RealRailway (RRW) - Development and Support

noahclem · July 06, 2014, 09:05:38 AM

I don't think Willy ever made up his mind on whether QTR would be one-tile with a bit of overhang or a two-tile setup as you've shown. The two-tile approach has the obvious benefit of increased capacity while one-tile would have at best a marginally increased capacity using DIPs. I think either approach would work well but the one-tile would be a little easier to implement.

As far as making more complicated rail interchanges possible the biggest need would be the 7.5m draggable elevated RRW Willy had started on. He seemed to have made some pretty good progress on it, including STR, but making models to fit RRW minicurves, in addition to everything else, makes that a pretty big project. Hopefully next time he shows up he'll share a couple pics of it.

memo · July 06, 2014, 09:34:51 AM

Quote from: noahclem on July 06, 2014, 09:05:38 AM
[...]but making models to fit RRW minicurves, in addition to everything else, makes that a pretty big project.[...]

Personally, I wouldn't need viaduct curves, as I use viaducts (both road and rail) almost exclusively for overpasses, and my impression is that most people use them that way, too. It would be a pity if such projects fail because of advanced models (and the lack thereof) in preference to basic functionality.

eggman121 · July 10, 2014, 12:36:21 AM

Quote from: memo on July 06, 2014, 09:34:51 AM
Personally, I wouldn't need viaduct curves, as I use viaducts (both road and rail) almost exclusively for overpasses, and my impression is that most people use them that way, too. It would be a pity if such projects fail because of advanced models (and the lack thereof) in preference to basic functionality.

That is my impression also. I don't think there are many RL instances where switches or turnouts are elevated. Bridges for rail already have there problems due to the rolling stock going over it and the forces that come with it.

Anyway speaking of turnouts here is my progress on the B2 long turnout wired up...

By no means complete but almost there.

-eggman121

art128 · July 10, 2014, 02:21:20 AM

I'm liking what I'm seeing.

Gugu3 · July 10, 2014, 02:53:05 AM

This is beautiful eggman!

FrankU · July 10, 2014, 10:58:38 AM

fefenc · July 10, 2014, 11:23:49 AM

Amazing, can't wait for NAM 33

noahclem · July 10, 2014, 01:44:46 PM

Beautiful work

I'd agree on the elevated rail stuff. A very basic set of L1 pieces would be a huge improvement. And unless on-slope pieces were still able to placed adjacent to the network being crossed in a draggable setup I'd prefer it be puzzle piece-based. A Flex piece could work for a crossing many different kinds of networks with out having a huge number of conventional puzzle pieces.

Kuewr665 · July 10, 2014, 10:21:22 PM

On all high traffic railways I know of, turnouts are grade separated at interchanges so that two busy tracks do not cross, so I agree that viaduct curves are realistic. I think L1 STR viaduct pieces would work well.

isii94 · July 11, 2014, 07:21:16 PM

I had another problem with LHD paths not showing up. This problem applied to STR as the paths are missing in "RealRailway_LHD.dat". There is an easy fix though:
Open RealRailway_Networks_STR.dat in ilives Reader and select all path files (this can be done by the filter tool). Then clone these files incrementing the first digit of the Instance by 2. Save the file and you're done.

----------

And for something completely different:

Is there an ID range I could use for this QTR project? I don't want it conflicting with any other things.

Indiana Joe · July 11, 2014, 07:51:09 PM

Quote from: isii94 on July 11, 2014, 07:21:16 PM
I had another problem with LHD paths not showing up. This problem applied to STR as the paths are missing in "RealRailway_LHD.dat". There is an easy fix though:
Open RealRailway_Networks_STR.dat in ilives Reader and select all path files (this can be done by the filter tool). Then clone these files incrementing the first digit of the Instance by 2. Save the file and you're done.

----------

And for something completely different:

Is there an ID range I could use for this QTR project? I don't want it conflicting with any other things.

There was a patch for that too floating around somewhere. Glad you figured it out.

The NAM team likes to keep a tight hold on its transit IID ranges so that things don't get disorganized; if you PM one of the senior members they can give you a range within the experimental range. The first step I think would be to learn RUL-2 code if you plan on starting an override network from scratch.

(Good luck; I haven't had the determination to go very far with it yet)

jdenm8 · July 11, 2014, 08:46:27 PM

Quote from: Indiana Joe on July 11, 2014, 07:51:09 PM
There was a patch for that too floating around somewhere.

Here. https://db.tt/eYYUaVUG

builder · July 12, 2014, 02:38:15 PM

Those catenaries, are they made automatically when you drag rail with the RRW? Or is this some downloaded version the modder is using in the pictures?

eggman121 · July 12, 2014, 03:10:02 PM

Quote from: builder on July 12, 2014, 02:38:15 PM
Those catenaries, are they made automatically when you drag rail with the RRW? Or is this some downloaded version the modder is using in the pictures?

The catenaries are an extra to the RRW but are still under development. There is no release package available nor is there a timeline for completion.

I'm just using pictures to keep people in the loop of current development.

Thanks for your interest in my work.

-eggman121

builder · July 13, 2014, 05:10:36 AM

Quote from: eggman121 on July 12, 2014, 03:10:02 PM
Quote from: builder on July 12, 2014, 02:38:15 PM
Those catenaries, are they made automatically when you drag rail with the RRW? Or is this some downloaded version the modder is using in the pictures?

The catenaries are an extra to the RRW but are still under development. There is no release package available nor is there a timeline for completion.

I'm just using pictures to keep people in the loop of current development.

Thanks for your interest in my work.

-eggman121

I gotta say, your work looks very good!

eggman121 · July 15, 2014, 11:33:11 PM

Quote from: builder on July 13, 2014, 05:10:36 AM
I gotta say, your work looks very good!

Thanks. Its quite a bit of work but I am battling along with this project.

To give a status update here is what is possible with the current progress....

Yep. Soon complex setups with catenaries will be possible. Can you name the puzzle pieces in this setup?

the puzzle pieces are proving to be real pains but one by one I am slowly completing them.

-eggman121

Gugu3 · July 16, 2014, 02:29:35 AM

Wonderful!

art128 · July 16, 2014, 08:55:16 AM

I am exited. I hope you'll release a beta version before the full release. I'll be glad to test it.

What's the status on Uki's work? Do you still get in touch with him about the overhead lines? He hasn't posted news on his website for a while.

isii94 · July 17, 2014, 03:22:40 PM

A small update from me:

Today I got the reply from Tarkus for a IID range, so I started creating the models.
When trying to test my progress I ran into a problem:
In the reader everything looks fine

When attempting to drag the network, I get the right preview (the T intersection is the "starter piece")

And then I get this weird result

Trains can drive on that, though

----
Other than that I started creating textures for some smooth curves:

eggman121 · July 17, 2014, 04:01:25 PM

I think the problem is that the preview has the correct IIDs for the texture but the base has not. I'd double check your IIDs for the draggable set textures.

It looks like you need an alpha channel on your textures as well unless the texture set is the End rail texture which I can see in one of your images. Also the RRW is model based so I would also check that your textures are on S3Ds.

Nice work by the way

-eggman121