-
-
Yes at this address >>> https://james-ross.co.uk/projects/or/buildsCheers, Gerry
"A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it is not open." Frank Zappa
It's my railroad and I'll do what I want! Historically accurate attitude of US Railroad Barons.
Forever, ridin' drag in railroad knowledge.
Audi, Vide, Tace, Si Vis Vivere In Pace
https://www.trainsim.com/forums/filedata/fetch?filedataid=79656&type=medium https://www.trainsim.com/forums/filedata/fetch?filedataid=79654&type=smallComment
-
I can confirm. After combining DB track profiles with ORTSSuperElevation entries in .trk file, works like a charm for dynatrax and standard DB curves. Thank you very much
Comment
-
Okay I misunderstood you then.Yes, My route has dbtracks placed the way you described and additionally dynatrax shapes on the curves. I just thought that track profiles takes into consideration all filtered shapes not only on curves and make this test just out of curiosity. As I write in previous post, some straight shapes like A1t100mStrt.s was replaced also by trackprofile but not in every place, so if track profiles should works only on curves then this is a bug For now I'm waiting for dynatrax correction for track profiles in Openrails.
And about the straight sections I'm quite sure that is intended. With the adjustments Philip has made, I'm pretty sure that Open Rails now starts super-elevating on the straight sections before and after the curves similar to how it is done in the real world.
You probably had the A1t100mStrt.s placed close enough to a curve that part of it needed to be super-elevated and then the entirety of it got replaced.
Comment
-
Hello,
I found a bug during using db profiles. When shape A1t70m7Bridge2.s is connected with dbtrack curve (for example DB2_A1t2000r1d.s or other) then bridge disappear and is replaced by dynamic track.Open Rails 2025-01-25 07-01-14.pngComment
-
Yeah, that's going to be a problem for those routes that used track with integrated bridges. Substituting dynamic track will also wipe out the bridge rails and show ballast where it shouldn't be.If you like what you see here at Trainsim.com, be it the discussions and knowledge in the forums, or items available in our library, I hope you'll consider a paid membership to help support keeping the site operating.... Thanks!Comment
-
The profiles out of the box shouldn't be touching anything named A1t70m7Bridge2.s. Anyway, not unless there is a difference in how Open Rails handles straight sections attached to a curve in the unstable version with the Dynatrax fix. I have not tested the unstable version yet but I doubt that.
If you have added something like "A1t*" to the IncludedShapes parameter in a profile like in one of your previous examples that would be why. The fix then would be to add ExcludedShapes "*Bridge*" to that particular profile.
Another thing that comes to mind is that you might have a profile without IncludedShapes defined. Then Open Rails will pick that profile in a situation like this. The solution is the same as above in that case.Comment
-
My profile for now looks like:
TrProfile ( Name ( "DB2" ) IncludedShapes ( "DB2_*, Dynatrax-*" ) ExcludedShapes ( "A1t70m7Bridge2" ) LODMethod ( "CompleteReplacement" ) ChordSpan ( 1 )
but bridge is still missing.Comment
-
Is that the only profile you have in the /trackprofiles folder?
I am asking this because Open Rails is replacing your bridge with a profile different from all the DBTracks profiles. So whatever else is there seems to be the problem and not the DB2 profile.
It is the profile that gets picked by Open Rails that you want to add the ExcludedShapes parameter to so that the bridge does not get replaced by it.Comment
-
Yes, I have only this one profile in TrackProfiles folder for now. After some additional testing I noticed that trackprofile is not a problem in this particular case. When TrackProfiles forder is empty, bridge is still missing in Openrails T1.5.1.1493, but no such problem in Openrails 1.5.1 stable. I will appreciate if someone test it the same way and create a bug on github. As for me this is a quite critical.Comment
-
Okay so I just tried setting up a similar scenario with A1t70m7Bridge2.s to reproduce it in T1.5.1-1393. And I get the same thing.
I also found out how you can fix it. If you take the default track profile name it "TrProfile.stf" and change the first part of the TrProfile line to "TrProfile ( Name ( "DefaultProfile" ) ExcludedShapes ( "*Bridge*" ) .....".
Then Open Rails will not use the default dyntrack profile for bridge shapes.
Apparently the default track profile will be used in cases like this even when "TrProfile.stf" is not present. Explicitly adding it and defining ExcludedShapes will cause Open Rails to not do that for those shapes.Comment
-
Thank you for the advice. For now I just replaced this trackobject bridge with bridge from shape and put the track separatelly.Comment
-
No problem, and yeah that works too. I do that myself in a few places.
Doing that will probably even give you a better result visually if you use the DB2br variant for the track and the accompanying start/end static objects. Then you will have the inner guard rail as well over your bridges.Comment
-
Updated profiles are now available in the file library (with the same fileids: 89703 and 89704).
Embankments of the b variants, s variants and v4hs variants have been adjusted and now look much better.
And a quite gruesome mistake pictured below has also been fixed in the DB3b and DB4b variant textures (thanks Jan for pointing that out).
Screen Shot 01-29-25 at 03.55 PM.jpgComment
-
Hello,
I started to use US1 dynatrax profiles with high ballast and embankment to create own shapes. As for me this is the best visual experience for dbtracks I had ever seen(I do not found something similar in standard DB profiles). Now I realized that superelevation profiles are not created yet for such dynatraxs. Is there a possibility to include US1 dynatrax profiles in future plans for superelevation? Or maybe such superelevation profiles already exist somehow? Thank you for an answer.
image.pngLast edited by StormerDSR; 04-08-2025, 09:49.Comment
Comment