These have been fixed; an update will be uploaded later today or tomorrow ... depending on the outcome of the other issue.

The BBD MR-90 EMU-2 did have sparks but they were not turned on; all other electrics have been updated.

Testing has revealed, that only 'Very Low Speed', 'Very Low Speed (with Catenary)' and 'Narrow Gauge' rail tracks are accessible by CanRail v1.1; the latter being NGRail included with CanRail. Other rail types give you the message shown below (the one you should have been shown). This message is issued when you try to attach a wagon to an engine and there is a conflict with rail types. That message has been fixed so far.
Where a train is on a track, these work. The others don't at the moment.

Whether it is possible to have CanRail v1.x running on other tracks is too difficult to say at the moment, because this is very hard coded throughout the set; and I don't want to update this set forever and a day, time can be better spent on CanRail v2.0. The following rail types are covered in the set : RAIL, ELRL, MGLV, (MONO), NGRL, ELNG.

Let's wait until an updated version of Nu-Tracks comes out and see whether the situation changes.

An update has been uploaded and is available from its usual location here.

Indeed, this message contains much more information. Thank you. Once the new version Nutracks is out, I will give both sets a new try.

Two questions about CanRail2.0:
Will it have any support for other tracksets?
I know the discussion about this, but are there any news about the release of CanRail2.0? Assuming CanRail2.0 is somewhat in final stages of development, I just want to know if there is any need for more bug reports for CanRail1.1 (if there are any left) or not...


Thanks for the update. I see the FP7 got its "sparks" moved, too. Great!

I would suggest yes because even though a fix might not be applied to v1.1, it would help OzTrans to avoid the same issue in v2.0.

_________________
Visit SimuSchool - Tutorials, Questions and Answers
TTDPatch Nightlies Downloads are back
Thrive

That one was missed when I did the diesel fumes. I didn't think that issue would have warranted an update.

BTW, for the ones that have not yet noticed; the ore cars/hoppers had their carrying capacity slightly adjusted (a narrow gauge ore car should have less capacity than a standard gauge equivalent). Also, purchase prices for freight cars have been adjusted here and there.

I'm not at all in favour of New Rail Types. It is an excellent feature, but very poorly implemented. There are far too many issues, especially graphically. I have started on my own Canadian Rail Track set, but have gone nowhere so far. There is a problems galore with bridges (no see-through bridges, no narrow gauge bridges) the only bridge you'll ever see are normal rail ones, with stations crosswalks and fuel pads don't work. Snowy tracks look awful and tunnel entrances are crap. There is not a single useful var act-2 variable for train vehicles in relation to rail types. 4A is about as useless as it can be, unless you know ALL rail type labels ever in use, it contains a random value that depends on the position in the GRF list of each rail track set in use and only values 0, 1, 2 and 3 can be relied upon (the default ones). For stations there is no information available at all.

My next stage is to implement rail tracks for CanRail v2.0 but using (leaving graphics out) graphics from the base set (trg1r.grf). It will simply update normal and electrified default rail types. Narrow Gauge has already been sort of implemented (in the maglev slot) in CanRail v1.1 and seems to be holding.

Apart from different graphics, why are rail types considered to be useful ? Why do players want speed limiting ? We have already an excellent speed limiting feature in CanRail. If there is a good reason for track speed limits, I may try to implement some, but not graphics wise (all tracks will look the same, with the exception of narrow gauge).

That is my ranting about rail types ...

It is in its final stage of development. But, there is still a bit of work to be done. Firstly, I'm in the process of porting the bug fixes from v1.x to v2.0 (keep them coming), as well as new features that have been tested and proving useful in v1.1. Also, I need to update (again) FIRS cargo carrying capabilities. Then, I'd like to add some future locos (2020+) to the set. Finally, there will be a need for some testing ... before we can release it.

When I tested NuTracks (r219) with CanRail v1.1, I found issues that depended whether NuTracks was loaded before CanRail or after it. NuTracks has serious problems, it allows electric trains on normal no catenary rail tracks when loaded before CanRail.

Just a quick question/suggestion: in the current version of CanRail (1.1) there are certain trains which can only be used in certain climates.

Can you include an option in 2.0 to override that, please? I really like the option of having the snow line change by the seasons in the Arctic climate but don't want to be without things like the EMUs. Montreal has just had half a metre of snow which must qualify as fairly arctic!

Thank you! Can't wait to try the new set.

_________________

"(Locomotion is) one of the best-playing games of its type." -Chris Sawyer

This has already been implemented in CanRail v2.0. All vehicles will be available in all climates by default; but there is a parameter, that allows disabling that and have it like it has been in CanRail v1.x.

In principle, the use of track sets destroys the hard work of many artists, who have spent hours creating their wares.

I have seen many instances of graphical problems and much more severe ones as depicted below; but here are a few samples displaying the ugliness of track sets :

A - Rail Tracks are dropped from the sky, instead of blending in nicely with the adjacent terrain.
B - Tracks (on bridgeheads) are laid on top of railings; this is a very common occurrence and outright ugly.
C - Tracks are not shaded in tunnel entrances; why do artists creating this very much wanted tunnels put so much effort into their work and have it destroyed with rail tracks in seconds.
D - See-through bridges are an ugly sight with track sets.
E - It is sometimes necessary for technical reasons to have front railings and front bridge parts to go right up to the front rail; thus part of the rail piece is then overlaid with bridge fronts. Rail track pieces on bridges are simply unsuitable at best; they have to be integrated with the bridge. On top of that almost every bridge uses different rail pieces, but with tracksets, you can have only 1 single rail track piece for all bridges.
X - Nothing much to do with track sets, but why do twin pillar bridges in OpenTTD only display the front pillar (see other image from TTDPatch).


Note: NuTracks (r219) used for display purposes against narrow gauge rails from CanRail v1.1, with green circles showing correct behaviour and red circles faults.

Oh my... Those are some very nice bridges...

_________________


Simuscape - A world of its own;
SimuTalk | Visual Studio | INFRA Diary

INFRA - Chose Your Destination;
INFRA Projects | INFRA Downloads

Well I think most of this is caused by this strange feature with the r-word. Some players (including myself) like the "need" to pay *much* more money for a track which in return allows trains to move (*much*) faster than on standard track. On the other hand, small, cargo collecting lines can be built with slow speed track at a reduced price. Your narrow gauge trains offer such a slow, cheap tracktype. Once the player seeks to beef up the capacities of parts of or of the entire network, there is more to do than just to replace the engines and/or the cars. These effects are even greater when dealing with highspeed passenger trains like the LRC instead of slow moving freight trains - in my eyes, they rely more on modern cars with increasing capacities. Well, all of this has more or less something to do with the mentioned realism. Since TTDP and OpenTTD both offer electrified and standard track (what's their use, besides of eyecandy effects?), why not adding speed and/or weight classes for track, too?

This is what I am thinking about railtypes.

Thanks for your information about CanRail2.0. One more question, however: Is there a way for the player to choose which livery will be used on the engines upon purchase?

EDIT: I have checked the new capacities of the ore hoppers. It seems that the modern standard gauge ore car has the same iron ore capacity than the non-modern one. Furthermore there seems to be an error in the non-modern ore car description as it says the car can be refitted to 30 tons of iron ore while the capacity is 47 tons of iron ore (which is the same for the modern ore car). I will check the other cars and give further feedback in the new year.

Ah, that sets my mind at ease. Thank you!

_________________

"(Locomotion is) one of the best-playing games of its type." -Chris Sawyer

Yes, they are, but they are under threat from Rail Track sets …

First, thank you for your thoughts. Narrow gauge has indeed been developed and implemented for that very same reason.

As for speeds in CanRail … we have of course many options to set purchase and in particular running costs. We could set running costs much higher for very fast trains. Not that there are many of them.

What is a fast speed anyway ? Currently the BBD LRC-3 is the fastest at 200 km/h. In CanRail v2.0 it will be the BBD JetTrain (2014+) at 264 km/h. There is another fast one, the GRP P50H (2019+) travelling at 200 km/h. I intend to include a future loco around the 350 km/h mark too. That covers the 200+ km/h range. Naturally, only passenger trains with lightweight coaches can travel that fast.

For freight trains the wagon speeds come into play. These range from 88 km/h for early models to 144 km/h for modern ones.

In the 160 km/h to 200 km/h range we only have a few more passenger trains with lightweight coaches. They are :

For CanRail v2.0, add the 'Push-Pull' MPI MP40/36 at 174 km/h to the list.

BTW, for strategists, in CanRail v2.0 the time it takes to load/unload trains depends on its design; e.g. Push-Pull trains take only a third of the time compared to an ordinary passenger train; thus simulating a faster turn around.

Should we do something with running costs for these trains; although later in a game with inflation turned on you'll be in the red with these trains.

Of course, players can always choose lower speed trains early in a game on any track.

Another option could be ONE additional track type for CanRail; the monorail slot is still vacant. The implementation of the 'slow' and 'cheap' narrow gauge track system seems to work, why not have an 'expensive' and 'fast' track system in the monorail slot. Just don't ask me to add it via New Rail Types. I would do a 'Narrow Gauge' clone. Any artists around to do a 'Narrow Gauge' conversion to 'High(er) Speed'. Any thoughts ?

Track speed limits and setting of construction costs can be applied regardless whether we use New Rail Types or not.

Just a short word on electrified operations. CanRail does not really offer any good and viable electrified train operations. Suburban lines offer some options, but at a price (track) and not even fast, with the CC&F EP-59a EMU and BBD MR-90 EMU-2. Earlier electrics are expensive to establish and not giving you any advantages. There are more viable options with diesels and steam.

a) there will be a new feature, called 'Favour-One-Company'. This will allow the first 8 players to choose a rail company (road) for standard gauge and narrow gauge. The available options will be :

If a player chooses Canadian Pacific, then CPR engines will be shown in the purchase list marked green. If an engine does not have a CPR livery it is marked red. A sample purchase lists are shown below :

b) the other one, is the old and trusted way of random liveries; i.e. you try until you have what you want. Some passenger carrying trains can be refitted to other liveries.

I shall have another look. Most probably, I may have missed some informational text strings, in particular German and French ones.

Mea culpa. I just didn't bother to add the extra code and graphics in NuTracks, at least up to now.
It's possible to provide a speclal ballastless overlay to be used on bridges, if that helps (try "Swedish Rails" for an example). I think I already added that to the new NuTracks code. Otherwise quite valid, go ahead and open a request about it, same for X. I'd say either a track type variable to check the current bridge type, or some way to prevent overlaying of track type graphics for bridges.

The attachment also shows that new track types aren't only about speed or other limits, but also about compatibility. I'd guess you don't really care, but wih a fully implemented track type, you automatically have new graphics for level crossings that work with any unknown road set, the same on bridges working (relatively) well with any unknown bridge set, tracks that match any base set on any ground type, etc.

I checked all of them out and could not see anything wrong (although I found an unrealated problem while doing that).

The coal hoppers carry :
. NG hopper : 20 t
. SG 2-bay hopper : 30 t
. SG 3-bay hopper : 40 t
. SG Unit Train : 55 t

The ore cars carry (iron ore) :
. NG ore car : 25 t
. SG ore hopper 'early' : 30 t
. SG ore hopper 'modern' : 47 t

Note : other cargo types, like copper ore, bauxite etc carry a couple of tons less.

In CanRail v2.0, for narrow gauge we'll have a new gondola [1898+] (carrying coal, iron ore etc) with a capacity of 17 t and 18 t respectively.

The coal hopper [1940+] has been updated and will carry the same cargo types as the gondola with a capacity of 25 t.

The 'tiny' ore car [1898+] will carry iron ore, copper ore with a reduced capacity of 11 t

Currently we have the following construction costs (excluding terrain clearing costs) per rail piece for normal, electrified and narrow gauge (in that order) :

TTDPatch : $200, $500, $150
OpenTTD : $224, $560, $168

Note : these costs are for medium game play with inflation turned off.

Are these costs still acceptable or should they be updated ? Also, how much should a high(er) speed track cost ?

Could anyone wanting to know more about CanRail v2.0. first consult the Canadian Theme Pack - Trains / Railways [Discussion] topic. The answer may already be there ... you are however welcome to ask here or comment until that topic opens for discussion.

Now that I have investigated Rail Tracks (including in connection with NuTracks), I have come up with a solution. I have implemented that solution in CanRail v1.2; which will be released after some tidying up.

First, a note on the use of NuTracks with CanRail v1.x. It is not recommended that NuTracks be used at all in conjunction with CanRail v1.1. With CanRail v1.2 it could be used, as long as it is loaded before CanRail and definitely not after.

The Narrow Gauge Track System (within CanRail) is compromised with the use of NuTracks.
a) Track construction costs (medium, no inflation) are $46'000+ per rail piece.
b) Road/Rail Crossing are disallowed.
c) Trains use Maglev properties (whatever that means).

These problems have been addressed in CanRail v1.2, but will still affect Canadian Narrow Gauge operations if NuTracks is loaded after CanRail.

A new track system has been implemented; it consists of 4 rail tracks :

There have been no changes to these 2 track systems, with the exception, that these are now speed limited to 100 mph / 160 km/h. All standard gauge rolling stock will run on it, including highspeed trains, but these will be limited to 160 km/h.

No changes to this track system either, with the exception, that it is speed limited to 65 mph / 104 km/h; but no narrow gauge train is capable of running faster anyway. So, that speed limit is only informational. Further, all rail type properties have been set, so that NuTracks can no longer interfere, unless loaded after CanRail.

A new highspeed rail track system has been added to the mix. It will become available with the introduction of the first Canadian train, that can travel in excess of 160 km/h; that is the 'UAC/MLW Turbo' train available in 1967.

The following trains (in CanRail v1.x) will benefit from the highspeed track system as far as maximum speed is concerned :
Any of these trains will also operate quite happily on normal rail with a reduced maximum speed of 160 km/h.

Additional benefits for ALL trains running on the highspeed rail system are :
Further the highspeed rail system disallows road/rail crossings and construction costs are fivefold of normal rail or twofold of electrified rail. It will happily integrate with normal rail; i.e. any train can swap from one system to the other. Players need to use way points to direct their trains appropriately.

Graphics used for the highspeed rail system will be the same as for normal rail; i.e. the New Rail Type feature will populate everything undefined (graphicswise) from the first rail type (RAIL). Unless New Rail Type property 0x12 is extended to allow any of the ordinary track sprites to be selected too alongside depots and stations, there will be no new graphics as it impossible to create well integrated graphics through New Rail Types.

How can players tell whether they have a highspeed or normal track in front of them :
a) Fences are different (currently the Canadian company coloured fences, as planned for CanRail v2.0 are being used).
b) Because highspeed trains use in-cab signalling, standard block signals have been updated; instead a dwarf signal showing a white aspect with clear track ahead (off, if blocked) will be shown. All other signals will default to whatever signalling system is in use (see image).
c) There are also plans for new depot graphics.

Naturally, this is an OpenTTD only feature implementation; TTDPatch is not affected and will operate as it has in the past. However, CanRail v1.2 will NOT be save game compatible; it'll be for new games only. If you try to update a save game from CanRail 1.1 to CanRail v1.2 all your normal and electrified trains will have no longer any power. However, players could sell ALL trains first, then convert all tracks to Canadian Rail tracks and repurchase trains again.

Any comments ?

Excellent work.

Just one concern, as far as I know in OTTD it is possible to use multiple train sets. I have never tried nor done this so I can't speak from experience.

If multiple train sets are allowed, each with its own "rail type" graphics, what are the chances for conflicts?

_________________
Visit SimuSchool - Tutorials, Questions and Answers
TTDPatch Nightlies Downloads are back
Thrive

Thank you.

Canadian Rail Tracks are invisible to 'foreign' train sets; as they cannot run on them, there are no conflicts. You can compare it to Canadian's standard and narrow gauge, neither can run or has an influence on the other. The only exception is Narrow Gauge; because it uses graphics from the maglev slot, other rail track sets that (re)define the maglev track system can conflict with CanRail's Narrow Gauge operations, if that GRF is loaded after CanRail (see comment about NuTracks).

This is getting interesting. Scenario thoughts are forming.

_________________
Visit SimuSchool - Tutorials, Questions and Answers
TTDPatch Nightlies Downloads are back
Thrive

Don't you dare to abscond to OpenTTD ….

Until I can fully replicate my screenshot contest submission under OTTD my TTDP loyalty is assured.

_________________
Visit SimuSchool - Tutorials, Questions and Answers
TTDPatch Nightlies Downloads are back
Thrive

We all know, AIs aren't brilliant at the best of times, but this is going just a bit too far ...
... OpenTTD r24871 and Denver and Rio Grande AI.


The Canadian Highspeed Rail Track is just about done ...