[Kazareh]

Do you think it could be possible for the track monitor to display your milepost marker? For example, instead of as it shows now '1.0 mi', '2.0 mi' for distance and such, also to/alternatively show your milepost? Eg '131.0' , '132.0', '133.5', etc? I think the MSTS one did that, and it's a feature I find very useful. Especially for comparing employee timetables, with speed limits and such vs position in the route itself.

[vince]

Display a routes installed mileposts? I sincerely hope not.

Mileposts are to me a distraction and dont have a real world analog in a cab display. They can be confusing as the mileposts may not be actual mile distances** where the fixed mile marking as it now exists on the OR track monitor display is accurate.

**route builders relying on the MSTS Editor got it all wrong due to the innacuracies in the way the terrain is generated.
A very good example of this is the missing 5 miles between Philidelphia Pennsylvania and Wilmington Delaware on the Northeast Corridoe Route.


Best,
Vince

[Kazareh]

 vince, on 16 February 2015 - 09:34 AM, said:

Display a routes installed mileposts? I sincerely hope not.

Mileposts are to me a distraction and dont have a real world analog in a cab display. They can be confusing as the mileposts may not be actual mile distances** where the fixed mile marking as it now exists on the OR track monitor display is accurate.

**route builders relying on the MSTS Editor got it all wrong due to the innacuracies in the way the terrain is generated.
A very good example of this is the missing 5 miles between Philidelphia Pennsylvania and Wilmington Delaware on the Northeast Corridoe Route.


Best,
Vince

Yes I am meaning those, Vince. I frankly don't care if they don't have a real world analog in a cab display, either. What does that have to do with the F4 Track Monitor anywho? While the default route's ones are yes, shoddy, don't insult the content creators we have for their routes... Mileposts are a very important part of railroading, whether they're actual 'mile distances' or not.

The primary reason I am wanting this? Running trains out from Pittsburgh to Harrisburg and such on the PRR Eastern Region. There are no speed limits on that route, due to the fact of the complexity of it, and furthermore? I tried opening the PRR Eastern in MSTS Route Editor(YES after following the Steam4Me tutorial BEFORE anyone says it!), and it crashes. It doesn't like that route, at all. So I can't go in and edit in the speed limits via route editor. I have the employees time table for that line, and there fore, the speed limits as per the route mile markers. I need something less distracting than popping into the #8 free-cam to see what in the blazes that little white milepost marker I just passed was, or alternating between #1, #5, and #8 views.. Could be much simpler to hit F4 and see displayed route mileposts as such.

[Lindsayts]

 vince, on 16 February 2015 - 09:34 AM, said:

Display a routes installed mileposts? I sincerely hope not.

Mileposts are to me a distraction and dont have a real world analog in a cab display. They can be confusing as the mileposts may not be actual mile distances** where the fixed mile marking as it now exists on the OR track monitor display is accurate.

**route builders relying on the MSTS Editor got it all wrong due to the innacuracies in the way the terrain is generated.
A very good example of this is the missing 5 miles between Philidelphia Pennsylvania and Wilmington Delaware on the Northeast Corridoe Route.


Best,
Vince

The reason the F4 display is there is because OR is a sim and somethings availible in the real world simply cannot be displayed as good as they should be, an example being signals. Using a relatively narrow view (46 degrees) on a 2560x1600 30 inch monitor one can only just pick out a signal at 1000 metres and even this is not reliable, this is nowhere where near good enough in real life. The second reason F4 display is there is that in real life (in Australia anyway) all drivers before they take command of a train service have to be route qualified, ie they HAVE to know the line. In a sim this is almost certainly will not be the case so things like distance to next stop and such things as mile posts will be a real advantage for most users.

As to distance inaccuracies OR is work in progress it _____DEFINITELY_____ is possible to use a more accuarate world model, there being a number of ways to do this. It will probably need OR to have its own route editor for this to be included as the map projection MSTS and therefore OR uses suffers from a number of serious distortions. Also the accuracy of a route depends on how much care the author has taken. In one Victorian route although it is overall 3 percent of distance to short all objects I have checked (and that is in the many dozens) are exactly at the correct Lat and Long within plus or minus 15 or so metres, so this route has the capability of being displayed correctly.

LIndsay