PDA

View Full Version : Lowering track spline points by 0.20m



cascaderailroad
July 18th, 2012, 12:51 PM
A very tedious way to raise the terrain under a track, so as to have non-floating track or roads:

Lay your track and apply the gradient ... place a common building at each track spline point, and name the building by the elevation: ie: 478 66m.

Using a calculator take that spline point height, and add 0.20 to that numeral, and raise that track spline point height.

Do this all the way down the line ... then go back and hit the "smooth spline" button on each track segment.

When done, go back and apply the original spline point track height(s) numeral to all the track spline points.

VERY tedious indeed ... but in some rare specialized scenes on your route, floating track is hidious ... Look Away I'm Hideous:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka1PeNNi6dg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuboJiAUMd8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQyXeLSL0II

scratchy
July 18th, 2012, 12:58 PM
Or just use JR's terrain track ;) I think you can take the medal for most particular about trackwork cascade haha

dricketts
July 18th, 2012, 01:31 PM
Or just use JR's terrain track ;) I think you can take the medal for most particular about trackwork cascade haha

I agree and have been using the track available at USLW. Any track with very deep ballast should do the trick when it comes to eliminating the floating issue. I've still lowered the spline points with USLW's track on my Frisco High Line route. This gives it a much more realistic feel and look. Deep ballast just wasn't found on lines that were not top revenue producers for the railroad.

Dermmy
July 18th, 2012, 04:17 PM
use a calculator to add .020 - what have we come to!

Dropping track is a tedious process, but why on earth would you double the work by raising it .020 first, then dropping it again after smoothing? Just lay the track, get it right, then smooth, then lower.

Also if you leave all the track at it's natural position till the route is done there is a utility by hiballer (I think) which will lower the whole route at the click of a mouse button. That doesn't work for me cause I like to take screenshots of 'finished' areas as I work but it's a great tool otherwise.

'Terrain' track has a place, but imho it looks about as unrealistic as floating track unless you are modelling a recently built hi-speed ultra-tracked main line. Otherwise it's just too much ballast...

Andy :)

sparky15
July 18th, 2012, 05:57 PM
If you lay the track, ballast it and THEN raise the ground under it to eliminate the float, it distorts the ground texture a bit to produce more random effects. By raising the ground level after ground texturing instead of lowering the track the textures seem to blend a little better. Of course, I tend to use a ballast texture to blend the track better with surrounding ground textures. I hate the MSTS "carpet look" without a ballast texture. If you ever go to USLW, search posts by Sparky. I put up a few pictures there that explain it better.

Dave...........

cascaderailroad
July 18th, 2012, 06:43 PM
Dropping track is a tedious process, but why on earth would you double the work by raising it .020 first, then dropping it again after smoothing? Just lay the track, get it right, then smooth, then lower. Andy :)

If you hit the smooth spline button after lowering the track, then you have floating track, all over again.

Yes it is tedious, redundant work raising spline point heights and applying the "smooth spline" tool ... but this is a cheepo alternative for small problematic sceniced areas, to stop floating track.

I only used it on the Horseshoe Curve park, atop the "Curve" ... and it works ... although VERY time consuming and totally redundant !

legia
July 19th, 2012, 06:08 AM
I think it should be 0.3 m.

Dermmy
July 19th, 2012, 04:06 PM
I think it should be 0.3 m.

Not if the track complies with 'official' standards wherein .2 is the specified value. The 'float' was a fix for older style alpha tracks which strobed if in contact with the 'ground'. Lifting track .2 was at the time thought to be a good-enough fix. It's now a legacy thing which could probably be 'fixed' properly, but then you have two sets of standards and a huge community outcry and goodness knows we have had enough of those to last a lifetime! I'll just keep dropping every spline point by .2, it's honestly not all that hard to do...