I'm currently working on a RF&P route and my track laying has finally reached the Acca Yard in Richmond. It's fairly large with the main yard, fuel racks and repair shops. I can't decide if I should lay out the prototypical track plan, which would look empty as even high end PC's would have trouble with the prototypical amount of trains running about, or a condensed version that models the main operations of the facilities at the expense of lost switching tracks and prototypical accuracy. I'm leaning towards the condensed version as I would rather personally have a smaller, but easier to fill, yard instead of a vast plain of empty tracks. I'm curious to see what some of you more experienced route builders out there typically do for yards.
Yard Size: Prototype or Economy sized?
- Thread starter opus722
- Start date
I would go for the full-sized yard. It makes more sense. Besides, you don't need to fill the yard all the way. Just create the illusion of a full yard.
Thanks for all of your input so far. It seems the clear consensus is to build the full yard. I'm leaning that way now too because in the end I'll never forgive myself for cutting corners. I had never thought of those low poly splines to fill up space. They make the decision a whole lot easier.
Your stuff in that thread is pretty much the look I want to achieve thanks for that in particular. It really makes the yard come to life rather than endless rows of space.
The illusion of activity is more important here than actual yard activity itself. My objective is a route for long distance running rather than switching so the yards are mainly elaborate scenery. The huge Potomac Yards on the other end, now long gone and presently undergoing redevelopment, are going to be a whole different ballgame, but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. I hope to post some pictures a few weeks (months?) from now when I have more to show than a bunch of track and HOG lines.
Your stuff in that thread is pretty much the look I want to achieve thanks for that in particular. It really makes the yard come to life rather than endless rows of space.
The illusion of activity is more important here than actual yard activity itself. My objective is a route for long distance running rather than switching so the yards are mainly elaborate scenery. The huge Potomac Yards on the other end, now long gone and presently undergoing redevelopment, are going to be a whole different ballgame, but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. I hope to post some pictures a few weeks (months?) from now when I have more to show than a bunch of track and HOG lines.
Hmm, good question.
Had some discussions about such.
One thing up front: a yard filled over 50% of its capacity is deemed stuffed.
Then it depends which assets you are going to use.
If its, say, high-poly cars and engines, you might be better off with a condensed version.
I suggest testing it. Set up some consists on a makeshift yard and see whats happening.
If it gets bumpy (even without scenerey and details), condense.
My 2 cents.
Had some discussions about such.
One thing up front: a yard filled over 50% of its capacity is deemed stuffed.
Then it depends which assets you are going to use.
If its, say, high-poly cars and engines, you might be better off with a condensed version.
I suggest testing it. Set up some consists on a makeshift yard and see whats happening.
If it gets bumpy (even without scenerey and details), condense.
My 2 cents.
On my layout the yards are really backdrop, being on other railroads that just pass nearby. On those lines I made the mainline, then brought the yard leads to where they look connected, but that actually aren't. Then filled in the yards with Sniper's static rail cars.
My route is the M&Pa, the backdrop roads are the B&O and the PRR so I have portals passing trains back and forth on their mainlines with the yards just as "decoration".
Of course that won't help if the yard is on your route's line, but I thought I'd just throw those 2 cents in....
My route is the M&Pa, the backdrop roads are the B&O and the PRR so I have portals passing trains back and forth on their mainlines with the yards just as "decoration".
Of course that won't help if the yard is on your route's line, but I thought I'd just throw those 2 cents in....
It's really a matter of art rather than science, whatever looks good and doesn't send the framerates down into single digits.
coalmine module,<kuid:522774:100276>
Yardwork,<kuid:522774:100710>
Those two are intended for route creators to use as a starting point or merge into a bigger route - and then customize to taste, delete all my static cars and replace with static intermodals and/or 85 foot high cube boxcars, whatever floats your boat. Chop off one end and make it a single ended yard, merge two side by side and add more tracks, expand the coal mine module and make it six levels deep.
American Flyer 1.1,<kuid2:522774:100852:1>
Look that route over and you'll see I used both modules, but changed both from what they originally were "out of the box". I also built other yards using static cars to give that busy look.
You can build something like North Platte or Proviso with painstaking detail, then add static cars only to the very outer tracks and maybe the fourth or fifth tracks from the outsides, staggering the empty stretches so the visible cars overlap here and there. People who like trains like to look at trains, so in a train simulator the trains are a more important part of the scenery than trees and houses. Biggest mistake most people make creating routes with big yards is forgetting that it's not a track simulator.
coalmine module,<kuid:522774:100276>
Yardwork,<kuid:522774:100710>
Those two are intended for route creators to use as a starting point or merge into a bigger route - and then customize to taste, delete all my static cars and replace with static intermodals and/or 85 foot high cube boxcars, whatever floats your boat. Chop off one end and make it a single ended yard, merge two side by side and add more tracks, expand the coal mine module and make it six levels deep.
American Flyer 1.1,<kuid2:522774:100852:1>
Look that route over and you'll see I used both modules, but changed both from what they originally were "out of the box". I also built other yards using static cars to give that busy look.
You can build something like North Platte or Proviso with painstaking detail, then add static cars only to the very outer tracks and maybe the fourth or fifth tracks from the outsides, staggering the empty stretches so the visible cars overlap here and there. People who like trains like to look at trains, so in a train simulator the trains are a more important part of the scenery than trees and houses. Biggest mistake most people make creating routes with big yards is forgetting that it's not a track simulator.
It needs to be a compromise between operational realism and optimisation. There is nothing like a huge yard area to drag down the frame rate in any of the sims. Quite often many of the people who end up using the route will be blasting down the main at 65 MPH and won't give tuppence for the exact track configuration 400 yards to the side at the back of the yard that you spent a week perfecting. On the other hand, having a large yardextending either side of the main removes some of the pressure from putting detailed scenery by the track, as the yard and its structures is the scenery.
Im doin a Chicago route which is including all lines yards etc most of the yards cross between 60s era to modern (for intermodal)
Im averaging 33fps on a 8 yr old comp so far in 2010.....
although it crazy I also am utilizing with all the lines that run through all the tracks will be specified for different interchange
assignments etc....
so depending on the operation every track eventually gets used....
one thing ive learned is that upgrading everything old that iuse in the cmp helps and i am also using originald track by betriebleiter which is 2.0 version its a crunchymesh and looks awesome....(eventually hope its upgraded soon)
Dave =)
Im averaging 33fps on a 8 yr old comp so far in 2010.....
although it crazy I also am utilizing with all the lines that run through all the tracks will be specified for different interchange
assignments etc....
so depending on the operation every track eventually gets used....
one thing ive learned is that upgrading everything old that iuse in the cmp helps and i am also using originald track by betriebleiter which is 2.0 version its a crunchymesh and looks awesome....(eventually hope its upgraded soon)
Dave =)
Last edited:
RHKluckhohn
Active member
That's one way to do it. How do the extra cars affect performance? (It's nice to have additional rolling stock on hand, too.)
In my observation the AI is not up to switching ops, it's a human operation. My yards are all on the small size so the tracks are protected by one-way markers to keep the AI drivers out. That messes up the signal indication, the yard track is always red. Has anyone a solution for that?
Bob
It gets a little bit of stutter if there's a lot of cars in there, but I make a bunch of short consists with a few cars and one or two big ones, so the tracks aren't totally loaded. I put them in at different places on the yard tracks so they're not in one big clump, and they are staggered across the yard ladder with some near the ends while others are closer to the middle. I also have the same ones saved and build freights out of them. I call them Mixed Freight Short ----1, Mixed Freight Short ---- 1, and so on. I use these on the through freights so I can interchange cars with the through freights. I noticed too that the AI are a bit daft when it comes to switching cars, so I let them do the driving when it comes to the long distance stuff, and I switch the cars in the yard and local industries.
I tried the yellow markers and that didn't work for me either, so that's why I adopted my method. There is supposedly another kind of direction marker, but I can't remember what it's called, to allow the signals to work properly.
What I don't like about the latest versions of Trainz is the stupid locked junction bit. This makes switching cars very awkward because we have to pull so far away from a junction lever to activate it. This also becomes troublesome too if a junction is set incorrectly because there's no time usually to set it before derailing.
John
"What I don't like about the latest versions of Trainz is the stupid locked junction bit. This makes switching cars very awkward because we have to pull so far away from a junction lever to activate it. This also becomes troublesome too if a junction is set incorrectly because there's no time usually to set it before derailing."
If you are referring to the "feature" (I hate it, too) that requires you to be about 6 or 7 meters from a switch stand before you can throw the switch, that distance can be reduced to as little as 2 meters. What I do is this. Under the track flyout, select the markers option, then click the trigger icon. Open the "advanced" item at the bottom and you will see a number, 20.00. Change this to any number you like; I use 2.00. Then click the switch stand and it is possible to save your head end brakeman having to run 20 feet every time you need to throw a switch.
Bernie
If you are referring to the "feature" (I hate it, too) that requires you to be about 6 or 7 meters from a switch stand before you can throw the switch, that distance can be reduced to as little as 2 meters. What I do is this. Under the track flyout, select the markers option, then click the trigger icon. Open the "advanced" item at the bottom and you will see a number, 20.00. Change this to any number you like; I use 2.00. Then click the switch stand and it is possible to save your head end brakeman having to run 20 feet every time you need to throw a switch.
Bernie
"There is supposedly another kind of direction marker, but I can't remember what it's called, to allow the signals to work properly."
Which apparently doesn't do what it says on the label reliably.
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/show...outing-Direction-Marker-lt-kuid-30501-1013-gt
No answer to that yet, guess I gotta submit a help desk ticket, and they'll probably tell me to contact the original creator but since the original creator is Auran we'll go straight into a program loop. :hehe:
As for freight cars, Justin Cornell's "sleep script" helps with that;
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?76129-Now-commence-Operation-Framerates
Second half of that thread describes how those work, 500 of them in a single yard will affect framerates once they're all in view, polygons is polygons and must be processed. But destructive testing shows that 5000 cars in different places around a big route don't hurt the performance because the sleep script prevents the program from loading and worrying over the physics for every loose consist car on the entire route. The script is public domain so you can download one of my "brakeman" series cars, steal the script out of that, and modify your newfangled 85 foot high cubes and intermodal cars to give them the same feature.
Which apparently doesn't do what it says on the label reliably.
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/show...outing-Direction-Marker-lt-kuid-30501-1013-gt
No answer to that yet, guess I gotta submit a help desk ticket, and they'll probably tell me to contact the original creator but since the original creator is Auran we'll go straight into a program loop. :hehe:
As for freight cars, Justin Cornell's "sleep script" helps with that;
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?76129-Now-commence-Operation-Framerates
Second half of that thread describes how those work, 500 of them in a single yard will affect framerates once they're all in view, polygons is polygons and must be processed. But destructive testing shows that 5000 cars in different places around a big route don't hurt the performance because the sleep script prevents the program from loading and worrying over the physics for every loose consist car on the entire route. The script is public domain so you can download one of my "brakeman" series cars, steal the script out of that, and modify your newfangled 85 foot high cubes and intermodal cars to give them the same feature.