[rickloader]

 Lindsayts, on 05 September 2017 - 07:28 PM, said:

<snip!>
OR DOEs have timetable mode of course, I have not as yet tried it as for a decent amount of AI traffic I assume it requires a decent working signaling system and I have found most routes I use the signalling system is only partly setup. For instance in 2 routes I would like a good timetabled activity neither has "calling on" signals set up, so one cannot back a loco onto a carriage set in a platform.

Lindsay

Hi Lindsay! Since the May update to timetable mode "calling on" is handled without specialized signals, so you can back a loco onto a carriage set. You can drop off, pickup and exchange wagons between trains.
Although good signalling is a big help with timetables, to an extent, trains will self regulate in timetables on partially signalled routes. (they appear to move between unoccupied track nodes - i think.)
A combination of Timetable Editor, track viewer, and Goku`s consist editor can far exceed the capability of MSTS RE.
Although a fully fledged ORTS activity editor would be great, extending timetable mode might be more realistic, given the dearth of programmers. Indeed the OR Roadmap calls for a convergence of timetable and activity modes, as a way forward.
rick

[dforrest]

 rickloader, on 07 September 2017 - 01:36 AM, said:

Hi Lindsay! Since the May update to timetable mode "calling on" is handled without specialized signals, so you can back a loco onto a carriage set. You can drop off, pickup and exchange wagons between trains.
Although good signalling is a big help with timetables, to an extent, trains will self regulate in timetables on partially signalled routes. (they appear to move between unoccupied track nodes - i think.)
A combination of Timetable Editor, track viewer, and Goku`s consist editor can far exceed the capability of MSTS RE.
Although a fully fledged ORTS activity editor would be great, extending timetable mode might be more realistic, given the dearth of programmers. Indeed the OR Roadmap calls for a convergence of timetable and activity modes, as a way forward.
rick

This sounds very interesting. Is there anywhere a "tutorial" of how to write a "timetable based activity". Also, are there any completed ones available for download?

[Garry]

I was interested in the fact that the lat/long co-ordinates are about 2 km out in your route. So I decided to check my Zurich Switzerland route. I found that the cords given above the station by TSRE5 match almost exactly those in Google Earth.

I was happy with this until I thought "how could they differ?". I created the original route tiles using MSTS, imported the terrain using Demex, and mapped out the route using Google Earth markers. So when I placed the station using TSRE5 it was positioned at the correct lat/long because that was the position of the marker.

Terrain tiles have subsequently been imported using TSRE5 and these match up at the borders with the originals from Demex. Using TSRE5 map view both the map and satellite views align well with the track I have laid, and the terrain seems in the correct position as I don't have a problem with it going over hills where it should be on the flat. So I am left puzzled as to what is actually about 2km out of position?

Garry

[Goku]

 Garry, on 07 September 2017 - 06:00 AM, said:

So I am left puzzled as to what is actually about 2km out of position?

Because Goode homolosine projection used in MSTS is very complicated and consists of different areas, the code can be good in some areas and wrong in another.
It is definitely good in Europe.

Also there is question which code is good and which is wrong. Maybe OR/TSRE code is good and MSTS has bugs?
It would be nice to download world.osm file and draw Goode homolosine map using OR code and see where it is wrong.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/Goode_homolosine_projection_SW.jpg

[Garry]

Yes it is more complicated than I can hope to understand, but I still have the problem of seeing where the difference becomes a problem. If TSRE5 puts google markers and the maps and the terrain 100km out of position, I will work at my route and never know that this is all wrong. But if one of these is in the correct place and the others are incorrect, then it would show up as a problem. Or is it that an existing MSTS route is at a different lat/long when viewed in OR/TSRE5?
Garry

[Goku]

 Garry, on 07 September 2017 - 07:43 AM, said:

If TSRE5 puts google markers and the maps and the terrain 100km out of position, I will work at my route and never know that this is all wrong.

Yes. If you use TSRE and OR you will never know it is wrong.

 Garry, on 07 September 2017 - 07:43 AM, said:

Or is it that an existing MSTS route is at a different lat/long when viewed in OR/TSRE5?

Yes. You will see the problem only if you are using the route in OR and MSTS.

[longiron]

 Garry, on 07 September 2017 - 07:43 AM, said:

Yes it is more complicated than I can hope to understand, but I still have the problem of seeing where the difference becomes a problem. If TSRE5 puts google markers and the maps and the terrain 100km out of position, I will work at my route and never know that this is all wrong. But if one of these is in the correct place and the others are incorrect, then it would show up as a problem. Or is it that an existing MSTS route is at a different lat/long when viewed in OR/TSRE5?
Garry

Because everything is shifted between MSTS and OR coordinates, you don't notice the difference when building a route or running a train because you are inside either the MSTS or OR cocoon. IMHO, its just two different sets of numbers - and both describe a route accurately in their own way. I jump between them regularly.

[Lindsayts]

 longiron, on 07 September 2017 - 12:21 PM, said:

Because everything is shifted between MSTS and OR coordinates, you don't notice the difference when building a route or running a train because you are inside either the MSTS or OR cocoon. IMHO, its just two different sets of numbers - and both describe a route accurately in their own way. I jump between them regularly.

In my case there is a difference, for instance the in the North East 1950's route, I checked the position of the reference point of all of the platforms in MSTS and compared this with GPS readings taken of these and they all were within 20 metres of the correct position. In TSRE5 or OR these reference points were around 2000 metre east of the stations. The solution Goku has proposed would work for me no problems.

Lindsay

[SP 0-6-0]

I hope Goku can actually fix the code base though so it is right or more "right" than it is now. I feel the idea proposed is a good fix but seems like just putting a band aide on the real problem.

Robert

[Genma Saotome]

 Garry, on 07 September 2017 - 07:43 AM, said:

Yes it is more complicated than I can hope to understand, but I still have the problem of seeing where the difference becomes a problem.

It's not that hard actually. Look at the map -- central Africa for one and the west side of the Amazon forest for another. Those are the only two places in a Goode-Homosoline projection where MSTS doesn't skew the heck out of the map.

OTOH, look at Japan. See the sharp angles on the vertical lines? What MSTS does is make that area square... it either shoves everything in the north half to the right... or everything in the bottom half to the left so in the end it has a square instead of a what you see. The net effect is that within MSTS things that should be on a north/south axis no longer line up and things that are supposed to be on an angle now are north and south. One or other places have been shoved sideways. At a detail level this effect changes all 90d intersections (e.g., streets) to an angles intersection.

It also means distances are goofed. If MSTS pushes the north half to the right then anything in MSTS between the SE and NW corners are closer to each other than they should be.

Other than the two places I mentioned, everything else is skewed to one degree or another. Kansas and the Ukraine are not too bad. Japan, Korea, and Alaska are horrible. Everything else is in between to some extent or another.