[steamer_ctn]

I am trying to fine tune the alignment of a locomotive and its tender. Due to the need to overlap the shapes between the tender and the engine, it has always been difficult to achieve a good alignment that doesn't result in some compromise, such as a larger gap between the two or crushed buffers, etc. This being due to the main adjustment being done through the "Size" statement.

Some MSTS posts suggest that use of a "CentreofGravity" or "Centre" could be used to alleviate the problem.

A tutorial on Steam4me provides details of the CoG fix:

CoG Fix

Currently it appears that OR ignores both of these statements. Is there a way in OR that a better alignment can be achieved?

Looking at the forums there has been some talk about playing with the shape reference point, but this seems to be undesirable as the point is probably centred to allow appropriate pivoting on the track.

I suspect that ideally, instead of playing with the centre of a shape, it would be better to allow the specification of an "off set" distance on either side the centre point. This offset would define the amount of the shape to considered as part of the car for distance to the next car calculation purposes. The full shape would still be displayed, but some pieces would be considered "outside" of the shape.

Is there any way to adjust the alignment within the current operation of OR?

Would it be possible to include a better alignment approach for tender locomotives?

[captain_bazza]

If OR obeys the standard set by MSTS then any allowance for asymetrical offsets along the longitudinal axis is adjust by the binding box in the SD file. Any attempt to to shift the center of a car (total length) then if the car is flipped the whole car will be off center anyway.

MSTS may have had its limitations, but the basic setup of a locomotive or rollingstock can be well managed once you understand how to use the setup correctly.

[steamer_ctn]

Hi Bazza,

Thanks for the reply.

captain_bazza, on 04 May 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:

Any attempt to to shift the center of a car (total length) then if the car is flipped the whole car will be off center anyway.

I agree that this is not the preferred way.

captain_bazza, on 04 May 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:

If OR obeys the standard set by MSTS then any allowance for asymetrical offsets along the longitudinal axis is adjust by the binding box in the SD file.

At the moment in OR, the longitudinal length does not appear to be impacted by changing the values in the SD file. I have made some large changes in this file, but there appears to be no difference in the spacing.

captain_bazza, on 04 May 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:

MSTS may have had its limitations, but the basic setup of a locomotive or rollingstock can be well managed once you understand how to use the setup correctly.

Whilst, I don't think that it was perfect, it appeared to give some scope to adjust the spacings.

I would be interested to have some feedback on how to successfully adjust the longitudinal settings in OR, in a bit more detail, so that I can fine tune some locomotives.

I was hoping that perhaps the centre statement could be used to set a "reference point" for longitudinal spacing only, and by adjusting this and the size statement in the wag file, the spacing between different wagons could be fine tuned.