Stable Version - Open Rails 1.4 - Coming soon

[cjakeman]

It's been a long time since the last Stable Version of Open Rails, so I'm very pleased to report that we are just days away from the next release - v1.4.

In preparing this release, we've made a number of changes to our systems, so that we can reasonably hope to deliver stable versions every 6 months in future.

A list of the improvements coming in v1.4 can be found here and this webpage will become part of the Open Rails website on release.

Of course, those of us who make use of the Testing Version updates will already be using all the goodies. Chief of these is the switch from XNA to MonoGame graphics. Although they look the same, the memory footprint is much smaller, MonoGame provides great potential for better graphics and also allows the use of ReShade.

[gammaray84]

I thought this day will never come.

The best news regarding Open Rails development in a long time. Can't wait for 1.4.

I have lot of hope for this Train Sim. It deserves it.

Thank you to everyone involved in this.

Good Day to All

[ragtimer]

Again,sounds far too complicated although I like the brake overcharge feature (for information,after performing a brake test before working a train,certainly here in UK the brake pipe is then charged to about 5.5 bar (normal working pressure 5 bar) and which will then leak off to the pressure which the loco in use will maintain.)As the pressure drop is slow,the distributors on the stock do not react.This ensures that there will be no dragging brakes as the previous loco may have charged the brake pipe slightly higher than the new loco.

[brama]

Great news. Looking forward to it!

[mstsbe]

I went through the launchpad milestone page, and some features even didn't make it: the long-wanted new 3D model format or at least extended .S model format:

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/or/+spec/or-3d-format

Could you please remove it from the 1.4 milestone and add it to the 1.5 milestone ?

As for other things: congratulations on the long-awaited switch to MonoGame which is now done. But the absolute priority for version 1.5 is a stable and working 64-bit implementation. Even exclusive 64-bit (instead of AnyCPU .NET compile option) is preferred, since running modern, dense routes with high-poly models on 32-bit Windows versions will bring those machines to a halt (i.e. < 10 fps).
Carlo's fork (which is already x64-exclusive) doesn't seem to get this right, or at least has been patchy in this area in the last versions, so it's time the core team takes a good look at it.

[cjakeman]

Could you please remove it from the 1.4 milestone and add it to the 1.5 milestone ?

Will do. We are working through the milestones right now to make sure entries are in the correct slot.

But the absolute priority for version 1.5 is a stable and working 64-bit implementation.

Agreed. This one is high on my personal list.

[cjakeman]

Thanks for your encouragement.

The best news regarding Open Rails development in a long time. Can't wait for 1.4.

Users don't have to wait for the next Stable Version as they can always update to the Testing Version which is published on Friday evenings.

Nothing gets into this Testing Version unless it has already been exposed and tried out by other users in the Unstable Version first for a week or two. It's pretty solid.

[Sidewinder]

Again,sounds far too complicated although I like the brake overcharge feature

It is great to know one aspect of this over-complicated application finally meets with your approval.

[R. Steele]

Thanks for your encouragement.


Users don't have to wait for the next Stable Version as they can always update to the Testing Version which is published on Friday evenings.

Nothing gets into this Testing Version unless it has already been exposed and tried out by other users in the Unstable Version first for a week or two. It's pretty solid.

I've been using either the testing/unstable ( or the monogame version ) for quite a while now and concur, all these are solid. Random crashes very rare, and if something does happen...the OR log always points to where the problem is. I believe I read that the option of more verbose entries ( detailed information ) will be available in 1.4?

Excellent work by the entire team of developers and all the users who continue to run all the versions, and provide feedback to the developers!
BRAVO_Applause.jpg

[ragtimer]

It is great to know one aspect of this over-complicated application finally meets with your approval.

Patronising

[daniellouwrens]

Again,sounds far too complicated although I like the brake overcharge feature (for information,after performing a brake test before working a train,certainly here in UK the brake pipe is then charged to about 5.5 bar (normal working pressure 5 bar) and which will then leak off to the pressure which the loco in use will maintain.)As the pressure drop is slow,the distributors on the stock do not react.This ensures that there will be no dragging brakes as the previous loco may have charged the brake pipe slightly higher than the new loco.

Hi Peter,

thanks for this post, I now have a much better idea of how the brakes work in relation to pressure.

It is very different to cars which have been my only real life experience.

Regards

Daniel

[R. Steele]

Again,sounds far too complicated...

Appreciate your viewpoint, I've read your opinion and the reasoning behind it in other posts -- however -- there are settings that allow you to run OR in basic mode...no complications from advanced physics or ORTS parameters.

I've been running some of the activities in Mick Clarke's Mid East Plus route ( which I like very much -- excellent route ) using OR's basic mode, and find most everything works properly. There are always some differences with activities...but those are usually easily solved.

Of course, your experience with UK equipment and operations is much more extensive than mine so your criticism will be more nuanced and knowledgeable than mine...but I thoroughly enjoy the experience provided by OR in a basic MSTS mode. I usually run with advanced physics and settings for North American equipment and routes.

...And The Mid East Plus using OR Monogame with ReShade looks wonderful, amazing work with the MSTS RE.

[ragtimer]

Further re UK freight train brakes,they are far superior to the Westinghouse used in the US where a doofus engineer (Al Krug's words) can run out of air.
Here we have the PBL EP brake application system on the locos where the brake pipe is charged (normally) at 5 bar.The first application (just push a small lever (see the class 59,60 or 66 cabview available over at UKTrainsim)forward once and you get the "initial" application.All braking should normally done in "initial".It reduces the brake pipe by 0.4 bar and you get a 1 bar brake application.If required or necessary,the brake can be further applied,but not beyond a 1 bar reduction (more is seen as being out of control) and can be brought back to initial WITHOUT a full release,so you go back to 1 bar in the brake cylinder and do not run out of air even with the electric powered compressors on the Class 60.
My problem with OR is lack of flexibility in views as compared with BIN MSTS,sound problems (and I have a good quality sound card) and in some routes,white voids.
Brake rates do not seem to be right compared with my RW experience.In MSTS they can be changed for freight and pass (although I always ran our waste trains which were containers on freightliner flats in pass timings which gave much better train handling).

[derekmorton]

One of the large differences between British, American and Australian trains is the size.
Trains in America are MUCH longer than in Britain. Australia only run trains of 1.8Km
With longer trains it is much easier to run out of air, and much more likely when going over mountains.
I remember a driver in New Zealand with 3 engines ran out of air and tipped the engines over on a downhill curve.

[Kuckoo]

Of course, those of us who make use of the Testing Version updates will already be using all the goodies. Chief of these is the switch from XNA to MonoGame graphics. Although they look the same, the memory footprint is much smaller, MonoGame provides great potential for better graphics and also allows the use of ReShade.

Been using only the Testing and so-called "Unstable" versions for I-don't-know-how-long now. If anything the Testing and Unstable versions have proven to be more reliable than the Stable version. Can even use sharper shadow textures at longer distances (2048 resolution at 3 km, shadow map count at 5) and still enjoy better performance than at default settings in the stable version. Vastly superior in every way. The improved physics are particularly impressive, especially when the Simulation and Experimental options are appropriately dialed in for the most realistic behavior (98% adhesion with 7% random factor change, etc.).

Kept track of all the improvements over time. It's almost incredible how much work has gone into it.