Superelevation Question

[Vince]

Dear team,
How is superelevation on curves implemented in OR?

The reason I ask is as I built (am building) the LIRR I positioned bridges and viaducts very close to the track base, probably less than a centimeter above the bridge deck. When running under OR, I notice that the inside radius of curves is in some cases, sunk below the bridge deck (or terrain) which suggests to me that the track is actually 'banked' or 'tipped' simulating the superelevation. I have superelevation set to level 1 and 90m length.

And not to rain on your parade oh magical developers, the task of revisiting my bridge, viaduct and terrain locations is WELL worth the effort as performance in OR surpasses anything (astounding really!) on train.exe, I'm figuring the LIRR will only run well on ORTS so my limits on tile objects and high detail has just evaporated.

Yes, there are some 'bugs' ( smoke, brakes, power, ect. ) but I had this thought; Maybe they're NOT 'bugs'? Huh? Maybe they're an accurate depiction of the proper physics? Physics I might add that [I]may] be (and always have been)interpreted incorrectly by the train.exe game engine.Hey, there's good precedence for my thoughts of possible lousy KUJU math!
For one, I seem to remember that KUJU got the calculation algorithms all wrong for the players location/track location with the resulting frustration that little goody gave us.(aka the busted coupler syndrome)
So I'm not assuming that the 'bugs' in OR a bad thing but that maybe due to corrected physics.

Meanwhile, I have no problem tweaking this and that engine or wag file to make OR the only Sim I'll ever need. I believe that the developers when they stated that accurate physics was the goal of the Open Rails Team. Good show guys!

back to pounding spikes.....

[eric]

ORTS treats the curve as dynamic track, and re-renders the track with the outer rail raised. If you're using something like Scalerail or DBTracks, you'll need to load a track profile so that it doesn't render flat-track.

Right now, it's not configurable, which is why I choose not to bother with it. Once there's an ORTS editor, and we can specify the transition pieces as well as the amount of cant by section, maybe I'll try it out.

[rdamurphy]

Dear team,
How is superelevation on curves implemented in OR?

The reason I ask is as I built (am building) the LIRR I positioned bridges and viaducts very close to the track base, probably less than a centimeter above the bridge deck. When running under OR, I notice that the inside radius of curves is in some cases, sunk below the bridge deck (or terrain) which suggests to me that the track is actually 'banked' or 'tipped' simulating the superelevation. I have superelevation set to level 1 and 90m length.

And not to rain on your parade oh magical developers, the task of revisiting my bridge, viaduct and terrain locations is WELL worth the effort as performance in OR surpasses anything (astounding really!) on train.exe, I'm figuring the LIRR will only run well on ORTS so my limits on tile objects and high detail has just evaporated.

Yes, there are some 'bugs' ( smoke, brakes, power, ect. ) but I had this thought; Maybe they're NOT 'bugs'? Huh? Maybe they're an accurate depiction of the proper physics? Physics I might add that [I]may] be (and always have been)interpreted incorrectly by the train.exe game engine.Hey, there's good precedence for my thoughts of possible lousy KUJU math!
For one, I seem to remember that KUJU got the calculation algorithms all wrong for the players location/track location with the resulting frustration that little goody gave us.(aka the busted coupler syndrome)
So I'm not assuming that the 'bugs' in OR a bad thing but that maybe due to corrected physics.

Meanwhile, I have no problem tweaking this and that engine or wag file to make OR the only Sim I'll ever need. I believe that the developers when they stated that accurate physics was the goal of the Open Rails Team. Good show guys!

back to pounding spikes.....

You would not believe some of the things the Devs have found...

For instance, the diesel exhaust. It has a maximum in MSTS, which isn't that high. So, some people specified maxsmoke parameters that are WAY out there. Which results in the "bug". There is a small app that will adjust all of your diesels to smoke more reasonably, and then you can adjust them to pretty much anything you want, since they're not clamped.

Also, one of the problems that has been encountered is with AI trains. With correct - or closer to correct - physics, they're all underpowered. Who thinks you can move 60 loaded tank cars with a pair of Dash-9's?


Brakes? Yep, it can take a loooooong time to pump up the air in 125 coal cars... Use SHIFT-F5 to watch what the brakes on the cars are doing. It will also show you some of the glaring errors in some .wag files. Including mine..

I can show you the math, if you'd like, but unless you're heading downhill with a good tailwind, you ain't goin' nowhere...

We won't even talk about the steam parameters....

Robert

[twpol]

Dear team,
How is superelevation on curves implemented in OR?

The reason I ask is as I built (am building) the LIRR I positioned bridges and viaducts very close to the track base, probably less than a centimeter above the bridge deck. When running under OR, I notice that the inside radius of curves is in some cases, sunk below the bridge deck (or terrain) which suggests to me that the track is actually 'banked' or 'tipped' simulating the superelevation. I have superelevation set to level 1 and 90m length.

It is implemented (currently, at any rate) using a similar system to dynamic track and the superelevation is simply a rotation about the central axis along it - i.e. the inner rail is lower and the outer rail is higher. This does cause the inner rail and trackbed to disappear below-ground sometimes (or below-bridge in your case). Since it's a bolt-on feature it will always be a bit dodgy at times but you are more than welcome to move things around so it works - we just can't guarantee that will always be how we do superelevation.

And for OR-specific content (when we get to that point), obviously the superelevation will be coded into the route via the route editor so such things should not be an issue.