route shape

After downloading some routes that appeared to offer some interesting landscapes, I noticed that they all looked like they were made from plans for a model railway. Compact, loops, with stations within walking distance from each other or just over a ridge of high ground or behind some scenery. Some routes did say inspired by or even mentioned fantasy so that could be expected. But if the route names existing or real places, I expect the route to actually follow the prototype as far as distance and direction is concerned. Details can be simplified so the whole yard, town or other area doesn't have to be complete but at least be representative of the real thing. The Canadian Rocky Mountains and the Darjeeling Himalayan Railway come to mind.

Is it because many route creators are inspired by route plans in rail magazines with in a basement mindset where a route goes around and around while point to point is a rare layout or because it is just easier to do?

I for one don't understand the ways of putting transdem into trainz routes. I did a route once using basemaps and it took ages. I have got books on station layouts which I can recreate the station areas but in-between stations getting height and route is not easy. I would love to redo my routes if I got the terrain for the areas right.

stagecoach said:

I for one don't understand the ways of putting transdem into trainz routes. I did a route once using basemaps and it took ages. I have got books on station layouts which I can recreate the station areas but in-between stations getting height and route is not easy. I would love to redo my routes if I got the terrain for the areas right.

Click to expand...

TransDEM will import actual satellite-derived height data along with actual aerial photos or topographic (ordinance) maps, then superimpose the two so that the maps will align themselves on the landscape. What is interesting is one can bring in historical maps and place them accurately on current DEM-generated so that old railway lines can be built.

Once all this is in TransDEM, you can then export a route ready for placing asset, laying track, and completing it up the way you want. There are options to import track in place, but the tracks really, really need to be adjusted so I find it easier to just import the route without the track in place.

You can go one step further from that and use the TransDEM-generated terrain and map as a basis for a fictional route. I have done that by placing track in places where no trains were ever planned. I followed the regular railroad building principals such as putting in tunnels, cuts, and embankments as needed, but I kept true to form with the landscape, which meant I had to plan my route carefully.

There's a bit of a learning curve, and what I've said here only scratches the surface of what can be done.

martinvk said:

Is it because many route creators are inspired by route plans in rail magazines with in a basement mindset where a route goes around and around while point to point is a rare layout or because it is just easier to do?

Click to expand...

Basically yes but other factors also come into play.

Not everyone wants to drive (or create) routes that go for hours between stops or towns. In some parts of the world freight trains have to take with them a full crew car with onboard sleeping, eating and recreational facilities for the replacement crew because the distance between towns where crews could be exchanged exceeds the driving hours limits. So some routes can recreate the prototypical yards and other facilities found in towns along these long routes but shorten the actual distances between them.

Another factor is compactness. Adding and decorating (texturing, scenery, etc) lots and lots of baseboards can be quite tedious and is not everyone's idea of a recreational hobby. So layouts with towns and yards hidden "just over the ridge" are one popular solution - "Kickstarter Country" is one such layout.

I guess we all bring our own bias to the table. I'm partial to Dutch routes where station to station distances are not so great as to cause boredom. If I was modeling one of those extra long freight routes, I'd probably use some portals to reduce the monotony of placing kilometers of scenery between the exciting parts. That or some magic tunnels with the ends logically far apart even though physically they might only be less than a baseboard away.

Now about the routes that go around in circles. One reason I got into Trainz was to get away from that basement limitation where the longest straight track is less than the length of the room.

martinvk said:

Is it because many route creators are inspired by route plans in rail magazines with in a basement mindset where a route goes around and around while point to point is a rare layout or because it is just easier to do?

Click to expand...

The Fond Du Lac Branch is 50km of single track with some very simple industrial sidings along the way and a small pair of yards at the terminus. I started it around Christmas of 2009. It was four or five years before I felt ready to put it up on the DLS but it was far from complete. At this point it's pretty much "done." I did the terrain the hard way, transcribing 10-ft contours from Topoquest and smoothing them out with invisible track meshes.

So now nine years later I enjoy linear railroads other people have created! And my test route is an 8-baseboard circle with about 7 miles of track, and I'm enjoying fiddling with it. Yes, it's easier and more relaxing.

:B~)

Most of my routes are linear jobbies though occasionally I delve into upscaling a model or miniature track plan. My Water of Coate route is an example of the latter. It allows you to focus your efforts to get quicker results than the frankly oft-times quite tedious task laying endless km of forest, fields and moorland with the occasional RRT1 style "town" scattered.

I'm not a route builder but I think people would be bored with endless miles/kilometres of mind numbing scenery. So, while I like the concept of protopical routes, I think some common sense is required. I like Martin's idea of "magic tunnels" where you can chop out much of the route but still have the more interesting parts. I'd like the magic tunnels to incorporate a "time jump" where the elapsed time would match the time that would have been taken if the full route existed. i.e. if it took 4 hours to complete that stretch then the magic tunnel would change the elapsed time by 4 hours.

I'm not convinced portals would achieve the same thing.

Some people actually prefer the "endless miles/kilometres of mind numbing scenery" while other like shunting operations. The trick is to combine both in the one route. Long trips between locations followed by lots of shunting to separate wagons from the consist and deliver them to set sidings, and to collect wagons from sidings to add them to the consist at each location.

Can you imagine what it would be like to be a pilot on the new Singapore to New York direct non-stop service that has just started (or is about to start)? A few minutes of excitement during the take-off and landing but with 16+ hours of boredom while the autopilot does all the work in between. And I thought that being an airline pilot is a glamorous job.

Don't they have two crews onboard?

Edit
Found this but the configuration does not give me a lot confidence on getting there alive.

pware said:

...

Can you imagine what it would be like to be a pilot on the new Singapore to New York direct non-stop service that has just started (or is about to start)? A few minutes of excitement during the take-off and landing but with 16+ hours of boredom while the autopilot does all the work in between. And I thought that being an airline pilot is a glamorous job.

Click to expand...

The recent 15 & 1/2 hour flight I did from Vancouver to Sydney was mind numbing, backside numbing and outright boring. I believe the Perth to London flight is around 19 hours. And I think the autopilot does the take off and landing as well.

Train trips can be boring as well although the trip I did a few years back from Rome to Florence was interesting when I looked up and saw the train speed was over 300 kph. It would be nice to have such a service from Canberra to Sydney. 3 to 4 hours in a car/bus and almost as long by air.

While the thoughts of driving very long routes is there, my stamina and mind is not. When I drive those long routes, I find myself nodding off which in real life would not be a good thing!

My own routes are a combination of distance drives between cities and towns with switching in between, or lots of switching at the hubs. On these routes, I let the AI do the driving since they don't nod off, or at least they're not supposed to, though that was a problem in T:ANE SP2, while I do the shunting in the yards and the local industrial switching.

My Gloucester route is a smallish compact industrial and passenger tram route, which can keep me busy for hours switching and driving. It's 7-mile real-distance mainline is plenty long enough and doesn't have a lot of trees and building in the interior where no one can see stuff anyway. My thanks go to George Fisher, by the way, for the original Gloucester Terminal route upon which this is based.

If done well, a model railroad route can be quite fun to drive because it's so compact, but still in some ways it's like fitting a fat lady's foot into a size 3 shoe. We're taking a world meant for 1:1 scale with outdoor lighting, among other things, and attempting to squeeze this into a room. Some things work well here, but a lot doesn't.

Signal Feathers

Vern said:

Most of my routes are linear jobbies though occasionally I delve into upscaling a model or miniature track plan. My Water of Coate route is an example of the latter. It allows you to focus your efforts to get quicker results than the frankly oft-times quite tedious task laying endless km of forest, fields and moorland with the occasional RRT1 style "town" scattered.

Click to expand...

:wave: I just downloaded your Route "Water of Coate" compact and nicely done too, really like the Colors you used and blended together......

I do have some questions about your "Signal Feathers", I don't quite understand the asset and how to use it, have seen this before on other routes, I can see it is something to do with Train Routing, I 'll post a picture later to be more specific......Have an appointment to run too...

Great work on your Routes..........

In my case, I have found it fun to only recreate realrailroads that were short in length. Forexample, my railroading interest is with the Maine Two Foot lines that were in existencefrom the 1880’s to the 1930’s. The Kennebec Central was five miles long, andran between Randolph and Togas Maine. Another was the Monson RR, with six miles of track that carried slatefrom the quarries at Monson to a junction with a standard gauge railroad. The Bridgetonand Saco River had about 20 miles of track, while the WW&F had about 40miles. The biggie of the five was theSandy River and Rangeley Lakes RR, which had about 100 total miles of track.
The very short limes present an opportunity to create verydetailed TRAINZ routes, that while short on switching; can be fun to run,especially if you include automatic passenger and freight loading functions. Both the KC and MRR were modeled at fullscale, but even here there is a lot of scenery that needs to be created.
My SR&RL was modeled at one-half scale, and includes allthe towns, industries, sidings, scenery, trackside buildings, scenery, locomotivesand rolling stock of the original. Evenat half-scale, there are over 400 baseboards, with a lot of scenic details andtrees – lots of trees. A trip over the longestpoint to point portion takes over one hour (real).
One of my scenic rules is to detail no more than one mile oneach side of the mainline, or in some cases no more than what can be seen as ifriding or driving the train.
As mentioned in earlier posts, it takes a lot of time (and dedication)to recreate a real railroad, and the end result could be very boring whilerunning long distances between locations. Then too, you need to create all the infrastructure and items that arefound with a real railroad. This in turnmeans you need to know someone to create the missing pieces, or learn BLENDERor GMAX. In fact, my experience hasbeen that BLENDER has added a whole level of modeling enjoyment to TRAINZ .
In my past life as a builder of model trains (On2), therewas an unwritten rule between modelers. One never criticized another modeler’s choices, or skills. So it should be with the TRAINZ modelingcommunity. In the end it comes down toyour personal goals, and since this is a hobby, anything that makes you happy,should make us happy.

blueodessey said:

I do have some questions about your "Signal Feathers", I don't quite understand the asset and how to use it, have seen this before on other routes, I can see it is something to do with Train Routing, I 'll post a picture later to be more specific......Have an appointment to run too...

Great work on your Routes..........

Click to expand...

If you are referring to the black squares with arrows , letters or numbers on them they tell the signal which way the lever is set so the scripted signals will show the correct route lights or semaphores..

blueodessey said:

I do have some questions about your "Signal Feathers", I don't quite understand the asset and how to use it, have seen this before on other routes, I can see it is something to do with Train Routing, I 'll post a picture later to be more specific......Have an appointment to run too...

Click to expand...

See here re feathers about half way through the tutorial http://www.trainzclassics.co.uk/guides_tips/files/Trainz_TC3_Signalling_Tutorial.pdf

blueodessey said:

:wave: I just downloaded your Route "Water of Coate" compact and nicely done too, really like the Colors you used and blended together......

I do have some questions about your "Signal Feathers", I don't quite understand the asset and how to use it, have seen this before on other routes, I can see it is something to do with Train Routing, I 'll post a picture later to be more specific......Have an appointment to run too...

Great work on your Routes..........

Click to expand...

Appreciate the feedback. I think someone got in first with what the "feathers" do, essentially work I/c/w the signals to show correct routing or aspects.

I think it comes down to how you wish to spend your time. I installed the Sherman Hill route. The yard is so long and the prototype speed limits so low, that it takes forever (probably five minutes, actually) for the switcher to get to the end of the yard ladder and then all the way back down to get a car. Then repeat, repeat. i found myself opening other windows and browsing or writing something (or even scripting).

Now, with Model Railroads, the operation holds my interest. Couple minutes between industries, then switching.

clam1952 said:

See here re feathers about half way through the tutorial http://www.trainzclassics.co.uk/guides_tips/files/Trainz_TC3_Signalling_Tutorial.pdf

Click to expand...

:wave: Thank you Sir,,,,,,,,I go there and gets some additional apprenticeship training with the Feathers,,,,,,,,,,,,,

martinvk said:

Is it because many route creators are inspired by route plans in rail magazines with in a basement mindset where a route goes around and around while point to point is a rare layout or because it is just easier to do?

Click to expand...

Interesting topic and thread so far!

For mine, I like to have a collection of operations routes with my own spreadsheets calculating what wagons or whole trains need moving (making very heavy use of the RANDBETWEEN function). The size of the route I pick for an operational session comes down to what kind of railroading I feel like doing at the time and varies in size from the tiny Jay St Connecting Railroading up to routes hundreds of miles long like my London to Lille route, or lets say the Cumberland to Connellsville for examples.

If a movement will take hours, no problem, my AI drivers do the driving while I shunt a yard or have lunch. Are not the most prototypical model railroads the prototypes themselves? Trainz gives us the power to model the real thing at a millionth or billionth of the cost. That's why I love it.