Elvas Tower: F5 HUD scrolling. - Elvas Tower

Jump to content

Posting Rules

All new threads will be started by members of the Open Rails team, Staff, and/or Admins. Existing threads started in other forums may get moved here when it makes sense to do so.

Once a thread is started any member may post replies to it.
  • 14 Pages +
  • « First
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

F5 HUD scrolling. Rate Topic: -----

#51 User is offline   steamer_ctn 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 1,879
  • Joined: 24-June 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 25 October 2019 - 01:33 PM

View Postscottb613, on 25 October 2019 - 04:05 AM, said:

If it's an open ended offer to work - Hand Firing - I'll ping you when I get some free time and maybe we could work out a mutually agreed upon time to take another peek... As always - my actual time in front of the sim is severely limited and only on weekends... I get plenty of time to talk about it though - LOL..

Thanks for that. IT would be down my list at the moment as well, so send me a PM when ready.

#52 User is offline   mbm_OR 

  • Fireman
  • Group: Status: Active Member
  • Posts: 236
  • Joined: 03-July 15
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Spain
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 25 October 2019 - 01:41 PM

Hi James,

I should clarify that this new work is not related to my original proposal, which gives title to this thread.
I found the Scott 's idea, interesting and that is why I generated the code that we now have.

View PostJames Ross, on 23 October 2019 - 11:17 AM, said:

Yes, this seems like a good improvement, although I am not sure how the extended HUD pages should fit in.

I have no idea about the extended HUD will be included in the "Train Driving Info" window.
The current HUD (F5) and extended HUD (Shift+F5) still untouched, only the proposed blueprint about F5 HUD Scrolling is the only work related to the true HUD.

View PostJames Ross, on 23 October 2019 - 11:17 AM, said:

I would like to strongly recommend that we:
  • Do not introduce any new options, except during testing of the feature


The new code, no longer requires the checkbox option. It has been removed.


View PostJames Ross, on 23 October 2019 - 11:17 AM, said:

The window can call "SizeTo(width, height)" on itself and it'll change size, but it'd need to be careful not to change frequently...

The new code allows changing from the standard text window to abbreviated window adjusting the size accordingly.

View PostJames Ross, on 23 October 2019 - 11:17 AM, said:

I dislike the fixed width font, it's less readable, and if the text wasn't all abbreviations (see above) it wouldn't be useful at all.

The fixed width font was applied only to abbreviations. Please, take a look to the new code, sincerely I don't see these abbreviations less readable. In case of doubt you could change easily to the full text window.


Improvements about the 'Train Driving window' code:
  • All references about 'Basic HUD info' have been changed to 'Train Driving info'.
  • The checkbox 'Standard basic HUD window' from Option/Video menu has been removed.
  • Added symbol-clickable at the top right, to toggle the window between standard text and abbreviated text. Default set to standard text.
  • An arrow symbol appears to indicate which control command has been pressed.


Maybe it could be the last update for this code, if I haven't managed to convince you. The work is done...

Attached is the new beta code aligned with the OR x1.3.1-99 Testing version.
Attached File  F5TrainDrivingWindow-x131-99.zip (1.27MB)
Number of downloads: 465

Regards,
Mauricio.

#53 User is offline   steamer_ctn 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 1,879
  • Joined: 24-June 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 25 October 2019 - 02:09 PM

View Postrickloader, on 25 October 2019 - 04:33 AM, said:

I don`t like to disagree with a respected developer, but I think the goal of a HUD is not " to reduce the information in the train HUD to types of controls and gauges the driver would have available to him". Rather it should be to provide essential information that the sim otherwise fails to provide. As the Ai fireman cheats, a simplified steam balance display maybe ok for the majority of users in AI firing mode.
It is ok to "disagree", as this generates discussion and if done in a respectful fashion hopefully leads to improvement.

As can be seen by this thread there are a variety of opinions as to what information should be in the HUDs. Therefore as suggested earlier in this post I think that it is important to have a big picture view (see my suggestions) as this helps set a goal for the outcome we want to achieve, and then we can work out what goes into each individual HUD. To clarify a point, I am not suggesting that information be dropped completely but merely questioning which HUD it should be located in.

To assist the developers, and ensure community agreement I think that it would be good to capture the outcomes desired, and then what data is proposed to be placed in each of the HUDs. This should be done in a single summary document that all can read and "agree" to rather then spread through a thread with various divergences of opinion. (Scott is this something that you can do at the correct time?)

It might also be good to confirm that there is a developer who is willing to take on this task so that a lot of effort is not expended only to find that it doesn't go anywhere.

View Postrickloader, on 25 October 2019 - 04:33 AM, said:

Manual firing is a different matter, and at a minimum the present CTRL F HUD needs to be retained ; even supplemented.. Perhaps steam production + consumption would help. But even driving in the full HUD and monitoring Boiler heat can`t avoid the soaring and plunging boiler pressure cycle
Manual firing cannot easily be adapted to changing steam demand on the road. This is because of lack of information, and some dubious loco physics. 2 examples.........
Just to make a quick minor point, OR will always only be a representation of real life and some "liberties" will always need to be incorporated into OR. For example, it takes a number of hours for a boiler to heat and cool, how many users of OR would be willing to wait for these time periods? Thus some variations to real life are inevitable, the question will always be what is acceptable, and what is not (again various opinions will be generated)?

Can a new thread be started on this rather then side tracking this one?

View Postrickloader, on 25 October 2019 - 04:33 AM, said:

It is very difficult for non- programmers to contribute, because much of steam physics is hard coded, and we have no access or idea what the sim is even intended to do. The original programmer is long gone, and probably intended to develop the steam model further. I don`t mean to be negative, but am just promoting an admittedly minority view
I disagree with the sentiment that only people with coding expertise can contribute. Non-coders can contribute a lot of help including the detailed research required to understand the real thing (essential if we are trying to model it), documentation of features and settings, as well as testing. Also they can assist with the type of work that this thread is generating.

So whilst I agree that having a programmer involved is important, it shouldn't just fall on their shoulders alone, otherwise it won't happen, as there is already more work then programmers.

View Postrickloader, on 25 October 2019 - 04:33 AM, said:

Crossed post with Scott. Yes I would like to help if I can. I`m not a physics expert, nor a real loco expert, and certainly not a coder. But I would like to contribute, because I know that manual firing can be very rewarding.
Thanks for that send me a PM with your email address to establish contact.

We would then need to set up a test environment (test stock, etc), and then run scenarios and check them against real life situations.

#54 User is offline   mbm_OR 

  • Fireman
  • Group: Status: Active Member
  • Posts: 236
  • Joined: 03-July 15
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Spain
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 26 October 2019 - 02:39 AM

Hi All,

Here are some screenshots of the latest:

Standard text:
Attached Image: Standard text.jpg

Abbreviated text:
Attached Image: Abbreviated.jpg

Regards,
Mauricio

#55 User is offline   scottb613 

  • Vice President
  • Group: Status: First Class
  • Posts: 2,973
  • Joined: 06-July 09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downeast Maine (soon)
  • Simulator:ORTS
  • Country:

Posted 26 October 2019 - 04:09 AM

Hi Mauricio,

Thanks so much for all your efforts and patience - evaluating now !

:sign_thanks:

Regards,
Scott

#56 User is offline   scottb613 

  • Vice President
  • Group: Status: First Class
  • Posts: 2,973
  • Joined: 06-July 09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downeast Maine (soon)
  • Simulator:ORTS
  • Country:

Posted 26 October 2019 - 04:13 AM

View Poststeamer_ctn, on 25 October 2019 - 02:09 PM, said:

I disagree with the sentiment that only people with coding expertise can contribute. Non-coders can contribute a lot of help including the detailed research required to understand the real thing (essential if we are trying to model it), documentation of features and settings, as well as testing. Also they can assist with the type of work that this thread is generating.

So whilst I agree that having a programmer involved is important, it shouldn't just fall on their shoulders alone, otherwise it won't happen, as there is already more work then programmers.


Hi Folks,

:I-Agree: Well said...

Regards,
Scott

#57 User is offline   scottb613 

  • Vice President
  • Group: Status: First Class
  • Posts: 2,973
  • Joined: 06-July 09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downeast Maine (soon)
  • Simulator:ORTS
  • Country:

Posted 26 October 2019 - 01:49 PM

Hi Mauricio,

Outstanding effort - sir - already your code is VASTLY superior to what we had before...

I spent most of my time (quite a bit) evaluating the "Full Text HUD" as that one seems the most likely to survive... I've only done Steam - I have yet to check Diesel or Electric...

I really laughed out loud when I saw how you reacted to James comment to remove the option from settings - too cool (just build the switch into the HUD itself)...

Mauricio - since we're effectively doubling your work - perhaps you might want to drop the Abbreviated HUD to make it easier on yourself ?

The Train HUD and Track Monitor work hand in hand - so I've included a bit of that in my discussion as well...

Any thoughts on that Accelerometer I posted - good, bad, or ugly ?

The following is - of course - just my humble opinion - intended to be constructive - please take it or leave it - as you see fit...


Abbreviated HUD Feedback
  • I do think the very small abbreviated HUD has worth but if it's not wanted - I understand...
  • The labels are actually physically closer to the values they denote and the display is less busy - all which makes it actually easier and quicker for your eye to find the value you're after...
  • I do agree with James - when looking at the text side by side - the Constant Width Font - does seem a bit off... If we wanted to pursue the Abbreviated HUD - I 'd suggest we try it in Normal Font... You have defined columns - so we could retain some manor of proper spacing - even with the Normal Font...
  • Since there's room on the "BTRN" line - we could just spell out the full brake type (service, apply, release, running)…
  • On the "BLOC" move the "BC" value to a new line to match "BTRN" and just spell out the full brake type (service, apply, release, running)…
  • Delete the labels ("__EQ", "_FOT", and "_EOT") from the first column - they’re not really needed and clutter the display...


Full Text HUD Feedback
  • At 2560x1440 the full text HUD was not nearly as large and obnoxious as I feared... Those of you with lower screen resolutions may feel differently...
  • (Eval1) I've "X" out what I feel are unnecessary comments on the HUD - if we remove these - we can make the HUD considerably smaller with no loss of form or function...
  • (Eval1) Delete the labels ("__EQ", "_FOT", and "_EOT") from the first column - they’re not really needed and clutter the display...
  • (Eval1) We need to be careful not to have too many colors in play - as that can add confusion - I would keep the labels in column 1 free from color change...
  • (Eval1) Gradients are redundant and I think we only need one - it's more appropriate on Track Monitor...
  • (Eval1) Speeds are redundant and I think we only need one - it's more appropriate on Train HUD...
  • (Eval1) The "BC" value on the "Engine Brake" line needs to be moved to a newline to match the format of "Train Brake"... This will keep the actual value from bouncing around so much when the brake type changes and leave brake control setting on its own line...
  • (Eval1) "Steam Usage" should be removed and the color coding moved to "Boiler Pressure"...
  • (Eval1) Rename "Boiler Water Glass" to "Water Glass" to shorten label...
  • (Eval1) Capitalize the first letter of each word in Column One - the "labels"...
  • (Eval1) On the "Fuel Level" line - just use the first letter of the fuel and water - for example: [93%c 93%w]...
  • (Eval2) I like how you worked in directional indicators for the Control Confirmations...
  • (Eval2) The yellow arrows should only be on the "brake control" line and not the reflected air values - to draw attention to the line you are actually controlling...
  • (Eval2) The directional indicators for the Control Conformations just aren't visible enough to grab your eyes attention - at least at my resolution...
  • (Eval2) The color chosen for Control Confirmations should not appear in any of the color changing fonts - to make it unique...
  • (Eval2) The red Control Confirmation is even harder to see...


Eval1
Attached Image: Eval1.jpg

Eval2
Attached Image: Eva2.jpg


Thank you so much for all your time and effort...

:sign_thanks: :sign_rockon:


Regards,
Scott

#58 User is offline   espee 

  • Engineer
  • Group: Status: Active Member
  • Posts: 553
  • Joined: 09-January 10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bridgetown, Western Australia
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 27 October 2019 - 01:39 AM

Quote

(Eval1) Rename "Boiler Water Glass" to "Water Glass" to shorten label...


As a boiler attendant, recip steam engine and steam turbine driver of 40 years... we always called them Gauge Glass.

It's the same number of letters Water/Gauge so won't matter, although Gage is an accepted variant in US english...

#59 User is offline   scottb613 

  • Vice President
  • Group: Status: First Class
  • Posts: 2,973
  • Joined: 06-July 09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downeast Maine (soon)
  • Simulator:ORTS
  • Country:

Posted 27 October 2019 - 03:45 AM

View Postespee, on 27 October 2019 - 01:39 AM, said:

As a boiler attendant, recip steam engine and steam turbine driver of 40 years... we always called them Gauge Glass.

It's the same number of letters Water/Gauge so won't matter, although Gage is an accepted variant in US english...


Hi Richard,

Sounds perfect to me - I was simply attempting to shorten it - thanks for your insights...

Regards,
Scott

#60 User is offline   scottb613 

  • Vice President
  • Group: Status: First Class
  • Posts: 2,973
  • Joined: 06-July 09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downeast Maine (soon)
  • Simulator:ORTS
  • Country:

Posted 27 October 2019 - 08:21 AM

Hi Folks,

I've spent a bunch more hours driving while toggling between both HUD types provided - all I ask is that whomever is making the ultimate decision on which design path we will follow - - - please do the same...

We should probably make that design decision prior to proceeding further with development...

While I don't think either is in their finished state - I honestly prefer the "Abbreviated HUD"

Mauricio - can you keep the Control Confirmations illuminated for say three seconds after release ?

:sign_thanks:

Regards,
Scott

  • 14 Pages +
  • « First
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users