What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Standar

X-Tracks 3.2 & TSECTION.DAT
===========================
I'm one of those users who several months ago downloaded X-Tracks 3.1 and installed it according to the instructions. I haven't done anything in the RE during this period and all of the freeware routes here that I've downloaded seem to operate flawlessly, with one exception, "Sea View 2", an absolutely phenomenal route, which I'll elaborate on later. This particular problem may not even be an X-Tracks issue but since this is the route forum I'll ask about it anyway. Some of the other equally excellent routes which I've installed and run seamlessly are: ADFRR, Raton Pass, Ohio Rail 9.1, PONv5, LGV-MED, FFL, Abula Line, Cumbres & Toltec, NNJ beta7 (haven't applied the upgrades yet), not to mention tons of rolling stock and the fantastic "Big Boy", etc. I love steam!Now that the preamble is over let's get to why I'm posting this request for information. I'm contemplating installing the "Standardized" TSECTION.DAT file available in the library. Up to this point, the only modification to my stock install of MSTS has been the upgrade to X-Tracks 3.1 soon to be X-Tracks 3.2. In reading the scanty docs included with the standardized tsection.dat file download, I ran across a line, which mentions the inclusion of extra track sections. Now the route I want to install ("Milwaukee Road's Trans-Missouri Division Part 1"), mentions in its installation instructions that "both" the standardized tsection.dat and X-Tracks 3.2 are required. I'll take the route author at their word as far as requirements go but before I change my base setup even further, I'd like to know what the differences are and just what each file is adding to or changing in my setup/system? After all, doesn't X-Tracks add the extra track sections already, so what's this about track developers getting ID numbers for extra track sections to put into the standardized tsection.dat file? I'm certain there's a good reason but being that I've never created any custom track sections the coordination process is a mystery to me.Let me just say that since I've had X-Tracks on my system (several months now and counting), I haven't experienced any problems that I can attribute to having installed it. I'm very comfortable with it and the increase of available routes for downloading made the installation worth it. I'm looking to plunge into route building eventually but that's a whole different animal."Sea View 2" Route Issue
======================
Now the "Sea View 2" route issue. I start out in Pelican Bay and attempt to explore the various islands but even with the various locomotives (both steam and diesel types) on full throttle, the train seems to bog down every one or two hundred feet (my rough estimate based on train length as a guide), almost stall (based on loco's max power and consist total weight), then slowly lurch ahead again. If a very powerful locomotive is not used, I'm guaranteed to stall, otherwise, this cyclically repeats itself for the entire run. This process appears almost as if a very steep section of track is being hit but visually its all flat or just a gentle uphill slope. Incidently, when using the F5 key view, the train and locomotive brakes are both off. Throttle at 100%. The brake pipe pressure is at the pressure set in the .ENG files, 90 psi or more based on locomotive in use. The brake cylinder pressure stays at zero (0) and only intermittently jumps briefly between one (1) and (3) psi before returning to zero (0). This happens for my automatic introductoy ride activities as well as when I manually "explore" the route. Any ideas? I'd really love to run the length of the route full tilt without hitting the quicksand patches. The scenery is absolutely gorgeous.Conclusion
==========
Any comments regarding either of these issues is greatly appreciated, and again thanks to all the great developers who've taken the time and energy to create and share their wonderful efforts with this community. By the way, Fozzy, that "K-36" of yours is absolutely stunning. Bravo! (I know the last line should go in the locomotive forum but I couldn't help myself)

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, LawrenceKellie, Sep-06-02, 04:47 PM, (1) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, level10, Sep-06-02, 04:52 PM, (2) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, dchagar, Sep-06-02, 04:55 PM, (3) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, Hawk, Sep-06-02, 05:21 PM, (4) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, level10, Sep-06-02, 05:23 PM, (5) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, Hawk, Sep-06-02, 05:36 PM, (6) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, LawrenceKellie, Sep-06-02, 05:38 PM, (8) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, Hawk, Sep-06-02, 05:46 PM, (9) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, LawrenceKellie, Sep-06-02, 05:53 PM, (10) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, Hawk, Sep-06-02, 06:18 PM, (11) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, LawrenceKellie, Sep-06-02, 05:37 PM, (7) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, level10, Sep-06-02, 06:37 PM, (12) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, Hawk, Sep-06-02, 07:09 PM, (13) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, lenglel, Sep-06-02, 07:34 PM, (14) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, level10, Sep-06-02, 08:10 PM, (16) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, level10, Sep-06-02, 08:13 PM, (17) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, davidbeach, Sep-06-02, 08:46 PM, (18) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, level10, Sep-06-02, 08:57 PM, (19) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, LawrenceKellie, Sep-06-02, 07:57 PM, (15) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, davidbeach, Sep-06-02, 09:01 PM, (20) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, dvdhoven, Sep-07-02, 01:43 PM, (21) RE: What Is The Difference Between X-Tracks 3.2 and Sta, level10, Sep-07-02, 03:49 PM, (22)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

I haven't run much of SeaView, but the phenomena which you are describing sounds like what happens when the 45 degree yard switches or ends are used. They are *very* nasty critters.Again, that is just an observation, guess, based on what you describe happening.Lawrence

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Thanks. Any info about MSTS is greatly appreciated. I guess I can just run "locomotive-only" consists until this thing is figured out.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

This is probably a combination of cars that can't take sharp curves or turnouts, and sharp curves or turnouts. I haven't run Seaview for a while, but I do remember some pretty short radius curves in it. If you're running a passenger or freight with the longer cars, I've had the same problem you describe on my own route when I try to take a standard freight car around a streetcar corner....lurch....stall, etc. I don't think this can be attributed to XTracks. You should, however, download both build 8 of the standardized tsection.dat and the updates to XTracks 3.2 so you won't have problems with a future route that uses these creations.
Dave

Dave

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Sep-06-02 AT 05:22 PM (EDT)

After running Sea View 1 & 2, I have to point to Lawrence Kellies observation. It's definatly the 45 degree end points that are causing the effect.
As Lawrence said, "They are *very* nasty critters."
If I remember right, you won't find any of those nasty 45's in Sea View 2. Bill realized they were a major hinderance.
Hawk
It's the "Orange Blossom Special" bringing my baby home.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I guess that cuts it. The latest standardized tsection.dat file should be installed. Thanks for the info about the switches. I'll try some straight stretches and see if the same thing still happens.I'm still curious though about what's in the tsection.dat file versus the X-Tracks file(s) and why I need both. I accept that I have to HAVE both, but I still don't know why? Let me get the tsection.dat installed then on to X-Tracks 3.2!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Just to claify a point, XTracks and/or the latest tsection.dat won't do anything to fix those 45's.
Unless I'm mistaken, the only way to fix that problem is to delete the 45's and replace them with dynamic track. Even running 1 Dash9 will have the same problem, just not as exagerated as running a full consist.
Hawk
It's the "Orange Blossom Special" bringing my baby home.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Dynamic track won't fix it either. Because if you are inserting where a 45 piece is, the dynamic track will have to be a 45 also! The only solution that I have found is to rebuild the area to use different radius curves.Lawrence

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LK! You are correct in the fact that the dynamic track will still have to be a 45, but it will not have the short straight section that the default 45's have. For some reason, I think that is the major problem with them
I may be wrong, but through experimentation of my own, I have found that dynamic track will allow the train to run smoother through the 45.
With all due respect, I'm not trying to argue with you, just pointing out my own observations.
Hawk
It's the "Orange Blossom Special" bringing my baby home.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Sep-06-02 AT 05:54 PM (EDT)

You are correct. I forgot about the little straight stretch.
Lawrenceps. Sheesh, I had to edit this because I couldn't even spell my name correctly. Must be Friday!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

ROTHFLMAO!!!!!!!!
Look at the bright side. Tomorrow is Saturday.
HawkIt's the "Orange Blossom Special" bringing my baby home.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>I'm still curious though about what's in the tsection.dat
>file versus the X-Tracks file(s) and why I need both. I
>accept that I have to HAVE both, but I still don't know why?
> Let me get the tsection.dat installed then on to X-Tracks
>3.2! XTracks is a set of track shapes that *require* the standardized tsection.dat (STDat). The STDat is what tells MSTS about the tracks. XTracks ADDS more tracks, making more and different combinations available.XTracks is only ONE of many packages that are either (a) out there or (b) coming.The STDat contains the definitions for the new XTrack pieces, along with definitions for other pieces. The STDat, if I understand my history correctly, was created so that many different track builders could have their tracks available to a multitude of route developers.In short, they are two different things. If you use XTracks (or a route uses it) you must have BOTH XTracks and STDat. But, you can use STDat by itself.....it doesn't require XTracks. XTracks requires STDat, but STDat does not require XTracks.Hopefully that will help some.Lawrence

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Wow! You route gurus are amazing. I finally understand!As far as Sea View 2 goes, I'll muscle through for now because I don't want to affect the route by editing it after I've upgraded my X-Tracks 3.1 to version 3.2 and installed the latest standardized tsection.dat. However, it's my understanding that once X-Tracks is installed, I have to process the route with "Horace" so I can use the RE on it. Since I'd be a newbie to the RE (not running it to inspect routes but to actually modify terrain and lay track), I'd just as soon wait for "Sea View 3" with more compliant track pieces. That route is definitely worth running a beefy loco over it just for the view.Thanks again gentlemen for your input. I really appreciate the wealth knowledge and friendly support here.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

OK! Here's the bad news. Sea View 2 was an extension to Sea View 1. Sea View 3 will be an extension of Sea View 1 & 2. The dreaded 45's will still be there, unless we can talk Bill into fixing that.
To understand where Sea View 1 stopped and Sea View 2 continued, you'd have to download Sea View 1.
The last I heard, there is no intention of fixing the 45's.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
Hawk
It's the "Orange Blossom Special" bringing my baby home.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Sooo... if I understand all this correctly, the reason the loco
was dragging in the first place was simply a case of a long
wheelbase on short radius curves?
This is a feature not a bug? I know I've had some pretty
amusing situations running the x-tracks template route when
my loco hits those street car curves at speed, fast enough
to push into the middle of the s-curve, but then bounces
back and forth stuck in the middle hee hee hee more fun
than a head on collision"you've got two trains, have you got two power packs?"
--Winston Churchill

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Sea View 2
==========
Fixing those switches sounds like a big job, but I hope I'm wrong. Am I? In any event, I'll be looking forward to the next release of Sea View, as well as the next version of these other hiqh quality routes being posted.Ohio Rail Update Pics - Amazing!
================================
Just a side note. I noticed a thread here with some screen shots of updates to the Ohio Rail route. I was totally floored! This place is turning into an MSTS user's paradise.Installing L2 with X-Tracks 3.2 & Latest TSection.dat
=====================================================
I hope this hasn't been covered already but I'm very much into the mass-transit type routes. I started off with the "L1" route (before X-Tracks) based in Chicago. When the L2 version of the route came out, I was concerned about conflicts with the tsection.dat file. With X-Tracks 3.2 and the latest standardized tsection.dat file installed, is there a simple and SAFE way to install and run this route? I'm looking forward to switching between "L2" and the new German subway route "Linie U1".Wish List
=========
Would some talented route designer please consider doing a "Flushing #7" line, or the "F-Line", or even the "A-Line". All three of these routes are based in NYC and have above and below ground sections. They're pretty long and would (in my opinion) make for some interesting activities. Well, it doesn't hurt to wish.Thanks again good people.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Correction - It was the NNJ Beta 9 screen shots that I just saw post. Awesome route!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Using the standardized \global\tsection.dat file and having L2 installed at the same time is a sure way to get the dread send/don't send. If you really, really want to make L2 work with the standardized \global\tsection.dat file, send me an email at tsection@train-sim.com requesting a file that includes the sections used in L2.Once you have that file, you will still have two potentially significant problems. One is that you will have to use Horace (included with Xtracks) to modify the L2 world files and the route\tsection.dat file to work with the standardized \global\tsection.dat file. The second problem is that once Chris releases his next version, the entries used to make L2 work will be over written. L2 is a developmental dead end and Chris' next release will incorporate several changes in design and development direction from that of L2.David Beach.Palouse & Lewiston

1% Completed

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Thanks, I guess at this point it doesn't make much sense to go through all that work when a compatible version is in the pipeline. I'm glad to see an elevated line will be available. Thanks again for the input. I really appreciate it.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Sep-06-02 AT 07:58 PM (EDT)

Sorry, I misunderstood the message to which I was responding.Lawrence

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Not a bad explanation.I can't seem to get the point across to enough people often enough, the standardized \global\tsection.dat file and Xtracks are two separate beasts, one of which (Xtracks) requires the other, but not the other way around. You can use the standardized \global\tsection.dat file in lieu of the default file with no problems even if you don't have any of the additional track shapes included. Just don't edit any routes created with the default file without thoroughly reading the readme file.I originally proposed what has become the standardized \global\tsection.dat file to avoid a situation where multiple parties developed different customized track packages, all of which would be non-compatible, and then having the route builders force to choose between customized packages and users having to swap \global\tsection.dat files back and forth.Sorting out a minor philosophical disagreement with Okrasa led to the discovery of the hole thing that makes the standardized \global\tsection.dat file compatible with routes that were designed for the default \global\tsection.dat file. Prior to this discovery, making any route created with the default file compatible with any customized \global\tsection.dat file was difficult.David Beach.Palouse & Lewiston

1% Completed

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Hi,Some of the problems with tight curves can be solved by having the line CouplerHasRigidConnection (0) in the Coupler section of cars and loco's.Read well, I say some, not ALL!
But I have cured several tram cars with this line.Dick van den Hoven

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

This sounds like a parameter I'd have to set on most of the rolling stock. That would be quite a few cars for me. Oh, but if it works...Thanks

Alert | IP

[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | File Library ] Copyright © 2002 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.