Menu

LEX File Exchange EA Support Files
SC4 Wikipedia Network Addon Mod
Dependencies Chat

Author Topic: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue  (Read 76043 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Swordmaster

  • Global Moderator
  • Forums Guru
  • *
  • Posts: 2606
  • Reputation: 23
  • Railways move the world!
  • CL:
    Puffing Billy
Re: NAM Poll: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #40 on: March 16, 2013, 04:09:59 PM »
I'd go with option 1. I would like to see it with no pavers in betweeen, and wouldn't mess around too much with supporting pillars to make it consistent with the rest of el rail over road.

However, if you'd like to go with something more realistic, I'd like to offer my support in modelling those. Personally, I'd like to see something like this in game and would lean toward that kind of solution:  http://bit.ly/13Q6HIx

It would be great to have more transit modelers, especially a talented one like you. However, keep in mind transit models have a maximum polygon count that's much lower than normal BATs, so something like the EL on Broadway will be very tough to represent.

(Note: you need to use URL instead of FTP in the bbcode.)


Cheers
Willy

Offline z

  • BSC Team
  • Forums Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4866
  • Reputation: 26
    • RTMT World Headquarters
  • CL: Detailman!
Re: NAM Poll: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #41 on: March 17, 2013, 04:27:42 AM »
As for the narrow sidewalks, RTMT has had to work with worse than that.  I think we can get full standard stations in there, with just a little overhang for some of the bus shelters.

Could you please explain this to me. I don't recognize the connection between the sidewalks and RTMT, currently. $%Grinno$%

Well, the sidewalks are where all the RTMT props go.  If they're too narrow, there's not room for the major props, such as the bus shelters and the subway stairs.  We ran up against this in some of the NWM networks.

Offline memo

  • NAM Team
  • Forums Parliamentarian
  • *
  • Posts: 1767
  • Reputation: 34
  • I like onions.
  • CL: RULin' RULin' RULin'
Re: NAM Poll: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #42 on: March 17, 2013, 07:31:29 AM »
Oh, that's what you were talking about. I should have made clearer the fact that the sidewalks themselves are props on these puzzle pieces rather than base textures. The good news is that I managed to make them slop-friendly – thanks to BuddyBud – and wealth-dependent.






Personally, I'd like to see something like this in game and would lean toward that kind of solution:  http://bit.ly/13Q6HIx

I was puzzled when I noticed that 10 meters further those pylons have suddenly turned teal. :P

For the time being, I am going to stick with something that blends in with the existing network types. The pylons can be replaced easy enough, later on. I am sure these would look quite pretty.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2013, 07:36:52 AM by memo »

Offline gn_leugim

  • Forums Parliamentarian
  • *
  • Posts: 1145
  • Reputation: 4
  • EHA - Making houses for eUro!
  • CL:      ★★ SC4 ★★ General Contractor
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #43 on: April 05, 2013, 04:25:28 AM »
it looks nice, i'm glad you considered the "textures" and their wealth too. on a side not, what a ride must be down hill on that rails XD

Offline memo

  • NAM Team
  • Forums Parliamentarian
  • *
  • Posts: 1767
  • Reputation: 34
  • I like onions.
  • CL: RULin' RULin' RULin'
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #44 on: April 30, 2013, 03:19:43 AM »
on a side not, what a ride must be down hill on that rails XD

Hehe, at least it is possible in principle. ;)




During the last weeks, I have been very busy and did not have any chance to continue this project. Now, I resumed and completed the modeling - after redoing some of the models three or four times until I was pleased. There's more to come on the weekend.



Offline RickD

  • Forums Parliamentarian
  • *
  • Posts: 1848
  • Reputation: 1
  • D'oh!
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #45 on: April 30, 2013, 03:33:13 AM »
It looks spectacular!   &apls
I hope there will be a GLR in AVE to El-Rail over Ave transition piece.  ;)
My name is Raphael.
Visit my MD: Empire Bay (My old MD: Santa Barbara County)

Offline rooker1

Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #46 on: April 30, 2013, 05:06:34 AM »
This does look very impressive. Great work!

Robin
Call me Robin, please.

Offline ivo_su

  • Forums Senator
  • *
  • Posts: 727
  • Reputation: 0
  • Master of Regional Development and Management
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #47 on: April 30, 2013, 06:07:39 AM »
I totally agree that this is a really impressive project. Concept, design and implementation are very high level. My only request to you is a memo if you can replace those piles with beautiful and more volume cylindrical. That should not be too difficult if you have the appropriate models of props. I guess with T'21 mod would become perfect, right?

Offline Gugu3

  • Forums Parliamentarian
  • *
  • Posts: 1195
  • Reputation: 1
  • Rock on!
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #48 on: April 30, 2013, 09:54:38 AM »
Exciting stuff!!! &aplsgreat work!

Offline gn_leugim

  • Forums Parliamentarian
  • *
  • Posts: 1145
  • Reputation: 4
  • EHA - Making houses for eUro!
  • CL:      ★★ SC4 ★★ General Contractor
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #49 on: April 30, 2013, 05:41:14 PM »
so far, so (very) good  &apls

Offline memo

  • NAM Team
  • Forums Parliamentarian
  • *
  • Posts: 1767
  • Reputation: 34
  • I like onions.
  • CL: RULin' RULin' RULin'
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #50 on: May 05, 2013, 06:01:46 PM »
I hope there will be a GLR in AVE to El-Rail over Ave transition piece.  ;)

This is definitely on my list. ;)

My only request to you is a memo if you can replace those piles with beautiful and more volume cylindrical. That should not be too difficult if you have the appropriate models of props. I guess with T'21 mod would become perfect, right?

Indeed, it is quite easy to replace the models. However, I will keep the default pylons for the time being because they fit to the rest of the El-Rail tracks.



Thanks for your replies. As promised I have more to show now.

(click)


These are little monsters and caused me quite a headache. :'(


They are not functional yet, because the paths are still missing, which still means a lot of work.

Any suggestions as to where the pylons should be placed, ideally?

« Last Edit: May 05, 2013, 06:04:40 PM by memo »

Offline z

  • BSC Team
  • Forums Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4866
  • Reputation: 26
    • RTMT World Headquarters
  • CL: Detailman!
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #51 on: May 05, 2013, 07:06:56 PM »
These are little monsters and caused me quite a headache. :'(

Oh, but the Sims are going to have so much fun traveling around and around on them. ;D

Quote
Any suggestions as to where the pylons should be placed, ideally?

Well, to look realistic, and also to resemble RL, it would seem that having the pylons right at the intersections, for whichever of the two network styles your using, would make the most sense.  For something like the upper left corner, making the supports extra wide and on both sides of the intersection, joining in a single support just under or slightly beyond the track should do it.

For the lower right corner, a wider-type pylon starting in the center lane and going out to meet the el rail would seem to make sense.  These would have to be on both sides of the intersection, and the two structures would meet with a single support just under or slightly beyond the track.  Or the method used in the previous paragraph would work equally well and look fine, and would be good if you wanted to limit your number of support structures (which you probably do).

For the four-way intersection such as at the bottom of the picture, using the wide-style supports on all four corners of the intersection, with each support sharing a pylon with its neighbor, should work out well.  The three-way intersections would have a three-way version of this.

Offline memo

  • NAM Team
  • Forums Parliamentarian
  • *
  • Posts: 1767
  • Reputation: 34
  • I like onions.
  • CL: RULin' RULin' RULin'
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #52 on: May 06, 2013, 07:38:34 AM »
Thanks for the quick response, Steve. If I understood you correctly, this is what you suggest:


(1)

I thought the same, but the following slightly rotated option comes to mind as well:


(2)

This one would look interesting, too:


(3)

For the three- and four-way intersections, – opposed to your suggestion – this is what I had in mind:


(4)

It's the same as yours for the RD-4, but differs for the Avenue-type, because the Avenue-pylons would have to be ultra-wide.

Also, in the first picture of my previous post, would you similarly place pylons directly next to the 2x2 tile intersections? It would be contrary to the way Maxis positioned the pylons, though, but the elevated heavy-rail pieces and alternate el-rail already have a similar look.

Offline z

  • BSC Team
  • Forums Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4866
  • Reputation: 26
    • RTMT World Headquarters
  • CL: Detailman!
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #53 on: May 06, 2013, 08:43:40 PM »
Thanks for the quick response, Steve. If I understood you correctly, this is what you suggest...

Yes, that's basically it.

Quote
I thought the same, but the following slightly rotated option comes to mind as well...

You generally don't see these in RL, though.  I think one of the reasons for that is that the straight version supports a bigger cross section of the track, thereby providing more support.

Quote
This one would look interesting, too:


(3)

Yes, radial supports are not uncommon in a situation like this.  But for symmetry, and to add a little more support on the curve, I would suggest a second support, originating at the same point at the lower left, but then going to the corresponding point on the right.  This type of dual radial support is fairly common.

Quote
For the three- and four-way intersections, – opposed to your suggestion – this is what I had in mind:


(4)

It's the same as yours for the RD-4, but differs for the Avenue-type, because the Avenue-pylons would have to be ultra-wide.

The problem with this arrangement is that you've got a whole lot of track with very little support.  I would take the support you have on the left and move it a little to the right so that it's inside the inner tile, and then I would make it even a little longer.  Yes, it's ultra-wide then, but I think this type of intersection calls for that.  I would then do the same with the avenue support, and then duplicate this on the other two sides, with the supports meeting up in each corner.  Not only do you have much better support for your el rail, but the supports are perfectly symmetrical, in the form of a square, and the same layout can be used regardless of whether you have an avenue or an RD-4 underneath, or even a combination, as you display.  The three-way intersections would look the same, except with the supports only on three sides.  The supports really should be dictated primarily by the rail load, and only secondarily by the type of road.

Considering the large of amount of track in that intersection, you might want to consider an 'X' support joining the four corner pylons I suggested and crossing in the center.  We don't want to take risks with our Sims! $%Grinno$%

Quote
Also, in the first picture of my previous post, would you similarly place pylons directly next to the 2x2 tile intersections? It would be contrary to the way Maxis positioned the pylons, though, but the elevated heavy-rail pieces and alternate el-rail already have a similar look.

Yes, I think that this would make more sense, and it would look better when combined with the support for intersections that we've been talking about.  That would also mean that in picture (3) above, if you follow my advice, you would have straight supports right at the tile boundary in addition to the two radial supports.  This is not uncommon, as curves do tend to need extra support.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2013, 10:33:56 PM by z »

Offline memo

  • NAM Team
  • Forums Parliamentarian
  • *
  • Posts: 1767
  • Reputation: 34
  • I like onions.
  • CL: RULin' RULin' RULin'
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #54 on: May 07, 2013, 09:28:44 AM »
So you say that (2) is very uncommon in RL, but (3) is common? Both of them are kind of radially. And actually, I was in favour of (2) because, to me, it looks most stable without an unnecessary large accumulation of pylons. ;D

Yes, radial supports are not uncommon in a situation like this.  But for symmetry, and to add a little more support on the curve, I would suggest a second support, originating at the same point at the lower left, but then going to the corresponding point on the right.  This type of dual radial support is fairly common.

This is not possible in the depicted situation because one of the networks is RD-4. The support would end up in the middle of the street - imagine the invisible intersections. ;) A single wide 45 degree pylon could work, though.

Regarding the three- and four-way intersections, your reasoning is convincing. Let's hope that the supports don't end up directly in front of the pedestrian crossings.

I will need further advice when it comes to intersections with El-Rail-Road-2. ;)

Offline noahclem

  • Administrator
  • Forums Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 5861
  • Reputation: 16
  • CL:
    Resident Reindeer
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #55 on: May 07, 2013, 05:21:30 PM »
I have to apologize for not posting before; I keep viewing and thinking here without speaking my mind. Basically I agree with Steve's ideas as a nice way to implement things without having to do a bunch of extra work--but if you're interested in the angled pieces, Markus, they would definitely be nicer. as to how many support pieces an elevated rail network over "avenue" needs I wouldn't be very qualified to answer (though I have lived in Chicago). To be honest, I kind of like the idea of support pieces in the middle of the road (between lanes). It's not very nice to drive on such roads but they definitely have character ;)

Offline z

  • BSC Team
  • Forums Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4866
  • Reputation: 26
    • RTMT World Headquarters
  • CL: Detailman!
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #56 on: May 07, 2013, 10:12:16 PM »
So you say that (2) is very uncommon in RL, but (3) is common?

Yes.

Quote
Both of them are kind of radially. And actually, I was in favour of (2) because, to me, it looks most stable without an unnecessary large accumulation of pylons. ;D

Use Google Earth to look at the for corners of the Chicago Loop.  (It runs along the rectangle created by Wabash, Lake, Wells, and Van Buren streets.)  Be sure to have the "Photorealistic" view turned on.  First of all, notice how sharp those turns are.  They're just as sharp as the 90 degree turns in SC4.  (I can still hear those wheels screeching now.)  Now look at the supports right before the turn.  They're completely orthogonal.  The supports under the intersections and turns themselves are slightly different than what I proposed, but if you'll look closely, you'll see that they're custom-built for each intersection.  You probably don't want to do that. $%Grinno$%

Quote
Both of them are kind of radially. And actually, I was in favour of (2) because, to me, it looks most stable without an unnecessary large accumulation of pylons. ;D

Yes, radial supports are not uncommon in a situation like this.  But for symmetry, and to add a little more support on the curve, I would suggest a second support, originating at the same point at the lower left, but then going to the corresponding point on the right.  This type of dual radial support is fairly common.

This is not possible in the depicted situation because one of the networks is RD-4. The support would end up in the middle of the street - imagine the invisible intersections. ;) A single wide 45 degree pylon could work, though.

I think you misunderstood what I was proposing.  Here's a rough picture:


That has pushed my drawing skills to the limit, so it doesn't show the orthogonal supports at the intersection.

Oh, why not.  Add in the supports at the tile boundaries and you get this:


And to address Noah's question, you can see in the Google Earth pictures that the curves and intersections tend to have more supports than the straight track, as there's more stress put on them.

Offline JoeST

  • Forums Guru
  • *
  • Posts: 2649
  • Reputation: 10
  • fbstj
  • CL: Not your average...
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #57 on: May 08, 2013, 01:17:11 AM »
I was thinking maybe have one tangential to the curve?
Copperminds and Cuddleswarms

Offline z

  • BSC Team
  • Forums Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 4866
  • Reputation: 26
    • RTMT World Headquarters
  • CL: Detailman!
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #58 on: May 08, 2013, 02:40:22 AM »
I was thinking maybe have one tangential to the curve?

That's certainly another possibility; in fact, you can see that's used in the Chicago Loop in the Google Earth views.  Basically, you'd have the tangent at the edge of the curve at an angle of 45 degrees, connecting to the two orthogonal supports.  The radial supports would still be there, but they would end at the tangential support.

Offline memo

  • NAM Team
  • Forums Parliamentarian
  • *
  • Posts: 1767
  • Reputation: 34
  • I like onions.
  • CL: RULin' RULin' RULin'
Re: NAM: El-Rail over Avenue
« Reply #59 on: May 09, 2013, 05:23:47 AM »
I have to apologize for not posting before; I keep viewing and thinking here without speaking my mind. Basically I agree with Steve's ideas as a nice way to implement things without having to do a bunch of extra work--but if you're interested in the angled pieces, Markus, they would definitely be nicer. as to how many support pieces an elevated rail network over "avenue" needs I wouldn't be very qualified to answer (though I have lived in Chicago). To be honest, I kind of like the idea of support pieces in the middle of the road (between lanes). It's not very nice to drive on such roads but they definitely have character ;)

Thanks for the response. More opinions are always welcome. :) The supports between the lanes is definitely an interesting idea, but I am not quite convinced. Apparently, most of the tracks in Chicago are constructed this way, but I don't understand why. I assumed that it would be necessary to retexture some of the RD-4 textures for this and therefore didn't pursue this idea.

Although it is one-way, I like to think of Chicago Van Buren Street as a RL example of El-Rail over Road-4.




I have done some further research and found New York Jerome Avenue which is exactly what you described, Noah. It seems to be a common configuration.




More examples: New York Northern Boulevard.




New York Roosevelt Avenue (though it's triple track rail).




As can be seen in the pictures, parking cars on the shoulders (as you have mentioned before) are very common. I'd like to add some cars, too, but it will be the last step.

What is left to do (in this order):
• RULs,
• paths,
• positioning of the supports,
• shadows,
• T21 beautification.



Use Google Earth to look at the for corners of the Chicago Loop.  (It runs along the rectangle created by Wabash, Lake, Wells, and Van Buren streets.)  Be sure to have the "Photorealistic" view turned on.  First of all, notice how sharp those turns are.  They're just as sharp as the 90 degree turns in SC4.  (I can still hear those wheels screeching now.)  Now look at the supports right before the turn.  They're completely orthogonal.  The supports under the intersections and turns themselves are slightly different than what I proposed, but if you'll look closely, you'll see that they're custom-built for each intersection.  You probably don't want to do that. $%Grinno$%

I was uncertain as to whether the arrangement of the supports at Van Buren and Wells Street originated in the fact that it had been a three-way intersection in the past, but Chicago Wabash Avenue - Lake Street certainly is one of the best examples of 90 degree turns.




I found other examples: New York Jamaica Avenue - Crescent Street. Note the radial support.




New York Fulton Street - Crescent Street. This one is less sharp and probably not as good a reference.




Boston Green Line.





To sum up, each of those configurations has a unique configuration of supports. As I have to decide, I will probably refer to Chicago Wabash-Lake because it seems to be one of the sharpest turns.


Quote
This is not possible in the depicted situation because one of the networks is RD-4. The support would end up in the middle of the street - imagine the invisible intersections. ;) A single wide 45 degree pylon could work, though.

I think you misunderstood what I was proposing.  Here's a rough picture:

Yes, I did understand you correctly. However, there is no empty space for the support at the right because RD-4 is medianless.




I was thinking maybe have one tangential to the curve?

That's certainly another possibility; in fact, you can see that's used in the Chicago Loop in the Google Earth views.  Basically, you'd have the tangent at the edge of the curve at an angle of 45 degrees, connecting to the two orthogonal supports.  The radial supports would still be there, but they would end at the tangential support.

I am afraid, this exceeds my capability. If someone is willing to model such a corner support prop, I would gladly add it. :)