A New Dimension in Model Railroads

Two quick comments -

It is quite possible to place artefacts of scale size in Trainz. As an experiment some years ago I made some model buildings to 1:12 scale to be used on a Trainz layout - not a simulation of a model railway/railroad - to create a model village. Quite effective when including normal sized Trainz visitors. This could be carried to extremes, for example 1:76 or 1:87 scale - the only problem being seeing them!

A virtual model railway/railroad could also be made to any scale by creating artefacts of appropriate size. For example, for a 1:22 scale garden railway, a shed would need to be made 22 times the normal size. Again I have made a few things and tried them out on a simple garden railway, including semi-detached cottages and a raised track bed.

For my own virtual modelling to 1:76 UK scale I use a close approximation of two metres on the baseboard equals one inch. For N gauge I would be happy with four metres to one inch. This would give a baseboard 720/4 inches in length ie.180 inches or 15 feet, whereas a 1:76 baseboard is approximately 30 feet square.

Ray

hminky said:

Had prototypical operations on several 4x8 layouts in HO, S and On30.
My last layout in On30:
http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/4x8/operation/lilo/
The BaseMapz works great, just lower it below the grid.
...[/IMG]

Harold

Click to expand...

Harold, thanks for the link to your On30 layout. I enjoyed looking at the route under construction and the motive power you have for it. Thought I try making a track model of the route in 3 different scales to see the relative difference. I used Cadrail to draw the route over an image file of the layout I got from the pdf file I dl'd from your site. I loaded the image in Cadrail, scaled it to 4'x8', checked some other dimensions and then drew over it.

I had a few problems making the dwg. A few spots needed some forcing to fit together. The plan called for 18" and 22" radius curves which I tried to use as a 1st trial. Usually I drew the final curve to fit and curve radius could vary slightly from the plans.

I started out using the Atlas switch templates in Cadrail that matched the plans, but I ended up making my own #4 and snap switch templates to get a slightly better fit in a few areas. The frog angles were maintained in all cases. When done drawing I scaled each version up to full size separately in Cadrail. I superposition the 3 versions so the NW corner of base board was located at 0,0,0 and exported it as a dxf file. I created a new trk file from the vector data and added it to the route asset in CM.

I went with ng36 for the track instead of ng30 since I model the EBT RR, The EBT mikes are big for the On36 ver. The McKelvey Bros Shay I use on my layout is a better fit. In the On36 ver everything is a a pretty tight fit.

I don't want to add to any confusion expressed in recent posts but I put all 3 scale versions on the same Trainz baseboard just as an exercise. You wouldn't do this if you were creating a TMR route. Mixing scales doesn't work. But this was just a comparative study. The gray areas in the layouts are approximately 4' x 8' and represent the size of the "plywood table" bench work in the respective scale.

Ist is the pic of the plan of your route that I used as the basis for the Cad dwg. I ran the track at 0 elevation - I didn't see any grade info on the plan and I didn't see any grades in the pics on the website.


3 versions on a single baseboard, HO at the top, N version in the middle and O at the bottom.


Close up of the McKelvey Bros Shay and 5 EBT flats cars in On36 and then in Nn36:




Bob Pearson

Harold, thanks for the link to your On30 layout. I enjoyed looking at the route under construction and the motive power you have for it. Thought I try making a track model of the route in 3 different scales to see the relative difference. I used Cadrail to draw the route over an image file of the layout I got from the pdf file I dl'd from your site. I loaded the image in Cadrail, scaled it to 4'x8', checked some other dimensions and then drew over it.

Click to expand...

The trackplan was developed from the layout for an article in "Model Railroad Planning 2007".

I used Autocad because the trackplan takes up less space than if done in MR Cad programs. The sectional track can be compressed into less space. In Autocad I could fit the trackplan in the space.

Did the trackplan back in TS12. The problem in Trainz isn't the track it is the topography.

Found most of the Trainz NG equipment wouldn't round the curves:



Harold

The curve problem appears to be from the Friction and power settings in the engine files of both engine and rolling stock. It is a common problem. Modify the engine files. Don't worry about the performance, just modify to get the behavior you want.

Peter

Linda,

Shortline2 said:

..I realize there is "upscaled" 3D models out there and I know I could make my own...

Click to expand...

You are way ahead of most others Linda .

Shortline2 said:

...In a dream situation, the wall, floor, ceiling, table, chair, benchwork, door, windows, people is all a base thing of the software and we as user just supplies out own textures to be used if we want to change the standard look, kinda like the grid/baseboard today is a fixed part of the program, and the sun and sky is part of the program...

Click to expand...

Speaking as someone who spent a large part of their working life designing systems for the railway industry I can (with reasonable confidence) say that the dream situation you describe above would be too expensive for N3V to develop unless TMR becomes a major success.

There will always be some of the forum regulars that will decry anything that is not exactly what they personally want Trainz to be.

TMR could be a great success and it looks like it's going that way and so refinements could follow, lets see what happens.

Shortline2 said:

..Will the walls cast a shadow on the layout like in T:ANE, will the sky interfere, stuff like that?...

Click to expand...

I think this is being worked on (or maybe has been fixed).

Regards

Chris M

Does the Basemapz utility come with the pre-order or just with the final version.

Thanks all for the comments and the thoughts.

I realize the cost part of the coding, one of my biggest problems in life is to try see the cost in things I do and wish for. I can understand it so to speak, just not see it, as in, feel it.

I hope this venture of N3V is a successful one and that they can take the branch even further into the mountains and hills and find some gold in there!

Enjoy the journey guys! :wave:

Climbing back into my mine...

With a smile, after all, Trainz in some form have been with me for a Life Time almost!

Linda

hminky said:

The trackplan was developed from the layout for an article in "Model Railroad Planning 2007".

I used Autocad because the trackplan takes up less space than if done in MR Cad programs. The sectional track can be compressed into less space. In Autocad I could fit the trackplan in the space.

Did the trackplan back in TS12. The problem in Trainz isn't the track it is the topography.

Found most of the Trainz NG equipment wouldn't round the curves:

Harold

Click to expand...

Ah yes compression - overlap a few pieces and it all fits fine. You can cut to fit in construction. I prefer to adjust radii abit and it fits in that way too but in construction the flextrack gets cut to fit in any case.

I don't use autocad as much as I did when I was working. I have an old version that's getting older and since I've retired I've found solutions that are just as good for what I need now. I use Cadrail as a general purpose cad program and seem to enjoy it for some reason.

I had trouble running the 2 locos on the On36 version of the route last night. The HO as much better and the N scale was not a problem as you'd expect based on the actual curvature. I wrote a bit for the last post about the curve resistance in Trainz and the problems it might present for sharp radius curves in some MRs but axed it out as it was getting too long. Interesting that you and Peter would bring it up. I was wondering if N3V would be bringing out a new controller for TMR but I guess none is planned. Especs for electric motor powered steam locomotive models with and without electronic controllers - I'm not jumping at that right now.

Thanks again, at least I got started and it appears it might be an interesting pastime for some long nights this winter. I don't plan on getting TMR but will look forward to SP2 for Tane. Figure I'll make my own routes - at least the track. I got 4 Armstrong routes bookmarked already.

Bob Pearson

Currently we have two scale options - model and real to give them some names. Nothing is stopping anyone making other size content. What Harold appears to be after is larger than standard rolling stock so that he can increase his 6' x 8' grid to get the resolution required with our "5 or 10m" grid.

We also recognize that investing time and effort into the types of programmatic solutions being discussed would take away for TANE/real size Trainz development. We have chosen to prepare a package for sale to a market segment that exists. Just as with the real size version of Trainz, we will evaluate what types of improvements we will make over time to the product offering. Simple facts are that V1.0 won't have as many features as v2.0 and nothing is set in stone.

Maybe I am getting the wrong end of the stick but it is my impression that people want smaller content, which is strange as they also seem to want smaller base boards. As Trainz itself is a scale model railway disguised as a simulation why do we need any changes? When the new version was announced, it seemed to be the same basic system, repackaged as a model railway simulator, aimed at the market where a full scale simulator does not reach or is not wanted.

I suggest that what we need is a basic Trainz scale 6ft x 4ft base board. Better still, a one foot square baseboard, that could be used to create any shape or size of layout. Changing model scale would immediately remove all the DLS content from use, which would be most disappointing for those purchasers expecting to model their favourite railway.

We humans are never happy with what we have.

Peter

Tony_Hilliam said:

Currently we have two scale options - model and real to give them some names. Nothing is stopping anyone making other size content. What Harold appears to be after is larger than standard rolling stock so that he can increase his 6' x 8' grid to get the resolution required with our "5 or 10m" grid.

Click to expand...

Thanks for being the only one to understand the problem and why the game doesn't work for Model Railroads.

Harold

narrowgauge said:

...Maybe I am getting the wrong end of the stick...

Click to expand...

Perhaps so Peter, the whole concept of scale in a 3D environment is a difficult one to grasp - it took me a long while.

narrowgauge said:

...We humans are never happy with what we have....

Click to expand...

Oh so true !

BUT surely the idea of TMR 2017 is to widen the uptake of Trainz, which means more money for N3V to put into developing the core product and any future spinoffs ?

I hope you will have some fun using the TMR routes and the assets the contain.

Chris M

hminky said:

...Thanks for being the only one to understand the problem and why the game doesn't work for Model Railroads...

Click to expand...

Harold, I understand what you are saying BUT the game can work for model railways it just takes a bit more effort to achieve the best effect. Scenery with the 5m grid can be too coarse so the solution is simple but time consuming, build your own hills and valleys using Blender (or whatever).

I've been involved with the 'real' model railway world since I was very young and have exhibited my layouts all across the UK and had them featured in model railway publications. To produce even a small layout with the required level of detail requires a good deal of effort and significant cost. The photo is just a small part of my garden railway (under construction) and the locos and stock featured in the photo (chosen at random) would cost far more than a lifetime of purchases of Trainz and FCTs.




TMR 2017 gives people the inspiration and a chance to build that dream model railway and maybe later do a 2000 board layout of LIRR or whatever they like.

Just my view on the world you understand

Chris M

I once had to model a real miniature railway and build a few oversized objects to make the existing train cars look smaller.

Now the standard Trainz objects, when masquerading as HO scale models, when placed on a baseboard, make the yellow 10m x 10m grid appear to be almost 12cm x 12cm, (11.49 actually) so the grid is effectively smaller.

I'm not sure that a complete revision of the grid size is necessary, after all Trainz started out as a model railway orientated programme and that was with the 10m grid, not 5m as we have available now. So with a careful choice of materials it should still be possible to achieve the desired effect.

While, as stated previously, there are things N3V should have done to tailor this version for the purpose, changing the whole scale of things would render all the current DLS content as unusable. Even MSTS, where the scale was doubled for narrow gauge created an odd situation with assets and rolling stock that couldn't be used on standard routes and was superseded by the arrival of X-Tracks etc which has proper ng track. In Trainz we already have a variety of track sizes, other than for miniature railways (5", 7.25" 15" etc.) but even so would be best left in proportion to the core dimensions.

Vern said:

I'm not sure that a complete revision of the grid size is necessary, after all Trainz started out as a model railway orientated programme and that was with the 10m grid, not 5m as we have available now. So with a careful choice of materials it should still be possible to achieve the desired effect.

Click to expand...

The grid doesn't have to be changed just the assets.

Railworks allows scaling of a scenery asset in the editor:



Upscaling MR assets would effectively make the grid smaller.

Harold

FYI to anyone interested...

Basemapz will be included with TMR17, and will also be available for free at my website. Release on the website will coincide with release of TMR17, as we are still testing the software.

ALSO... I've seen a lot of comments here about the grid size being too small to be effective in a model setting. PLEASE TAKE NOTE: Basemapz SCALES THE PLAN UP TO 1:1 when it produces the route. So the 5M grid becomes 5M in the real world, not in the HO/N/etc. world. Thus, if you use my utility to create your model railway from a track plan, you will end up working in 1:1 scale, and the 5M grid will be just as sufficient as it has always been.

Regards,
-Mike

ModelerMJ said:

FYI to anyone interested...

Basemapz will be included with TMR17, and will also be available for free at my website. Release on the website will coincide with release of TMR17, as we are still testing the software.

Regards,
-Mike

Click to expand...

Thank you for the info@:wave:

Ish

hminky said:

...Railworks allows scaling of a scenery asset in the editor...

Click to expand...

You mean you can actually work with the Railworks editor Harold ?

Personally even after 40 plus years of using and designing computer software I find their user interface obscure to say the least.

Really, can you justify spending real money for every asset you have in Railworks versus the 400,000 plus assets completely free in Trainz ?

Scaling in 3D is a relative term, just get to grips with it.

Cheers

Chris M