[charland]

Hi OR,

I've added about 3 degrees of super elevation and although it looks great I've been noticing that the inside of curve where the terrain rises now have bits of terrain poking into the ballast... as seen near the caboose in this shot.

http://i479.photobucket.com/albums/rr160/paul_charland/TerrainOnTrack_zps87da31b7.jpg

These are bot visible in route editor, not MSTS.

Paul :-)

[James Ross]

 charland, on 03 September 2014 - 03:58 AM, said:

I've added about 3 degrees of super elevation and although it looks great I've been noticing that the inside of curve where the terrain rises now have bits of terrain poking into the ballast... as seen near the caboose in this shot.

This is pretty much guaranteed to occur somewhere, as super elevation necessarily rotates the track about its centreline - one side goes up, the other down. If the terrain is close, it "collides". :)

[cjakeman]

 James Ross, on 03 September 2014 - 06:30 AM, said:

This is pretty much guaranteed to occur somewhere, as super elevation necessarily rotates the track about its centreline - one side goes up, the other down.

Once we have our own Route Editor, then we can lay super-elevated track correctly. Until then, this trick is the best we can manage. It's quite neat though.

[charland]

Thanks, and yes, would be better when OR has it's own editor, this is the kind of thing you can see in OR but can't see to correct in MSTS' Route Editor.

Paul :-)

[Simon E]

We should probably start a thread on what features we would like to see in an OR route editor...

I might just do that if nobody objects to that. I have a few Ideas up my sleeve... some may sound silly, but no.. they might be useful, like a "station platform editor" for example. My Idea of a "Platform editor" is tracing the shape of a certain platform (its curvature, its width and length, and of course the texture(s) for its surface top and side faces... Fences?) That is just one idea I have floating around in my head. I could start a thread on the subject, if anyone is interested. Platforms all around the world have odd shapes and configurations, that is why I think this maybe useful to lots of route creators. A signal editor would be of very good use too, a part of the OR editor devoted to making signals, and to help scripting them to do the right thing.... My list goes on and on. I will start a separate thread on this if you like. Just let me know.

I also noticed the trees on the tracks issue, while It is disconcerting, I have learnt to ignore it... We will eventually get it sorted, I hope. :good2:

[Kazareh]

 cjakeman, on 03 September 2014 - 10:02 AM, said:

Once we have our own Route Editor, then we can lay super-elevated track correctly. Until then, this trick is the best we can manage. It's quite neat though.

To be honest, until they can get the #5 Passenger Cam and the ALT-1 3D Cab cameras corrected to be rid of the 'gyracam' effect on Superelevated Curves, I don't want Superelevation being a -required- part of the sim at all...

[That Genset Foamer]

 Kazareh, on 29 January 2015 - 10:45 PM, said:

To be honest, until they can get the #5 Passenger Cam and the ALT-1 3D Cab cameras corrected to be rid of the 'gyracam' effect on Superelevated Curves, I don't want Superelevation being a -required- part of the sim at all...

It's got a long way to go, but I know it's getting there. In theory superelevation profiles could be installed into a common part of the ORTS directory and it could parse by track-section prefix as well, and maybe even read in from Dynatrax profiles. There should be some kind of flag that could be put in the .w file which states whether a track section is parsed as superelevated, and the process of selecting those segments could be done manually as well as by the track editor.

Also there's the matter of superelevation runoff modelling but that's just a minor engineering nitpick compared to the above and could be harder, as it involves postulating/profiling neighboring tracks.