I'm not referring to RS Derek etc) route and other items, programmers are doing a wonderfull job in what they are doing, there is no argument on that at all. Those boring bits could put some people off RW.

by pdeee on 09 Apr 2010 16:26

I would like to see the S&D extended to Wimborne and Broadstone, with all those lovely little countryside stations and goods yards...... .

I second that !!!!

Ken