[_o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha]

From the Tortoise's mouth:

Revision: 1658
Author: roeter
Date: vrijdag 21 juni 2013 13:26:20
Message:
Processing of sigcfg.dat file : when duplicate names are used for SignalDrawStates, the double entry is no longer rejected but this state is inserted using a dummy name, allowing it to be referenced in the signal script through the number.
----
Modified : /trunk/Program/Revision.txt
Modified : /trunk/Program/RunActivity.exe
Modified : /trunk/Source/MSTS/SIGCFGFile.cs

Thanks very much for this, Roeter!
Finally some visible signals in my favourite Halycon Badische Schwarzwaldbahn.

[Csantucci]

A good improvement indeed: I had to modify many sigscr.dat files because this flexibility of OR was missing. Thanks Rob!

[cjakeman]

_o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha, on 22 June 2013 - 06:58 AM, said:

Finally some visible signals in my favourite Halycon Badische Schwarzwaldbahn.

Be good to see some screen shots . . .

[bennycdn]

Where do you find v1658,I have 1656? Benny

[_o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha]

You can find the latest daily experimental builds in the source code repository: http://www.openrails...resources.html.
I use the TortoiseSVN client to download the program precompiled (ready to run) from that repository. If you want, you can download, read and alter the sourcecode, and compile OR yourself.


OR v0.1648 (0.9) with blank signals,
versus

OR v0.1660 with signal indications.

I already have converted this route to DB Tracks to learn the process. A .stf track profile is needed for superelevation of the DB Tracks.
Lots of scenery updating still needs to be done to make the route look better still. Halycon has released a 'reloaded' version, but no new tracks or scenery yet, AFAIK.
Notice the proper vertical chain and zigzag of the catenary, which is not a loft but has been assembled by hand.

[Csantucci]

Hi o-Khanawa, have you created the .stf track profile for DB Tracks? If yes, could you share it with us?

[_o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha]

No, not definite yet. DB Tracks is considerably more complicated than ScaleRail. Plus there are many variations, with even more difficult geometry in the concrete forms.
I have basic ballast, ties and rails done for the simplest wooden ties version, but OR throws lots of out-of-memory errors, perhaps due to me using the wrong LOD's. Or perhaps because DB Tracks is simply too detailed to have it drawn dynamically in superelevated curves with the current OR?

Hack's Dynatrax profile has been a great help with ScaleRail, but the DB Tracks Dynatrax2 profile is not in clear text, so everything has to be guesstimated and measured off track already laid down.

I don't know if Norbert Rieger, the author of DB Tracks is actively working on .stf track profiles. Currently, he is revising DB Tracks v1 and working on v2, the X-Tracks equivalent. Have a peak at http://www.tssf.eu/f...hp?topic=1931.0, where he has his own sub-forum, "MSTS Tiefbau" in German obviously. Some screenshots with DB Tracks are almost like the real thing. Generally, German routes and rolling stock are of very high quality and still actively developed and supported.

There is talk of DB Tracks becoming the norm for routes specifically built for/under Open Rails. We need to wait for the world editor first for them to be incorporated in the OR core.

ScaleRail will probably loose out, because it doesn't conform to the standard MSTS/X-Tracks track pieces' geometry. So DB Tracks needs to be expanded with US style track as well in the future. And Australia/Russia/China/India broad gauge, Swiss/RSA narrow gauge and probably more specific system variations to suit the different player communities.

My main gripe with both track systems is the lack of distinction between mainline and yard tracks, other than colour and weathering. Secondary main, yard and spur tracks should have increaslingly lighter rail, wider tie spacing, lower ballast shoulder, lesser quality of ballast and more weeds and shrubs growing over them in order to look realistic IMO. Also a suitable sub roadbed, combined ballast shoulder for evenly spaced double tracks would make track laying quicker and should look more realistic.

That is better left to another thread, as is proper vertical chain catenary with zigzag that can be lofted to the tracks.

OR is moving slowly but steadily ahead, giving new life to the MSTS, and will perhaps one day take over?