LAST EDITED ON Apr-12-03 AT 12:39 PM (EDT)
Good evening Eric,hearing you loud and clear. > Is it not time that they were standardised and given in the download information? <Last point first: Yes, I'll think of stating it also in the file_id next time - the height has been publically discussed in this forum before release, so it never occured to me to repeat it in there. Naturally not everybody will have read the thread in question. As for standardisation. On a voluntary basis, some standardisation is happening, which actually is the reason why the STS cars were adjusted to 6.2 metres from their original size. So far, Kuju/MSTS doesn't offer the most obvious solution to the wire height dilemma, namely firstly giving the wire some "substance" (presumably in the form of a bounding box) and secondly coding the pantograph in a way that it would stop extending as soon as it reaches the wire (without MSTS thinking that the train has just crashed because it has "hit something").The various models of traction equipment that are currently around do also differ in one important aspect. Some have animated poles/pantographs, while the pole/pantograph is fixed onm others, i.e. an unanimated, firm part of the shape file. Actually, except for the Berlin T24 motor (www.thetrain.de) I haven't seen an animated trolley pole yet - correct me if I'm wrong.With an animated pantograph it is theoretically possible for an author or even a repainter to adjust the pantograph to a new or different height, provided deeper knowledge exists of the shape file and of how the matrix used to animate the pantograph works. With pans that are not animated we are stuck with the shape the author gave us, unless you wished to get the panto to the wire by scaling the entire car along its z (height) axis...The STS Brill's are based on Carles' Romero's FCC Brill interurbans. These use the 6m wire that most European electric stock now has, thanks to most authors voluntarily respecting this informally established standard.For US traction equipment, Dave's Mesaba Electric has spurred the same voluntary standardisation of trolley poles and pantographs to 6.2 metres. Incidentally, scaling the original Brill interurbans by 5% both in length and in height for proportionality, but leaving their width untouched (unless you want the wheels off the tracks) did not only bring the car shapes to a matching height for the other equipment coming with it (platform coaches, boxcars), it also took them right up as closely to the Mesaba "standard" as possible. See the discussion in the STS thread about wire height, including user input on what height to go for. A third standard established by now is the 7.2 wire of the NEC, with all US class 1 electric engines and motor units observing it. Also the L&PS seems to have its visible wire - which in reality is scenery, the default wire has been moved out of sight - at these 7.2 metres (subject to Wayne's confirmation). A fourth wire height is the default 5.4 (?) metres of the Tokyo Hakone route, which seems to have little impact on what is published here at train-sim.com, but I assume that would be very different if you downloaded from a Japanese MSTS site. >Could motor cars and trams have alternative files for different heights, so that, within reason, cars can run on most lines?<Wayne Campbell, the author of the L&PS car No.2 you referred to in your mail, is actually considering three alternate heights for the car, namely the 23ft version for the NEC 7.2 metres wire, the 21ft version for the 6.4 wire you refer to (which route calls for that height, by the way?), and the 20ft version for the Mesaba 6.2 metres. So, yes, it is possible, either by giving a full set of files (shape, shape definition and engine) for each of the three heights, or by provinding alternate shape files to swap back and fourth. You may now ask why the STS cars don't have the same, do you? The idea of doing a couple of shape files for the NEC wire is in the back of my head, but that does mean some trial and error to get the animation right, provided Carles does allow these modifications to his shape, which we'd actually have good chances for, I assume. So it is a matter of time.Once the animations were "cracked", it would only be a matter of calculations and editing of shape files to provide an entire set of swap shapes for different wire heights. I'll keep the request in the back of my head, but cannot promise an instant result.Just as a side remark: I occasionally go the other way, if I get a route with an odd wire height that does not at all fit any of the horses in my carbarn: I change the wire height in the xxxroute.trk file to the desired standard height, and then scale the shape files for the poles to match the standard wire. That is much quicker a solution which works fine if all the engines you'd typically run on a specific route have fairly identical pantograph or trolley pole heights. If you want to be perfect, you may also switch the poles on a route to a different model of matching size. See some of the screenshots in the STS thread. I saved a second copy of the Sweden1 route on my HD, giving it a different ID, and used 6.2 metre wire and some Mesaba poles on it instead of the default 6.0 metre with Swedish gantries. This way, it took me 10 minutes, some renaming of files or editing of gantry.dat - whatever you prefer - and one error message for a missing .ace on one of the poles to get the cars to run under a properly set wire. But be warned, replacing the poles (instead of scaling the existing ones) could take another few hours in the route editor just to move and fine tune all those poles that get placed too close to a diverging track, if you wanted it to be perfect.Lukas a.k.a Swissie
Alert | IP
Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
