WCML Over Shap From Keith Ross

[smarty2]

I already practice that anyway with neutral sections, makes it more easy for when the real implementation arrives!

[smarty2]

New vid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQqpKtHxHII

[Anthony061]

New vid.

This is from the description

The clips feature a range of DLC locos and stock

Indeed it does! I counted 25! That amount of DLC can only be dreamt about by teenagers like me
For those whose interested, here's a list (feel free to correct any errors, I'll modify my post to suit)

Class 90/DVT, RSC 37, European Assets, Class 20, 150, Tornado, 86, Settle-Carlisle, Voyager, 325, HST Buffers, 390, 57 Railtour, 142, 70, HHA, 67 Advanced, Freightliner 66 V2, 60, IGA, IWB, VGA/VKA, UK Wagon Pack 01, 153, EWS 66 V2

Anthony

[smarty2]

Not sure about the UKwagon pack 1, that PCA may have come from the settle route? Yes a pretty comprehensive list to be sure, but not necessarily required for the route.

[rosschris10]

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(wipes drool of keyboard)

[smarty2]

Mind you though, if you did have to buy that lot...... It would Brock the bank!!

[johnrossetti]

Cor goodnit. ! a must buy for me, then de-electricfy.

Begs a question this route, taken from another thread (unfinished routes)
As this route is from the same designer as the WCML 1 and has the same station as a start/finish point, I wonder if they could both be joined together using that software that joins two routes. ?
Ive heard all the reasons why routes are not large, but has anyone actually tried to join any routes to make a big one.
I have a very long route called Express Corridor and even on my oldish pc runs just as well as, say, Paddington.
Being a self teacher I have learned much about RW and watched how it calls files using my second monitor and it appears to be area dependent i.e. as you leave Glasgow its not calling files from Carlisle.
Just a thought
John

[Kromaatikse]

The best explanation I've heard is that there's a practical limit on the number of track ribbons, and also the physics starts to lose precision and start jittering once above a certain distance from the origin. So while you *can* make a bigger route, it's not necessarily a good idea. Either of the WCML routes by themselves is already quite close to the limit of available memory.

There is another potential problem: while there is an overlap of perhaps 10 route miles between WCML-N and WCML-Shap (from just south of Carlisle to just north of Gretna Jn), they don't necessarily match very well - they are modelled in slightly different eras, at least, and I suspect that some lessons have been learned over time. The same problem applies if you wanted to tie in Western Lines of Scotland as well, only more severe - the Carlisle area track layout is almost unrecognisably different between the 1960s and the modern day.

[jarmstro]

The best explanation I've heard is that there's a practical limit on the number of track ribbons, and also the physics starts to lose precision and start jittering once above a certain distance from the origin. So while you *can* make a bigger route, it's not necessarily a good idea. Either of the WCML routes by themselves is already quite close to the limit of available memory.

The principle line on the amazing LAV Madrid-Valencia route is almost 400km long. I have never noticed any problems whatsoever with the physics or anything else anywhere on the route? Also, this route calls by far the most custom and default assets of any route I possess. Personally, I think that this route length limit theory is a myth. Very few long routes are available purely because of the sheer amount of time and effort they take to build.

On another note, I must say that this new route by Keith Ross looks absolutely superb. There is something about the way he draws and populates his countryside's that make his routes stand head and shoulders above the rest.

Cheers
John A

[smarty2]

Yes, the NEF route is huge too, no problems running that either, even on my old P.C!

[gypbrc]

Yes but a long route such as a 400km US route may actually have less information held within the track network files than a 100km European route. The signalling information is also held within those files and US routes in general do not have the abundance of TPWS and AWS systems associated with UK route and those similar systems associated with the many European routes. This in addition to the entire network (line type, electrification, superelevation, speed limits, crossovers...) is fully loaded into the memory when scenarios are started. The game loads and checks all of the network and stock before loading any assets.

If you have a track network that's a GB in size that's gonna cause problems for a lot of people.

[ckmemphis]

2 points I'll address here. Firstly, route length isn't a problem for the sim. When a route loads, it's the track network that is loaded mostly into RAM, and of course the scenery of the area you are in. It loads the track networks in for the dispatcher to route trains and your service correctly, so you can have a fairly long range to cover, and you should be fine. How I know this? While I was still a great fan of Northern Europe, it was easy to load a service running from Copenhagen to the north of Germany, with some 700+ km to cover, the route runs as good as Paddington to Oxford. And scenery is one of the best for a freeware route. No physics problems, scenery loading problems or anything. You will actually get think the route never ends, as that is a hell of a long distance to cover, trust me. So to answer your question, yes, it's possible to created the route from Preston to Glasgow. It's just he RAM footprint needed for the track network will be high, and of course, if you load the route up with trains, services, and really do a full timetabled run, middle to high spec computers will be the way to go... If you learn how to use portals to store trains on the route until they needed, you could do a 24 hour system and performance will be as good as Free Roam...

Then, joining the route was found to be possible, but you have to make sure that the start/endpoints, or the joining area are in about an inch of each other. Then you must make sure that scenery placements in the join are spot on. Als take note of the run off areas, like south of Carlisle on WCMLN, and north of Carlisle on WCML Shap. Also remember the routes were created in different technology eras, so the 2 route may not be compatible with reach other, unless you spend months correcting this, aligning things, getting the dispatcher to see things correctly and so on. Where route joining will work, is if one creates a single tile, place track, scenery and so forth. They give 2 people the same tile and let them build north and south of that tile, but not really including that tile in their work... Then, when you have 100miles each way, combine the 2 routes, with the original tile as you middle block, and the 2 routes at each end. This way, you track, scenery and all other aspects will be damn close to perfect... That's in a perfect world...

So to answer your question in simple terms, both setups are possible, but requires a tonnes load of work and dedication to make it work correctly, and even then you not guaranteed success...

[mckenziejames04]

2 points I'll address here. Firstly, route length isn't a problem for the sim. When a route loads, it's the track network that is loaded mostly into RAM, and of course the scenery of the area you are in. It loads the track networks in for the dispatcher to route trains and your service correctly, so you can have a fairly long range to cover, and you should be fine. How I know this? While I was still a great fan of Northern Europe, it was easy to load a service running from Copenhagen to the north of Germany, with some 700+ km to cover, the route runs as good as Paddington to Oxford. And scenery is one of the best for a freeware route. No physics problems, scenery loading problems or anything. You will actually get think the route never ends, as that is a hell of a long distance to cover, trust me. So to answer your question, yes, it's possible to created the route from Preston to Glasgow. It's just he RAM footprint needed for the track network will be high, and of course, if you load the route up with trains, services, and really do a full timetabled run, middle to high spec computers will be the way to go... If you learn how to use portals to store trains on the route until they needed, you could do a 24 hour system and performance will be as good as Free Roam...

Then, joining the route was found to be possible, but you have to make sure that the start/endpoints, or the joining area are in about an inch of each other. Then you must make sure that scenery placements in the join are spot on. Als take note of the run off areas, like south of Carlisle on WCMLN, and north of Carlisle on WCML Shap. Also remember the routes were created in different technology eras, so the 2 route may not be compatible with reach other, unless you spend months correcting this, aligning things, getting the dispatcher to see things correctly and so on. Where route joining will work, is if one creates a single tile, place track, scenery and so forth. They give 2 people the same tile and let them build north and south of that tile, but not really including that tile in their work... Then, when you have 100miles each way, combine the 2 routes, with the original tile as you middle block, and the 2 routes at each end. This way, you track, scenery and all other aspects will be damn close to perfect... That's in a perfect world...

So to answer your question in simple terms, both setups are possible, but requires a tonnes load of work and dedication to make it work correctly, and even then you not guaranteed success...

Well, you know what they say: Better for someone to have tried and failed then not bother trying at all.

[ckmemphis]

Yes but a long route such as a 400km US route may actually have less information held within the track network files than a 100km European route. The signalling information is also held within those files and US routes in general do not have the abundance of TPWS and AWS systems associated with UK route and those similar systems associated with the many European routes. This in addition to the entire network (line type, electrification, superelevation, speed limits, crossovers...) is fully loaded into the memory when scenarios are started. The game loads and checks all of the network and stock before loading any assets.

If you have a track network that's a GB in size that's gonna cause problems for a lot of people.

Fully agree with this... That's why Donner Pass can work with 140miles of track, but Ox-Padd just about makes it on a low end pc... That is also one of the main reasons why it's best to build a route by laying your entire network first, before scenery. As if your network is too big, it's much easier to cut back that way...

[ttjph]

Incidentally, both the 47 and 87 have a surprise feature - which I'm not going to talk about in detail until release. You'll most likely notice it while driving, though.

They also both have a *hidden* surprise feature, which will probably come as a complete surprise to anyone who encounters it - and not everyone will. It is, however, entirely realistic.

I'm really intrigued now!

Is this "hidden" feature more, or less likely (or neither!) to make an appearance to those who try to drive sympathetically and realistically?