Announcing new activity

My latest work is being uploaded even as I speak.Ahem...Could I have the horn please... ( I can only afford one )Blabbity-blabbity-Bleeeeooooo... pfft!Thank you.Announcing "Clearing up the Empties."A rather extensive activity for Marias Pass 3.1

The culmination of an eight month (or was it nine) project that
eventually manifested more bugs than a flop house bed.I assure you that it has been thoroughly fumigated, but lets consider it a beta until I get some feedback. This one had me rolled up in a corner in the fetal position with an empty bottle of "Jack Daniels" more than once.Shure is purty though.I won't gas on too much about it except to point out that it is a gratifying combination of both yard switching, and long haul work.Its long, its colorful, its entertaining.And best of all, the entire trainset and all the parts are contained within. It can be set up ready to run in under ten minutes.You're welcome.The only downside is that the zip is rather large, as you might imagine, but if you have broadband, no sweat.Your feedback here, or at my email is welcome. I need people's assessment if I am to continue making quality activities.By the way, this is the first of a two part related activity, the second of which is still in progress. They can be run stand alone just fine.

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

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

RE: Announcing new activity, dcushing, Jan-27-05, 01:01 PM, (1) RE: Announcing new activity, yardlimit, Jan-27-05, 01:08 PM, (2) RE: Announcing new activity, oakpalms, Jan-27-05, 08:02 PM, (3) RE: Announcing new activity, yardlimit, Jan-27-05, 10:00 PM, (4) RE: Announcing new activity, yellowdog, Jan-28-05, 12:39 PM, (5) RE: Announcing new activity, yardlimit, Jan-28-05, 01:22 PM, (6) RE: Announcing new activity, henry3, Feb-08-05, 11:59 PM, (7) RE: Announcing new activity, yardlimit, Feb-09-05, 10:04 PM, (8) RE: Announcing new activity, kmanc21, Feb-10-05, 06:47 AM, (9) RE: Announcing new activity, yardlimit, Feb-10-05, 07:29 AM, (10) RE: Announcing new activity, henry3, Feb-20-05, 00:01 AM, (13) RE: Announcing new activity, yardlimit, Feb-20-05, 04:29 PM, (18) RE: Announcing new activity, gallaghe44, Feb-12-05, 06:32 PM, (11) RE: Announcing new activity, yardlimit, Feb-12-05, 08:41 PM, (12) RE: Announcing new activity, henry3, Feb-20-05, 00:04 AM, (14) RE: Announcing new activity, claudie, Feb-20-05, 12:16 PM, (15) RE: Announcing new activity, yardlimit, Feb-20-05, 03:52 PM, (17) RE: Announcing new activity, yardlimit, Feb-20-05, 03:50 PM, (16) RE: Announcing new activity, yardlimit, Feb-20-05, 05:12 PM, (19)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Just wondering, where can one find this amazing activity?

Duncan

Alert | IP

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

Well... I uploaded it Sunday, but I imagine the site administrator might have quite a few files to go thru before posting in the library.
Fact is, it hasn't shown up yet. The file should be named CUEv1.zip

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

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

Yardlimit,You have gone out of your way to make running your activity easy. That takes a lot of time and effort to put that all together. Does your download automatically place all the trainset files in the folder? If so, that might cause a lot of duplicate files for some people, and duplicate engs and wags are really hard to get out of the MSTS "brain" once that happens. I sure hope you included an option not to do that.Bob

Alert | IP

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

LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-05 AT 10:08 PM (EST)

No. Mine aren't that automated. Its flexible and relatively easy.
You are asked to dump the zip out into a temp folder, ideally on the desktop. The result will place stuff in related groups of folders
and subfolders. The rest of the install is done in about 7 easy steps. copy & paste. When it comes to the point of placing in cars & engines I point out in the docs that if the user already has some of the stock, they
may copy in just my specially named wag/engine files, just in case
they have modded the originals. They are warned not to copy in the entire folder unless they are satisfied to have the wag/engines overwritten with the originals as published. My files have a unique
name and therefore will not interfere with modded ones or originals.Now, the only caveat is that my files will expect to find and use the original shape files and the like, so if they have been renamed, (I cant imagine why) some editing of my file might be required to deal with that.In a couple cases, the car folders chosen had no reccommended folder name from the author, so I chose one that seemed appropriate. This could result in a redundancy in your trainset, but that could be discovered and corrected with a little scrutiny.
Everything is there, but one is free to make adjustments if you have some of the train files already. And by the way, in most cases only wags that interact with the player train have special files. The activity AI trains/statics will use original wags (or yours) as long as the names are unaltered from originals. On static or AI trains, I
have included special eng files mostly to control lights and sounds,
but again they will not interact with or modify originals.Thats about it. There isn't a darn thing extra to download or struggle with.

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

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

Eek! Well, your particular activity will certainly be easier to use, but I'm afraid this "fix" will screw up a lot of other things related to building consists, etc. Personally, if it were me, I'd rather modify your activity in a 3rd party program (i.e. Conbuilder) to run with my customized setup (which has all of the bugs pulled out of all the rolling stock, along with modified wag/eng physics, etc) than dump a second copy of the same piece of stock into my TRAINSET. Maybe that's just me, though. Clayton

Alert | IP

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

LAST EDITED ON Jan-28-05 AT 01:52 PM (EST)

I think you missunderstand. There is nothing intrinsic in my activity that will prevent you from doing any of what you discribe. And along with that, you do not have to duplicate anything you already have. If you already have one of these engines or cars, rather than copy in my folder, just copy in my uniquely names wag or eng file. The activity will run fine. If you are not satisfied with the corrections to physics I made in my Wags or eng files, go ahead and update them to suit your taste. Just make sure you dont change the name. I think what you dont understand is that orig wag/eng files are unchanged right out of the publishers folder --except for the additional uniquely named wag or eng file I provided along with them. It does not interact with the original wag or eng files.
If you do not wish to overwrite something, simply pop in my CUE_eng
or CUE_wag. file into your own folder. Beyond that, knock yourself out with changes. You'll understand better when you see how the files are layed out.Anyway, I've been doing add-ons for games of one sort or another
for about ten years. One of the first things you must ask yourself
when putting an add-on together is: Who will use this? The only correct answer is not "power-user," but "anyone." Therefore I feel I must, to the best of my ability, make this accessable to the newbie who would not know unicode from cuniform. The power-user can
always make things go. The newbie may not be not be able to.

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

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

Hi Greg!It looks like you have another winner on your hands. Thanks for sharing it with the community.I'm about halfway through the run, and everything had gone well up until I rolled up to a red signal at Pinnacle. When I stopped at the entrance to the siding, I saw another eastbound train moving slowly ahead of me. Another train with an odd look was in the siding heading westbound.When the signal cleared and I started forward, I could see that it was actually *two* trains in the siding, and they were overlapping each other. One was an Amtrak train and the other a double stack train with DASH 9's on the point. As soon as I cleared the single track, the activity ended with the "car derailed" message. I think I reached the siding around 11:15 am and the signal cleared around 11:30. I cannot be sure, however, because I cannot load the save from just before the derailment. "The activity starts with objects in collision...."I couldn't see anything in AE to account for this. Has anyone else reported something like this? Or am I running too slow/too fast?Either way, I like the run so far.Henry

Alert | IP

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

>Hi Greg!
>
>It looks like you have another winner on your hands. Thanks
>for sharing it with the community.
>
>I'm about halfway through the run, and everything had gone
>well up until I rolled up to a red signal at Pinnacle. When
>I stopped at the entrance to the siding, I saw another
>eastbound train moving slowly ahead of me. Another train
>with an odd look was in the siding heading westbound.
>
>When the signal cleared and I started forward, I could see
>that it was actually *two* trains in the siding, and they
>were overlapping each other. One was an Amtrak train and
>the other a double stack train with DASH 9's on the point.
>As soon as I cleared the single track, the activity ended
>with the "car derailed" message.
>
>I think I reached the siding around 11:15 am and the signal
>cleared around 11:30. I cannot be sure, however, because I
>cannot load the save from just before the derailment. "The
>activity starts with objects in collision...."
>
>I couldn't see anything in AE to account for this. Has
>anyone else reported something like this? Or am I running
>too slow/too fast?
>
>Either way, I like the run so far.
>
>Henry
Ok. Bear with me. I'm long winded.This is the first tangible issue anyone has brought to me in 450+ downloads. No news was good news. So no, I cant say anyone else has mentioned this, or anything else.BUT... I do recognize the phenomenon. I'll tell you what I know, and then I'll make some suggestions.This same thing was seen quite awhile ago during 8 months of test and developement. Just once. Essentially the same thing occured at one of the higher elevations, perhaps the same location -but without the derail incident. The EB passenger had stopped on the main, and was engaged in presumably a staredown with a WB freight at a point where two tracks became one. We all know about staredowns, but one of the more stupid things MSTS can do is run a following AI train right up on a siding with another stopped AI train in the same location without regard to its presence. This is exactly what happened when the EB freight caught up with the passenger. The real issue of course, was the staredown. I corrected it with some carefull tweaking of the passenger train schedualling and efficiency settings. The problem never re-occured during testing. The whole thing never caused a crash of any kind. It simply prevented me from going any further. I also wised up a bit and began a "keep to the right" scheme for EB and WB trains at passing points. This can help with staredowns a lot.Now lets talk about your situation. If I understand your message correctly, the silly telescoped trains were already moving off out of that siding as you encountered them, just befor the derail incident. I find that fact encouraging, because it means whatever delayed that passenger train in the first place had ceased to be a problem. Under normal circumstances, the freight never gets an opportunity to catch up to the passenger. Its not fast enough. Its not efficient enough.
Under all subsequent test runs the passenger kept well ahead of the freight. It should. So what caused it to wait? Here's where I get into the theorhetical, then we'll talk about work arounds. First of all my assumption is that the derail incident, and the other phenom are not related, just coincidental. AI trains dont derail or cause derails --unless you clip them or they hit you. I could be wrong, but I'm going to put that aside for now. Here's what is interesting: All the AI traffic is fixed timed to gracefully pass, and it does seem to in every case I've observed.
So what changed? The only answer I can come up with is the only thing I can't completely control: player driving efficiency.Why would this cause a hold-up two trains ahead? Thats the tough part. I think it is wrapped up in code engine behavior. I have read that the code engine looks at 3 or 4 boxes ahead in an effort to determine how it should handle AI train behavior with regard to oncoming traffic. This judgement is not always perfect, and sometimes peculiar. I learned a lot about this when I put together "All in a nights work" based on KHP1s
"2nd section" activity. Heres how I tested the activity in an effort to deal with this stuff
and then I'll tell you what I think happened. Since the schedual is not really time dependant, like "widowmaker," the player is not compelled to push the envelope to say 90% efficiency, nor is it advisable to dawdle, cause you'll get bitched at. I made a number of player runs at what I would call a slower average speed. I also made a number of runs at what I would call a high average speed. The point was to provoke an unsovable staredown with the AI trains based on the two possible extremes of player behavior. Once I got the passing paths tuned, nothing undesirable was noted in either running mode.So what happened with you? Heres my best guess, and if I'm wrong then I still have some workable solutions. I think you were running hot. I think you were running consistantly one or two boxes behind that EB freight by that point in the activity. Maybe shooting for an average speed only a few mph below the posted speed limit. Probably somewhat faster that my most agressive speed tests. Then some bad things came together that I did not encounter. By 11am the first WB passenger should already have passed you, so my assumption is tht the EB Amtrak was approaching the first WB intermodal near the location of the "incident.". The EB freight was one or two boxes behind the EB Amtrak. No problem so far. Normally the WB intermodal and the EB Amtrak pass uneventfully. Then the two intermodal freights pass uneventfully. This time however, you were very close behind the EB intermodal. The program code looks three or four boxes down in an effort to judge what to do withe WB intermodal. It sees three trains approaching the WB intemodal. The first two are AI trains. Completely controllable. We pass them using first come first serve rules of engagement based on how the passing points are set up. But whats this? The third train is a human. Cant control it; speed is unpredictable. The subprogram designed to deal with a PLAYER train in close proximity ahead takes precidence and says: err on the side of caution. WB intermodal stops at light two boxes short of encounter with player train with EB passenger stopped on siding opposite. It could pass safely on main, but in this instance does not. It ignores the presence of opposing AI trains and focuses on the player train, giving it the opportunity to meet at which point passing should be possible. All in the mind of a limited program.
Meantime, the EB intermodal ahead of you catches up to the waiting EB Amtrak and superimposes itself over it on the siding. At some point you halt the player train at a red. Program code says ahah! Player train stopped. Main ahead is clear one box. Move ahead safely. WB intermodal moves forward into next box. As this is completed, our now thoroughly bastardized telescoped trains are clear to move forward to the single track in fusion. They begin doing so and move off. You now complete the move forward into the siding. One of your cars derails on one of MP3.1s nasty switch crossovers --or maybe the derail was a mystery I can only guess at. End of scenario.
My best guess. There are many who may read this who are more experienced than I am who may have a different take, and maybe a suggestion at a more likely cause. But thats my best effort.Ok, Yardlimit, but what do I do about this?!Based on my tests, my guess is that this is an isolated incident that did not manifest itself during testing. I can't explain the derail at all with any degree of assurance. It never happened to me at all.
The only thing of this nature I struggled with is chronic coupler busting at the cutbank bridge. I solved that issue and put a clever twist into the story line as well. Here's what I think you should do. Go back about two or three saves.
(if you can) Run your train throuout the activity aiming for an average speed about 10 mph below the posted limit at any given time.
Its comfortable, gives you time to react to sudden speed or grade changes, and still lends itelf well to good driving efficiency. I used this rule of thumb during a lot of the testing, and it seems to work real well. My guess is that the phenomenon you described will not reoccur. If it does with continued predictability, then tell me. If it becomes apparent that this is more widespread than just you, I will tweak the activity, and reissue a new ver to correct it.
But not unless I get the sense this is chronic and unavoidable with many.The input of other activity gurus is wecome. hope this helps.Best wishes,

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

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

First let me say that it looks like this will be as great an activity as the widow maker. I did have one problem with a car derailed message though. I was coming out of Kalispell and enetering the Whitefish yard (running a little late or at least the conducter told me so) when the AI train waiting to exit the yard starts up and runs into my train. Luckily I had saved after entering the main at Columbia Falls and ran hot into Whitefish. Hit the 3 view and looking backward saw the AI start to move just as my last car cleared the turnout onto WF6, but it was close.Ken

Moving America one virtual train at a time.

Alert | IP

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

>First let me say that it looks like this will be as great an
>activity as the widow maker. I did have one problem with a
>car derailed message though. I was coming out of Kalispell
>and enetering the Whitefish yard (running a little late or
>at least the conducter told me so) when the AI train waiting
>to exit the yard starts up and runs into my train. Luckily I
>had saved after entering the main at Columbia Falls and ran
>hot into Whitefish. Hit the 3 view and looking backward saw
>the AI start to move just as my last car cleared the turnout
>onto WF6, but it was close.
This is a well known problem. It can happen in "A in a NW" as well.
Its an AI train quirk. AI trains will begin motion precisely when your last car clears the switch. If the space between you and the AI lead engine is short -you can get clipped. Work-around is to clear the switch at just under speed limit. I could have choreographed in a contrived warning like I did in "2nd section," but folks usually work it out just like you did.

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

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

Hi Greg!Sorry it's taken me so long to get back with you, but work and family matters managed to get in the way.>Ok. Bear with me. I'm long winded. No problem. As a fellow activity creator, I understand the value of a full explanation. Since I'm not quite in your league, I've learned quite a bit.>This same thing was seen quite awhile ago during 8 months of
>test and developement. Just once. Essentially the same
>thing occured at one of the higher elevations, perhaps the
>same location -but without the derail incident. I think I managed to solve that mystery. I went back to the previous save and shifted my view to the rear of the player train. After I cleared the single track it looked like the Amtrak train started to move, but the stack train didn't. My view was still at the rear of my train when the derailed message popped up, so I think my train was okay. My suspicion is that the bounding boxes between the two AI trains interacted, and one or both of *them* derailed.I think I've heard of other activities in the past where the AI trains derailed and ended the player's run.

>So what changed? The only answer I can come up with is the
>only thing I can't completely control: player driving
>efficiency. I thought so, but I was hoping otherwise.>Meantime, the EB intermodal ahead of you catches up to the
>waiting EB Amtrak and superimposes itself over it on the
>siding. Oh. I guess I wasn't as clear as I thought I was. The interposed trains were both westbound. >Ok, Yardlimit, but what do I do about this?! Besides frown? <g>>Here's what I think you should do. Go back about two or
>three saves. I guess I save a bit more often than most. Or I have something squirrely on my system. After a few tries at closer points, I ended up going back to a save near Belton to get things to flow. And from there I had to run at about half of the posted speed limit to keep distance between me and the EB stack train.>My guess is that
>the phenomenon you described will not reoccur. If it does
>with continued predictability, then tell me. If it becomes
>apparent that this is more widespread than just you, I will
>tweak the activity, and reissue a new ver to correct it.
>But not unless I get the sense this is chronic and
>unavoidable with many. I don't think I'd worry about and update. This seems to be a unique problem on my end. Even running slow as I stated above, I still ran up on the stack train's markers from time to time. IIRC, I ran up close to him several times between Essex and Browning. I did finally pass him (as planned?) between Blackfoot and Meriwhether.I had a chuckle at the conductor's message about getting into Cutbank by 1430 hours. I think it was around 1400 hours when I read it, and there was a heck of a lot more that 30 minutes running between me and Cutbank. When I finally pulled into Shelby, it was around 1800 hours. Suffice it to say, I was well out of time. I'm going to have to re-run the activity again when I get some time.Even with the bugs (on my end) and the failure to complete, it was an enjoyable activity.Thanks for sharing.Henry

Alert | IP

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

>Hi Greg!
>
>Sorry it's taken me so long to get back with you, but work
>and family matters managed to get in the way.
>
>>Ok. Bear with me. I'm long winded.
>
>No problem. As a fellow activity creator, I understand the
>value of a full explanation. Since I'm not quite in your
>league, I've learned quite a bit.
>
>>This same thing was seen quite awhile ago during 8 months of
>>test and developement. Just once. Essentially the same
>>thing occured at one of the higher elevations, perhaps the
>>same location -but without the derail incident.
>
>I think I managed to solve that mystery. I went back to the
>previous save and shifted my view to the rear of the player
>train. After I cleared the single track it looked like the
>Amtrak train started to move, but the stack train didn't.
>My view was still at the rear of my train when the derailed
>message popped up, so I think my train was okay. My
>suspicion is that the bounding boxes between the two AI
>trains interacted, and one or both of *them* derailed.
>
>I think I've heard of other activities in the past where the
>AI trains derailed and ended the player's run.
>
>>So what changed? The only answer I can come up with is the
>>only thing I can't completely control: player driving
>>efficiency.
>
>I thought so, but I was hoping otherwise.
>
>>Meantime, the EB intermodal ahead of you catches up to the
>>waiting EB Amtrak and superimposes itself over it on the
>>siding.
>
>Oh. I guess I wasn't as clear as I thought I was. The
>interposed trains were both westbound.
>
>>Ok, Yardlimit, but what do I do about this?!
>
>Besides frown? <g>
>
>>Here's what I think you should do. Go back about two or
>>three saves.
>
>I guess I save a bit more often than most. Or I have
>something squirrely on my system. After a few tries at
>closer points, I ended up going back to a save near Belton
>to get things to flow. And from there I had to run at about
>half of the posted speed limit to keep distance between me
>and the EB stack train.
>
>>My guess is that
>>the phenomenon you described will not reoccur. If it does
>>with continued predictability, then tell me. If it becomes
>>apparent that this is more widespread than just you, I will
>>tweak the activity, and reissue a new ver to correct it.
>>But not unless I get the sense this is chronic and
>>unavoidable with many.
>
>I don't think I'd worry about and update. This seems to be
>a unique problem on my end. Even running slow as I stated
>above, I still ran up on the stack train's markers from time
>to time. IIRC, I ran up close to him several times between
>Essex and Browning. I did finally pass him (as planned?)
>between Blackfoot and Meriwhether.
>
>I had a chuckle at the conductor's message about getting
>into Cutbank by 1430 hours. I think it was around 1400
>hours when I read it, and there was a heck of a lot more
>that 30 minutes running between me and Cutbank.
>
>When I finally pulled into Shelby, it was around 1800 hours.
> Suffice it to say, I was well out of time. I'm going to
>have to re-run the activity again when I get some time.
>
>Even with the bugs (on my end) and the failure to complete,
>it was an enjoyable activity.
>
>Thanks for sharing.
>
>Henry Hey Henry, I didnt see this reply right away. Thanks.
I wanted to make some comments regarding what you said here.First, thanks for the tipoff regarding AI train derails causing a
activity stoppage. This was a possibility I was not aware of.With regard to the WB telescoped trains; I imagine the first train stopped to wait for your passing, and the one behind caught up.
I could adjust the schedualing some more, but I want to wait till I
hear if more people are seeing this often. MSTS can do some of the damnedest things.You should be able to reach Shelby much earlier than 1800. What will
prevent you from doing so is if you end up following that EB freight into Shelby. Yes, the opportunity to pass the EB freight is quite intended, and every effort should be made to take advantage of it. It will help you get completed earlier.You can probably run a little faster than 10mph under the speed limit and get better results, but it is also wise not to crowd that EB freight until you are past the high elevations. Best wishes,

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

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

I ran this great activity through to the end, but had one big problem when I finally got to Shelby. At Shelby you are first routed onto South 3 and then South 4. There is a message indicating that you should leave the helper and all cars after it on South 3. However, if you put all pickups at the beginning of the train then the order is wrong. Except for Cutbank there is nothing to indicate that pickups should go at the end of the train.

Alert | IP

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

All pickups should go to the end of the train. I anticipated that a player would gravitate toward the fewer steps involved in attaching cars to the end of the current train than any other arrangement. I suppose I should have made this clear by some comment from the Conductor. Don't be offended, I'm not beating up on you. Sometimes I feel that I am too "anal" in going into the detail I do at choreographing activities to the extent I do. Situations like this convince me I am on the right track. If anything, I need to be more thorough. So for the record.... please attach all pickups to the end of the train. In part two, you can betcha I won't be ambiguous
about this.

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

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

I put all of my pickups at the end of the train, so I got that part right.I did, however, go to great pains to make sure I kept that helper on the rear for the whole run. <sheepish grin>Henry (Who made a heck of a lot more work for himself....)

Alert | IP

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

To yardlimit,
I did everything in the readmetext and your act. is running find on my computer just can't wait for the second one.
Great job you did there,
Claudie.

claudie

Alert | IP

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

>To yardlimit,
>I did everything in the readmetext and your act. is running
>find on my computer just can't wait for the second one.
>Great job you did there,
> Claudie.
Thanks Guy, I am working on part two even as I write this.
To early to say just when It'll be ready, but it will be just as fun as part one.Best wishes,

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

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

>I put all of my pickups at the end of the train, so I got
>that part right.
>
>I did, however, go to great pains to make sure I kept that
>helper on the rear for the whole run. <sheepish grin>
>
>Henry (Who made a heck of a lot more work for himself....) Relax.The way I ran it in testing; I kept the helper where it was and
added subsequent cars behind it. When you drop cars at Shelby, everything that is to go into that siding will be there.
Theres more than one way to do this admittedly. Just make sure you place what that drop wants to see.Best wishes,

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

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

P.S.Henry:Whadya mean, not in my league? The Library is filled with your stuff!
I'm not gonna live long enough to do as many good pieces of work.
But thanks for the good word.Best wishes,

Yardlimit

Alert | IP

[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | How To... | File Library ] Copyright © 2004 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.