Terrain Bugs

[tie]

I thought I would add some photos of the buggy areas of my route. As you can see there are huge terrain mounds in OR that corrupt a small area of the route I'm working on. Under the mounds you can see the white voids. I tried smoothing terrain along the blue-lines etc. But there is no fix that I can see. This area works just fine and beautiful in MSTS, but not in OR. The route is still 90% playable, with the exception of this area. (approx. 2 miles is corrupted)

bug1 by CN Edmonton, on Flickr
bug2 by CN Edmonton, on Flickr

[crstagg]

And the OpenRailsLog.txt is attached where?

[R. Steele]

Rory if you don't get a satisfactory answer here...perhaps you can post these shots over at Elvas under the OR "Maybe it's a bug" part of the Open Rail forum. >>> http://www.elvastower.com/forums/ind...ils-simulator/

Charles is right, the OR log may contain some information that would be useful. (By the way...THE ROUTE LOOKS WONDERFUL - sorry for all the shouting...but it is exciting!)

[tie]

https://bugs.launchpad.net/or/+bug/1647463

Right here dude.

Its a fun project Gerry. The bugs are not that bad anyways (just a 2-3 mile stretch).

[charland]

Hi Rory,

Two questions... did you add this terrain to your route and maybe the terrain was added starting at a different elevation in DEMEX, there is a setting in Options>DEM-EX Options>Datum Shift>Elev. Offset.

The terrain that's MIA, you might want to try turning on F7, then left click and right click and see if toggling terrain does anything.

Paul :-)

[R. Steele]

https://bugs.launchpad.net/or/+bug/1647463
Right here dude.

Excellent, now it just needs to noticed and triaged by the OR devs.

Its a fun project Gerry. The bugs are not that bad anyways (just a 2-3 mile stretch).

regarding bug2 screenshot, to my very untrained eye that looks like a missing tile (just had an instance of that myself) and in the OR log I find this warning >>> Warning: Ignoring missing tile C:\games\sim\ROUTES\can99v2\TILES\-0199F410.t

Also to both Rory and Charles: Do you fellows know what these numerous warnings mean?
Warning: Missing UV index in vertex 18 in sub-object 0 in distance level 0 in shape c:\games\sim\routes\can99v2\shapes\webbs_machinery .s

I have seen many routes with these warnings, but do not know what they look like in the simulation...

[tie]

Excellent, now it just needs to noticed and triaged by the OR devs.


regarding bug2 screenshot, to my very untrained eye that looks like a missing tile (just had an instance of that myself) and in the OR log I find this warning >>> Warning: Ignoring missing tile C:\games\sim\ROUTES\can99v2\TILES\-0199F410.t

Also to both Rory and Charles: Do you fellows know what these numerous warnings mean?
Warning: Missing UV index in vertex 18 in sub-object 0 in distance level 0 in shape c:\games\sim\routes\can99v2\shapes\webbs_machinery .s



I have seen many routes with these warnings, but do not know what they look like in the simulation...

Sorry, I don't have a clue, but there were a lot of those UV Index errors that I discovered. So far Paul, DEMEX was not used for this project.

[charland]

Hi Rory,

So how you creating your terrain, is there something new I've slept through?

Paul :-)

[wwhall]

Rory,

If I recall, I saw some of the same behavior in the "original" Blackfoot V2 route a couple of years ago. Thinking back, I seem to remember that changing the viewing distance in OR at least hid them. They weren't right at the track there, they were well back toward the horizon, though.

By the way, that OR log file has been a Godsend for me finding all kinds of problems in routes, scenery, and rolling stock.

[geepster775]

So how you creating your terrain, is there something new I've slept through?

Go back to napping. My guess its the terrain was crafted manually by hand about a decade ago.

When you open the RE on version 2 or the route, the camera lands about 18 feet above sea level. Examining the route in Mosaic shows that it evidently is a tabletop route with no dem at all, and any elevation changes are manually crafted. It also explains the largely east-west orientation of the tracks while the prototypical line runs more northwest-southeast. No DEM here.

Clearly there is something in one of the tiles that Open Rails does not like, and which MSTS ignores.

Rory, do you have a camera coordinate from MSTS camera somewhere in the middle of the problem area. I don't know if that's been provided either.










One other thing I noticed is the middle of the route (ver 2 at least) features the larger tile size. The large tile with the green square is tile 0199F41_ which is as close as I can find to the tile error in the OR log.

[coolhand101]

According to that logfile, the OP is still using the stable version of openrails. Try the testing version and see if the two images on top of the thread are fixed!

Thanks

[tie]

Ya its not really a new route...its a re-work of Ted Kocyla's old version 2. Its not as E-W as the original, but indeed is more prototypical than the former. I definitely changed a lot of the old stuff to mirror the actual route and its buildings. I drove from Battleford to Lloydminster today, and a lot of the structures were spot on. Altex Transloading does not appear on google earth. But that big oil facility by Lashburn is there. Trust me. They have a website too. The North Battleford area still bugs me, so I may have to rebuild the city and yard to a 45deg angle. Vermilion I had to do e-w because of yet another OR-glitch that stopped me from going NW-SE.....another unsightly bulge in the terrain.
I still use the old Geometry extractor for the terrain. SOme of the tiles are larger than others. Camera placements were put in by Ted, so I'll have a look around.