Does anyone remember the "SCS Scenario Creation System"?
- Thread starter DaveL
- Start date
Kennilworth
Active member
Hi Dave
I remember it well and really miss it. It was a great system which was written by Mike Carter and was streets ahead of anything else. Like yourself I was able to produce long automated sessions in TS12 when using it.
In the early days of TANE I was able to write sessions in TS12 and install both the route and session into TANE where they worked as they should. Constant changes to the route files later prevented the editor being able to read them into the SCS database.
I just wish there was something half as good for TS19.
Regards
Brian
I remember it well and really miss it. It was a great system which was written by Mike Carter and was streets ahead of anything else. Like yourself I was able to produce long automated sessions in TS12 when using it.
In the early days of TANE I was able to write sessions in TS12 and install both the route and session into TANE where they worked as they should. Constant changes to the route files later prevented the editor being able to read them into the SCS database.
I just wish there was something half as good for TS19.
Regards
Brian
lovetrainzloathen3v
New member
SCS was much better than trying to use all these rules. I have been running Trainz, every main version since CE 2001.
Never managed to create anything with the convulated "rules" system.
SCS i was just starting to get to grips with when it fell by the wayside.
Give me a proper scenario creation front end as per TS2019 any time over rules.
Never managed to create anything with the convulated "rules" system.
SCS i was just starting to get to grips with when it fell by the wayside.
Give me a proper scenario creation front end as per TS2019 any time over rules.
Last edited:
Yep, if N3V had spent a few of their limited dollars on creating a timetabled based train routing system they would have made money. As I have said, trains run on the clock. They invented accurate time keeping. But, TRS19 totally ignores that central factor of railroading. A proper set of FUNCTIONS based UPON a set of rules would have allowed some of the "real" railroaders to make realistic railroad activities. AND, such a system would have allowed the CUSTOMERS to safely modify the sessions to suit their objectives. Those changes would not be loaded down with today's constant rules conflicts that are logically fragile and crash under unexpected circumstances. In other words, the present flawed process takes all the joy out of trying to create a real railroad environment.
Last edited:
Basically Amen to everything said so far in this thread. The "rules" system is cumbersome, arcane and many are semi obsolete but still present. A straightforward Activity Editor like MSTS or DTG TS should be a must going forward into the next version of Trainz. Even better if we have an autonomous routing system capable of setting points etc. ahead of the player train (including dynamically resolving conflicts). You've got your (slightly) prettier graphics, now actually focus on the simulation aspect. 
The current rules and driver command system is a godsend for those who are not computer programmers and wish to essentially "drag and drop" functionality for their layouts. Peruse the code for Quickdrive. How readily would that be realized in the SCS? I think the devil is in the details.
lovetrainzloathen3v
New member
There would be far more sessions per route on the DLS.
If rules were not such a pain to use. Easily proven, by the wealth of scenarios created as freeware for TS2019.
Due to it having a proper and useable scenario\session creation tool with a front end.
Even the MSTS activity editor is easier to understand and use.
If rules were not such a pain to use. Easily proven, by the wealth of scenarios created as freeware for TS2019.
Due to it having a proper and useable scenario\session creation tool with a front end.
Even the MSTS activity editor is easier to understand and use.
If there is such a wealth of scenarios for TS2019, where is the problem? Which creation tool are they using?
The railroads implemented standardized civil timekeeping. Accurate timekeeping was introduced by shipping, for accurate navigation.
lovetrainzloathen3v
New member
lovetrainzloathen3v
New member
Yup John Harrison, UK clockmaker.
True, in terms of creation. However, adoption on a universal scale by the public was based upon railroads where you could set you clock by the time they produced. Now we have time whose accuracy is beyond the day-to-day needs of the public. N3V has access to the NBS time (National Bureau of Standards). The lack of utilization in a productive manner is the issue I raise. That is, producing a process whereby the N3V world is managed by the NBS clock. From that the variety of manual and automatic actions by railroad personnel can be emulated on your home computer. ALL signals, crossings, routings and other activities are MANAGED. The weird slow-downs at some signals would no longer occur since they were not ordered by the "central system". Our sytems (routing, signaling, speed control, etc) operate independently and we have chaotic events that require the customers to alter config files, or worse, change the programming of a script.
An example of a simulator with proper "time management" is the Lockheed Martin flight simulator. Its systems have enabled customers to band together into a simulation of an air-traffic-control group that manages hundreds of virtual flights daily all over the world. Each flight is under the management of individual customers using a rule-based process akin the to the real ATC system. In-fact, many of the people who function as "simulated" ATC operators are the very same professionals who have a day-job running the world's ATC. So, simulated airlines around the world all operate in one system as do the real airlines thanks to Lockheed Martin - and Microsoft before them (FSX series).
However, if I want to fly without the rules of ATC I can. I simply do not notify them of my flight and they never see it on their screens - it is virtual. Under a proper system your railroad could also operate independently, or in coordination. All we need are the tools from N3V to do a proper simulation.
Tracks and cars/wagons are expensive. A portion of the rail system is thus shared among operators. Imagine if there were a group of experienced railroad dispatchers running the shared elements. Rather than constrain multi-player activities to one system you would have the same expansion of your world as the simulated ATC offers in the flight-sim world. Your little local railroad could offer transit to the "simmer" running a larger system but needs delivery to one of your customers. Or you could lease some unused cars/wagons to another railroad for a one-shot contract where they need extra capacity. The N3V system would "virtually" add to that railroads stock and reduce yours with a contract that says the items were due to return on a specific date. N3V could just adjust your inventory or you could send an engine to pickup a string of cars. A similar arrangement would share tracks. A lot more interesting than driving a train.
As a note" the Lockheed system is priced almost the same as TRS19.
SCS appears to be a method for arranging cars in a consist that is based on a logical purpose. That purpose could be defined by the user or the status of an industry. I assume cars are arranged by the SCS system based upon the schedule of a train so they can be loaded, emptied, dropped off or collected in a logical manner. By prearranging the consists in a cataloged fashion the SCS program is able to arrange for a proper consist to be loaded and the contents delivered as in response to a schedule. If an industry runs low on product the response of the railroad manager (you) will be governed by a timetable that takes into account ALL customers who are contracted and have on-demand ad-hoc needs..
From what I read awhile ago, there is no SCS timetable that provides an overall specification as one would expect in a railroad operation. I assume that a railroad would design its system to serve likely customers and then sell them service that will meet their needs on a scheduled or demand basis. Yes, you can devise your schedule yourself with the tools at hand but it is not a common structure as each person uses different methods where the abilities and flexibility may be limited. With a proper railroad management system a product such as SCS takes on new value as a tool that is sub-servant to the schedule. It provides the logistical support to meet the criteria of the schedule.
I have no idea how to create scenarios that automates a virtual railroad as I suggest. I suspect that the tools are there (SCS & Rules). They just need an over-arching management system to logically, and easily, use them.
This entire dialog may indeed be irrelevant.
From what I read awhile ago, there is no SCS timetable that provides an overall specification as one would expect in a railroad operation. I assume that a railroad would design its system to serve likely customers and then sell them service that will meet their needs on a scheduled or demand basis. Yes, you can devise your schedule yourself with the tools at hand but it is not a common structure as each person uses different methods where the abilities and flexibility may be limited. With a proper railroad management system a product such as SCS takes on new value as a tool that is sub-servant to the schedule. It provides the logistical support to meet the criteria of the schedule.
I have no idea how to create scenarios that automates a virtual railroad as I suggest. I suspect that the tools are there (SCS & Rules). They just need an over-arching management system to logically, and easily, use them.
This entire dialog may indeed be irrelevant.
Last edited:
lovetrainzloathen3v
New member
I believe you are thinking of a different SCS, Dick.
Scenario Creation System was just that.
Not a wagon (car) tagging system.
If i am wrong, i apologise.
Mike.
Scenario Creation System was just that.
Not a wagon (car) tagging system.
If i am wrong, i apologise.
Mike.