Dynamic Track and Narrow Gauge DT is always rendered as Standard Gauge
#1
Posted 03 January 2018 - 02:57 PM
I have downloaded (from trainsim.com) the wonderful White Pass & Yukon River route (thanks Bob for this nice XMas gift!), which has narrow tracks. This route uses dynamic track pieces. To avoid displaying them in OR as standard gauge track, Bob converted them to Dynatrax pieces. But the result is "dual track".
It seems to me that OR always renders the contents of local tsection.dat as standard ("A") gauge pieces. Or: is it possible to correct this by editing some route's data (e.g. the TrackGauge() property from the route.trk file) ?
There is - of course - another answer: not to use dynamic track pieces, but ...
/I've found some workaround by editing the route's acleantrack2.ace, so that those standard gauge rails are no more visible./
With best wishes for the new year,
Mirek
#2
Posted 21 January 2018 - 10:58 AM
So, I dived more into this and found in the source code (class TRProfile):
var gauge = viewer.Simulator.SuperElevationGauge;
Thus, there's better solution to eliminate the incorrect rendering of dynamic track with other gauges than standard: you can set the proper gauge in the OR Options-Superelevation-Gauge option.
But how about reading the value from the route's TRK file rather than from the OR options? I mean the TrackGauge() parameter (which I think is ignored by OR).
Does it sound reasonably?
Best regards,
Mirek
#3
Posted 22 January 2018 - 06:14 PM
#4
Posted 22 January 2018 - 11:40 PM
So I suspect it may be something in your system. I ran it on ORTS beta version 4020. The route wouldn't load in MSTS.
#5
Posted 23 January 2018 - 01:03 PM
I'm aware of this. I just tried to find a solution - maybe only partial.
(Unfortunately, I don't have a route with more than one gauge with dynamic tracks.)
@atsf37l:
If no one else has this problem, it is possible that I'm the only one. Anyway, some solution exists - see my post #2 here.
Thanks for your answers,
Mirek
#6
Posted 24 January 2018 - 01:24 AM
http://www.elvastower.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/oldstry.gif
#7
Posted 25 January 2018 - 04:38 AM
I've found the reason of my bad rendering!
To reproduce this, go to OR Options-Experimental tab and set Superelevation level to non-zero value (I use 1). Now, find a piece of track that matches length set in Superelevation option. And - here you are (see attached image).
Regards,
Mirek
Attached File(s)
-
Phantom_rails.zip (1.23MB)
Number of downloads: 264
#8
Posted 25 January 2018 - 04:48 AM
Even if you set the proper gauge (3ft = 914 mm in my case) at te Superelevation option tab, the "phantom rails" are drawn bigger and set higher than the normal track rails - and the track makes "step up/dn" at the connections.
Mirek
#9
Posted 27 January 2018 - 05:11 AM
mirekkr, on 03 January 2018 - 02:57 PM, said:
I have downloaded (from trainsim.com) the wonderful White Pass & Yukon River route (thanks Bob for this nice XMas gift!), which has narrow tracks. This route uses dynamic track pieces. To avoid displaying them in OR as standard gauge track, Bob converted them to Dynatrax pieces. But the result is "dual track".
It seems to me that OR always renders the contents of local tsection.dat as standard ("A") gauge pieces. Or: is it possible to correct this by editing some route's data (e.g. the TrackGauge() property from the route.trk file) ?
There is - of course - another answer: not to use dynamic track pieces, but ...
/I've found some workaround by editing the route's acleantrack2.ace, so that those standard gauge rails are no more visible./
With best wishes for the new year,
Mirek
By chance, does your "Dual Track" always appear on bridges?
#10
Posted 27 January 2018 - 09:14 AM
Nope. Bridge rails are ok (the inner pair of rails on bridges is intended to be there). I'm talking about outer pair of rails (see my picture in post #7 here).
By all means, it's the Superelevation (SE) what is responsible for this effect. If you switch SE off (level = 0), the phantom rail disappears. As far as I understand how the SE feature is implemented, it draws another piece of track *over* the existing one.
You can help it by setting the SE gauge value to appropriate width. But (as I wrote above), the result is not much better because SE rails are bigger than the others and if you look closer at the connection you can see a visible difference in the height.
Don't know if this could be easily solved (derive SE rail dimensions from standard track shape?, resize them by the ratio of actual/standard gauge?).
Regards,
Mirek