Procedural Track

[RailSimulator]

Hey Guys,

Just wondering if anyone knows of any plans to the same system as currently use to make procedural junctions possible apply to making diamond crossovers and single and double slip points, so they can be made to look like the junctions with the correct frog points, checkrails and so forth?

Kindest Regards Railsimulator09.

 

[Vern]

This has been asked and does not appear to be coming soon. Maybe in TRS2021 if N3V are still in business...

 

[Tony_Hilliam]

We have plans to continue upgrading all aspects of Trainz for many years to come. While Vern would like everything fixed and implemented by tomorrow (or sooner if possible), commercial reality is that it all takes time.

People complain about the price, the time it takes to fix things, and the length list of things to fix. These are all intertwined.

With TRS19 we have have a product that is well in advance of previous versions of Trainz. Once we have completed the final polish and have it ready for official release we'll be ready to begin work on some of the more major tasks such as this.

 

[Vern]

Diamond crossings are a basic function of operational railway infrastructure and should have been supported as a function of spline track in Trainz 1.0, let alone still no sign of them 18 years later...

 

[grazlash]

Just on procedural track in TRS19, I happened upon Samplaire's wonderful new procedural track when searching for TB4.6 assets on the DLS last night. There is a great variety and it's an alternative to the built in TRS19 track.
@Vern. Are you sure your tag shouldn't read "Digging away AT TRS2019.." Everything may happen in due course, just enjoy the ride while you wait. I hope you enjoy your retirement.
cheers
Graeme

 

[SailorDan]

Just wondering if anyone knows of any plans to the same system as currently use to make procedural junctions possible apply to making diamond crossovers and single and double slip points, so they can be made to look like the junctions with the correct frog points, checkrails and so forth?

Diamond crossings have existed in Trainz for many years. For instance: Turnout Diamond Number 8,<kuid2:171456:38520:1>

As with any new technology, it may take some time before they are implemented as procedural track. The only improvement would be that the angle would be adjustable, so it hardly seems worthwhile.

Single and double slip points can be made up from procedural track. What elements of the point do you consider as missing?

 

[SailorDan]

Diamond crossings are a basic function of operational railway infrastructure and should have been supported as a function of spline track in Trainz 1.0, let alone still no sign of them 18 years later...

Diamond crossings have existed in Trainz for many years. But to call them a basic function of operational railway infrastructure is somewhat overstating the case. They are actually somewhat unusual: much less common than a slip.

 

[CJ187]

there are basic.
almost everywhere in germany are diamond crossings.

 

[SailorDan]

there are basic.almost everywhere in germany are diamond crossings.

Those images are single and double slips. A diamond crossing is not a junction, just a crossover point. They have guard rails, but no moving points. Therefore, unlike slips, they cannot be setup with procedural track because procedural track only does guard rails and frogs at junctions.

/Edit. It appears there may be a diamond crossing in that third image - the track that runs diagonally across the lower right corner includes 3 diamond crossings and two slips. Most of the other crossings are slips. Edit/

 

[JCitron]

Where I live diamond crossings exist but are far and few between, and double-slips are even more rare.

CJ187 -

Seeing those images, I can only imagine the number of spline points needed when laying that track!

Do you AI drivers get confused with all those points?

 

[CJ187]

/Edit. It appears there may be a diamond crossing in that third image - the track that runs diagonally across the lower right corner includes 3 diamond crossings and two slips. Most of the other crossings are slips. Edit/

in the third picture are more than 27 Diamonds (in one Station!)

2nd Picture has also one diamond in the middle ^^

 

[Kennilworth]

Hi

Surely every double junction has a diamond crossing where the second track crosses over the first one? This would make it a basic track layout on most rail systems, especially in Europe.

I look forward to the day that a future version of Trainz can be linked to my mind so that I don't have to do anything other than imagine the route and session that I want and everything will be done for me.

Speaking personally, I enjoy finding work-rounds for the things that have not yet been implemented. At my age it keeps my mind active.

Regards

Brian

 

[RailSimulator]

I can definitely understand that it would take a little time inorder to get system working that allowed for all the check rails and frog etc to be put in the right places and everything. But in terms of there being many out there yes I also understand that but I think its more just having the flexibility to allow for different angles to be applied, especially when creating routes or trying to recreate them sometimes some if not most track plans will have various diamonds and single and double slip points, all with different angles. For me personally Id just like to have the flexibility to recreate track plans without having to adjust to the restrictions of premade diamonds and slip points, thats all Im saying.

 

[Vern]

They are an essential component of double track junctions, before the advent of high speed turnouts with many still in existence today on secondary lines or what's known as "swing nose" diamonds in use. Also found in complex station areas etc. etc.

The Fixed Track diamonds are all very well, but they don't adapt to the track type they are using and if you clone and change the config, still only useful for personal route. Even so, does the Trainz signalling AI see these FT diamonds as junctions and protect against opposing train movements?

So repeating the assertion that improved track geometry including making diamonds and slips *protected by the signalling AI* should be on the agenda for future versions, please.

 

[SailorDan]

Even so, does the Trainz signalling AI see these FT diamonds as junctions and protect against opposing train movements?

Uh? A diamond is not a junction - that's what makes it distinct from (for instance) a double crossover. If it was a junction then procedural track could already do it.

 

[Vern]

Uh? A diamond is not a junction - that's what makes it distinct from (for instance) a double crossover. If it was a junction then procedural track could already do it.

No need to be pedantic. Infrastructure where two train movements could come into conflict and needs to be protected by the signalling system.

 

[ZecMurphy]

Hi Vern
For signalling of a 'diamond crossing' (not double or single slip/compound points), we introduced the interlocking towers. This was one of the major reasons for their design and introduction (along with the other pathing and signalling abilities).

For diamond crossings, the configuration is relatively simple. You have a signal for each direction a train is expected to travel through the crossing (so for a simple 1 track crossing 1 track arrangements, you would have 4 signals).

You then create 4 paths, one for each direction of travel. In these paths, you use the 'set external object' (I think it was called) option to set the conflicting signals to be red.

This should work for both player and AI trains, preventing issues through the crossover.

Granted it isn't automatic, but it also allows you to handle some very complex arrangements (including multiple crossovers in the one area, or to force signals in the nearby area to show a suitable aspect as required, or to force the setting of any necessary catch point junctions).

For the procedural track itself, there are plans to expand on the system in future to support more junction variations. However there are only so many things we can do at one time, and as such we do need to work out a priority order that we work on things. This isn't going to suit everyone, but hopefully it does mean we can eventually bring these functions to Trainz! (and I'll admit to being someone who is looking forward to the expansion of the procedural track system; the Victorian Railways absolutely loved single and double compounds; to the degree that even the most remote branchline stations tended to have at least one!).

Regards

 

[cascaderailroad]

I love those signals on the track ... Very easy to read them for train crews

 

[JCitron]

I love those signals on the track ... Very easy to read them for train crews

I agree. The path indication for the double-slips is easy to see. The German signaling system overall is quite easy to understand once you study it. Like the Pennsylvania Railroad, the German system is a PCL system with semaphore indications done in colored light positions. There are of course a multitude of various signals, but the overall same function is there. From what I've seen on YouTube videos, they still use some semaphore signals as well. These seem to be on old branch lines and are disappearing from the modern world as they are replaced with the modern signals.

 

[Vern]

Appreciate the comment re IT's, Zec, but even from your description the thing sounds fiendishly complex for what should, in truth, be a basic function of the signalling and routing logic. However if expanded functionality of procedural or for that matter all track systems to create and "see" a diamond crossing in the signalling that would be a huge leap forward.