A Tejesember, on 02 March 2014 - 02:15 PM, said:
We talked about it a bit, and here is our idea:
The implementation of safety valves is great for most locos at the moment, but we think that OR "should" let the modeller use the real parameters. It is a simulator, isn't it? :sign_welcome: So we suggest having the ability to declare some variables in the eng file to define every safety valve at each, with area of cross-section, opening pressure, closing pressure. Something like this:............................
The implementation of safety valves is great for most locos at the moment, but we think that OR "should" let the modeller use the real parameters. It is a simulator, isn't it? :sign_welcome: So we suggest having the ability to declare some variables in the eng file to define every safety valve at each, with area of cross-section, opening pressure, closing pressure. Something like this:............................
Firstly I suspect that this type of information is going to be hard to find for every locomotive, in fact, your info is the first that I have come across where the size of the safety valves is specified for the locomotive. So most players will not be able to find this level of detail about their locomotive.
Secondly the whole point of driving (and firing) the locomotive is to keep the steam pressure below the point of operation of the safety valve. Most steam operation manuals for railway staff seem to make a strong point of this.
So given the player should operate below the max steam pressure, and that the safety valves work now, and provide the player with a consequence for exceeding the max steam pressure, what value do you see in adding the extra refinement that you have suggested?
A Tejesember, on 02 March 2014 - 02:15 PM, said:
And the effects in the SteamSpecialEffects could match these. So if the first (in order of declaration in eng file, no need for indexing) opens, the first effect is activated. If the second, then the second, etc.
This would not cause any backward-incompatibility, and your current code for locomotives made for MSTS (and probably badly set up) would still be useful.
I haven't looked into your code yet, but I think I could gladly code this, if you don't have the time.
This would not cause any backward-incompatibility, and your current code for locomotives made for MSTS (and probably badly set up) would still be useful.
I haven't looked into your code yet, but I think I could gladly code this, if you don't have the time.
In my work with the code, I have never really got into the visual effects, so I would need to develop an understanding of how to do this. I am happy to have a go, but I have some other things that I would like to look at first, so it might be a while before I get around to it.
Cheers