[Csantucci]

Up to release 1512 OR displayed also the upper overhead wire (differently from MSTS) as can be seen here below:


Starting from release 1513 the upper overhead wire isn't any more displayed, to better match MSTS:


I preferred the solution with the upper overhead wire and think that in general railways have two overhead wires (at least here in Europe). What do forum members think about this?

[pnrailway]

Actually I think both are useful, depending upon the route. For instance, here in the states, if one were running the large PRR Eastern Region route, then wires such as shown in the upper shot are appropriate. If you were running the British Columbia Electric, one of the trolley routes or the RMD than that on the bottom would be appropriate. Also, if a wire configuration like the first were used on the latter routes, the upper wires would be sticking up in space above the pole arms and not look right. If it were not possible to say provide a user option to spec which one to use for which route, then I opt for the current bottom configuration.

[PA1930]

I agree with you Carlo. I personally would prefer the first one you showed... Actually I haven't complained about this before I don't know why, as I keep telling my self I'd prefer to see the overhead wires like you show on the first screenshot. Glad its not only with me its happening, though! :jawdrop2:
But as Paul also says, it might be good for some routes existant as well with the "single" overhead wire. So my sugestion would be making it possible to choose between both types of overhead wires on the options tab. :)

[wacampbell]

Eventually we will want a mechanism to provide both catenary and trolley style overhead selectable on a section by section basis. Until then we will match MSTS behavior which displays single wire trolley.

[Csantucci]

Here in our trainsimhobby forum there has been unanimity in preferring double wire, but I understand that for tramways and interurban electrics in general single wire could be better.
By the way MSTS not always uses single wire. In curved track MSTS uses a (not nice) version of double wire, see picture.

So, neither implementing double wire nor implementing single wire corresponds to what MSTS does :jawdrop2:
For the time being I would be happy if a checkbox in the Experimental options page could be available to select between the two solutions. That should not be a big work, as the two wire solution was already implemented.

[pnrailway]

 wacampbell, on 08 May 2013 - 04:32 AM, said:

Eventually we will want a mechanism to provide both catenary and trolley style overhead selectable on a section by section basis. Until then we will match MSTS behavior which displays single wire trolley.

Thanks Wayne. an option like that would be greatly appreciated. :jawdrop2: :)

[ChrisD]

Quote

Up to release 1512 OR displayed also the upper overhead wire (differently from MSTS)

I put my vote on this representation. Sure OR has the power to show 2 wires instead of one.

Maybe in a future update each section of track could have a flag next to electrified stating single or double overhead wire.

This way every one can be happy. :jawdrop2:

ChrisD

[BB25187]

Hello,

On my side I reverted the change in the source files, since the double wire is more relevant on most of the routes I use.
Nevertheless, I agree that an option would be convenient, since the trolley style also make sense.

By the way, a couple of countries (Belgium, France, ... ) do use 3 wires catenary for 1500 or 3000V direct current. So, I am (naively) wondering if the shape profile used to define the overhead wire basic section could not be defined in a dedicated file rather than to have it hardcoded in the Wire.cs source files (i.e. without need to recompile)?

Regards