| |
I realize that Track Designer has an elevation feature, but are there other
sources of information on creating terrian for an L-Gauge train set?
I have roughly an 11' x 11' room in which a shelf system is going. The layout
is two modified dog bone loops with a run of dual mainline for the length of one
wall (say 5' minus the return loops). Looks like some switching will fit at the
ends for industry and rail yard.
I am looking keeping the bench widths in increments of 10" (that's a road
baseplate, right?) Track Designer has allowed me to get the rough dimensions of
all the track (plus a 4 stud border).
I was hoping Model Railroader magazine would be a good resource, but it keeps
making me realize all of the limitations of L-Gauge. I've ruled out plaster &
chicken wire and would rather build up scenry with plywood than burn through
bricks.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Ed Andrews wrote:
> I realize that Track Designer has an elevation feature, but are there other
> sources of information on creating terrian for an L-Gauge train set?
>
> I have roughly an 11' x 11' room in which a shelf system is going. The layout
> is two modified dog bone loops with a run of dual mainline for the length of one
> wall (say 5' minus the return loops). Looks like some switching will fit at the
> ends for industry and rail yard.
>
> I am looking keeping the bench widths in increments of 10" (that's a road
> baseplate, right?) Track Designer has allowed me to get the rough dimensions of
> all the track (plus a 4 stud border).
>
> I was hoping Model Railroader magazine would be a good resource, but it keeps
> making me realize all of the limitations of L-Gauge. I've ruled out plaster &
> chicken wire and would rather build up scenry with plywood than burn through
> bricks.
Here's a direct link to the current Track Designer layout.
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=1005981
Please ignore the track alignment glitch at the mid-right.
Thanks.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Ed Andrews wrote:
> I realize that Track Designer has an elevation feature, but are there other
> sources of information on creating terrian for an L-Gauge train set?
Not really. TD is the best program to come up with a concept of how much area
you have to cover, and then I would fill in from there using baseplates, bricks
and BURPS as you posess to fill in how ever big a area you want (or can afford).
Green paint is cheaper than baseplates, but some of us have amassed large
quantities of baseplates over time...
> I have roughly an 11' x 11' room in which a shelf system is going. The
> layout is two modified dog bone loops with a run of dual mainline for the
> length of one wall (say 5' minus the return loops).
Just doing a quick looky loo, my return loop is 47" long. This is to 8 stud
separation between tracks. (so, about 8 of 11 ft are going to be taken up by
return loops...if you go to a wider stance (IE the 1/2 circle), you get down to
3'
> Looks like some switching will fit at the
> ends for industry and rail yard.
Some, see above for the limits of what will or won't fit. 25" is a good max.
depth, anything more and you may run into reach problems if it is against a
wall.
> I was hoping Model Railroader magazine would be a good resource, but it keeps
> making me realize all of the limitations of L-Gauge. I've ruled out plaster
> chicken wire and would rather build up scenry with plywood than burn through
> bricks.
Use both. Or, go and get some used DUPLO/Explorer. Some people have scrounged
large quantities for around the 1C/piece mark. Otherwise, yes, fully bricked
scenery costs a good amount per foot.
James Powell
(a mostly plywood modeler)
|
|
| |
"James Powell" <wx732@freenet.victoria.bc.ca> wrote in message
news:I7oxzL.Aww@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.trains, Ed Andrews wrote:
> > I realize that Track Designer has an elevation feature, but are there • other
> > sources of information on creating terrian for an L-Gauge train set?
>
> Not really. TD is the best program to come up with a concept of how much • area
> you have to cover, and then I would fill in from there using baseplates, • bricks
> and BURPS as you posess to fill in how ever big a area you want (or can • afford).
> Green paint is cheaper than baseplates, but some of us have amassed large
> quantities of baseplates over time...
[ ... snipped ... ]
I have to disagree with this. IMNSHO TrackDraw (www.trackdraw.com) is much
better than TrackDesigner. You can put together a layout much quicker with
TrackDraw than you can with TD PLUS you can actually zoom in and out on it.
If you are doing a layout of any size, Track Designer's inability to zoom
will drive you batty.
Mike
--
Mike Walsh - mike_walsh at mindspring.com
http://www.ncltc.cc - North Carolina LEGO Train Club
http://www.carolinatrainbuilders.com - Carolina Train Builders
http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=mpw - CTB/Brick Depot
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Mike Walsh wrote:
>
> "James Powell" <wx732@freenet.victoria.bc.ca> wrote in message
> news:I7oxzL.Aww@lugnet.com...
> > ... TD is the best program to come up with a concept of how much area
> > you have to cover,...
> ... IMNSHO TrackDraw (www.trackdraw.com) is much
> better than TrackDesigner. ...
I'm happy to announce that TrackDraw now has accurate models for 9V, 4.5V, 12V,
monorail, most baseplates and road plates in any color. And just today, Thomas
Woelk uploaded a crater baseplate that looks pretty darn good.
You can try it out by downloading TrackDraw from the Yahoo group at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/trackdraw ; go to 'Files', then 'Releases' to get
the latest (td_a13.zip).
Cary
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Cary Clark wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Mike Walsh wrote:
> > ... IMNSHO TrackDraw (www.trackdraw.com) is much
> > better than TrackDesigner. ...
>
> You can try it out by downloading TrackDraw from the Yahoo group at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/trackdraw ; go to 'Files', then 'Releases' to get
> the latest (td_a13.zip).
Erm, are there samples of designs drawn with TDraw to help the needy?
I have difficulty getting the curved part of a switch (points in UK) to join up
with existing track. It seems that only the straight part of a switch will be
accepted.
So I insert a switch and have to rotate it around. But then it will not fit the
existing track nicely. Any help?
C S Soh
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Chio Siong Soh wrote:
...
> Erm, are there samples of designs drawn with TrackDraw to help the needy?
That's a great idea. It would be fun to turn all of the old Idea Book layouts
into TrackDraw files for instance. That would be a neat addition to the release.
If anyone has other interesting layouts, I'm happy to include them.
> I have difficulty getting the curved part of a switch (points in UK) to join
> up with existing track. It seems that only the straight part of a switch
> will be accepted.
If you press the Tab key after adding the point, it will rotate through all
three connections. Then the curved part of the point will match the adjoining
track. You can also click on the point (or any other part) after it has been
added to the layout and press Tab to rotate it through the connections.
Cary
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Cary Clark wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Chio Siong Soh wrote:
> ...
> > Erm, are there samples of designs drawn with TrackDraw to help the needy?
>
> That's a great idea. It would be fun to turn all of the old Idea Book layouts
> into TrackDraw files for instance. That would be a neat addition to the release.
> If anyone has other interesting layouts, I'm happy to include them.
>
> > I have difficulty getting the curved part of a switch (points in UK) to join
> > up with existing track. It seems that only the straight part of a switch
> > will be accepted.
>
> If you press the Tab key after adding the point, it will rotate through all
> three connections. Then the curved part of the point will match the adjoining
> track. You can also click on the point (or any other part) after it has been
> added to the layout and press Tab to rotate it through the connections.
Hi, thanks, Cary.
Tried it, works great! I'm sold on TrackDraw.
Besides samples of track plans, user-friendly documentation would be appreciated
in the release.
Another idea is to have symbols of straight and curved tracks where we have cut
the magic 5 cm gaps (for DCC). So that we don't have to go to another Paint
program to add them.
Also, a part symbol for the train connecting lead (part #5305) and maybe the
speed regulator (part #4548), too. You'll have to think of a way to manage the
wires - maybe get Kevin Clague's help. So that we can have a full picture of the
layout with all the electrical connections included.
The goal is that, we can then send a copy of the complete TrackDraw layout to
someone else in any other part of the world and he/she would be able to
duplicate exactly our layout. (Like we can now do in LDraw).
Look what you have got yourself into ;-)
C S Soh
|
|
| |
Mike Walsh wrote:
> I have to disagree with this. IMNSHO TrackDraw (www.trackdraw.com) is
> much
> better than TrackDesigner. You can put together a layout much quicker
> with TrackDraw than you can with TD PLUS you can actually zoom in and out
> on it. If you are doing a layout of any size, Track Designer's inability
> to zoom will drive you batty.
TrackDesigner has a (somewhat limited though) zoom function. And it's
biggest plus : it will work under Linux (and probably MacOS X) using WINE,
which is definately not the case for TrackDraw :(
--
Jan-Albert van Ree | http://www.vanree.net/brickpiles/
Brick Piles | Santa Fe B-unit
|
|
| |
"Chio Siong Soh" <robodoc@fifth-r.com> wrote in message
news:I7w86q.Mu6@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.trains, Cary Clark wrote:
> > In lugnet.trains, Chio Siong Soh wrote:
> > ...
[ ... snipped ... ]
>
> Another idea is to have symbols of straight and curved tracks where we • have cut
> the magic 5 cm gaps (for DCC). So that we don't have to go to another • Paint
> program to add them.
You have a couple of options here:
1) There is limited drawing ability within TrackDraw so you can "annotate"
your layout with text and arrows and the like and they become part of the
layout design.
2) You can create modified versions of the track parts and add or delete
XML as needed to have the parts look visually like you'd like them to look.
>
> Also, a part symbol for the train connecting lead (part #5305) and maybe • the
> speed regulator (part #4548), too. You'll have to think of a way to manage • the
> wires - maybe get Kevin Clague's help. So that we can have a full picture • of the
> layout with all the electrical connections included.
Cary will have to comment on the wire itself but modeling the track
connector and the speed regulator would be pretty easy. For anyone wanting
to learn to author TrackDraw parts, these would be good ones to start with
because they are simply polygons and circles with some detail added.
>
> The goal is that, we can then send a copy of the complete TrackDraw layout • to
> someone else in any other part of the world and he/she would be able to
> duplicate exactly our layout. (Like we can now do in LDraw).
>
> Look what you have got yourself into ;-)
>
> C S Soh
Not to beat a dead horse but the best way to make this happen is to learn to
author the parts yourself and start contributing. Creating TrackDraw parts
is very easy once you get the hang of it. I have created quite a few of the
parts Cary is now distributing and he will incorporate contributions to the
parts library pretty quickly.
Mike
--
Mike Walsh - mike_walsh at mindspring.com
http://www.ncltc.cc - North Carolina LEGO Train Club
http://www.carolinatrainbuilders.com - Carolina Train Builders
http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=mpw - CTB/Brick Depot
|
|
| |
"Jan-Albert van Ree" <javanree@vanree.net> wrote in message
news:I7w9Iu.wuF@lugnet.com...
> Mike Walsh wrote:
[ ... snipped ... ]
>
> TrackDesigner has a (somewhat limited though) zoom function. And it's
> biggest plus : it will work under Linux (and probably MacOS X) using WINE,
> which is definately not the case for TrackDraw :(
[ ... snipped ... ]
I'd argue that what TrackDesigner provides is not really a zoom. It is
simply a choice of 4 scales of which 2 are useless (.5 pixel per stud and
.25 pixel per stud). When drawing a layout of any size or complexity the
scale settings become a huge impediment.
Regarding Cary's choice of implementing TrackDraw with .Net which limits its
portability, that discussion has been rehashed several times. I will
concede that TrackDesigner may work better under WINE on Linux. TrackDraw
wouldn't be the first application which only ran on Windows nor will it be
the last.
What I do find somewhat surprising is how tightly many people continue to
hold on to TrackDesigner when there is virtually ZERO chance of it ever
being updated. I would think the Train Community would be working
feverishly to make sure TrackDraw does everything we need it to but that
doesn't seem to be the case.
Mike
--
Mike Walsh - mike_walsh at mindspring.com
http://www.ncltc.cc - North Carolina LEGO Train Club
http://www.carolinatrainbuilders.com - Carolina Train Builders
http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=mpw - CTB/Brick Depot
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Mike Walsh wrote:
>
> Regarding Cary's choice of implementing TrackDraw with .Net which limits its
> portability, that discussion has been rehashed several times. I will
> concede that TrackDesigner may work better under WINE on Linux. TrackDraw
> wouldn't be the first application which only ran on Windows nor will it be
> the last.
>
> What I do find somewhat surprising is how tightly many people continue to
> hold on to TrackDesigner when there is virtually ZERO chance of it ever
> being updated. I would think the Train Community would be working
> feverishly to make sure TrackDraw does everything we need it to but that
> doesn't seem to be the case.
I love TrackDraw. Every time I get a new copy of it, I marvel at how it's gotten
even better. I play with it I marvel at how great it is and at the plethora of
great features and gadgets it has. It never ceases to amaze me. Yet I still used
TrackDesigner to design the latest MichLTC layout I am straw boss for... Novi
Toy & Hobby, December 3-5 (info here: http://michlug.org/events/ )
Why? Inertia.
I keep saying "Next layout, I switch, really!". Then I get to crunch time with
the show 3 weeks away and everyone asking "where's the plan?" and I need to get
designing, and I find I want this loop from that layout and this yard from that
other layout and before I know it, the whole thing is designed in TrackDesigner,
mostly by copying and pasting smidgens of track from older layouts and then
rearranging like mad.
Cary has said he is not going to do a TrackDesigner convertor. His perogative.
But if you ask why people haven't converted, perhaps that is one reason why.
Inertia.
I would love it if some clever person did a convertor. Even a partial,
imperfect, compromise riddled one that only worked 90% of the time. (that's the
sort of thing Cary would not do, I expect, he's someone that I believe wants
everything to be perfect if it's associated with him... but he has said someone
else is very welcome to try as the data format specs for TrackDraw are open.)
Also I am not sure that people think the formats are finalised enough to where
older layouts that they do now will work next year. Are they? Is all the XML now
finalised? Or at least going to be forward compatible going forward?
If you ask why people haven't converted, perhaps that is one reason why.
Uncertainty.
Cary has implied he doesn't really care how many people adopt TrackDraw, he
wrote it for his own reasons. Again his perogative. I'm glad he did what he did,
it's a gift of love and we can't ask volunteers to do what WE want, we can only
be glad when they do what they want and it's useful to us.
But again, if you ask why people haven't converted, perhaps that is one reason
why. Lack of awareness.
It needs better PR. It needs people singing its praises and giving clinics and
making sample layouts available and lots of splash and pizazz. That's not Cary's
style. He is so self effacing, it's not funny. (some of the best programmers are
that way, you know). He needs a PR agent to say how wonderful he is. (and he is
wonderful you know!).
I'll probably get a note from Cary saying he's not happy with this post. :-)
|
|
| |
Mike Walsh wrote:
> I'd argue that what TrackDesigner provides is not really a zoom. It is
> simply a choice of 4 scales of which 2 are useless (.5 pixel per stud and
> .25 pixel per stud). When drawing a layout of any size or complexity the
> scale settings become a huge impediment.
I use a virtual resolution for that, also makes it very easy to do
screenshots so you can make GIF's or JPEG's of your layout. Virtual desktop
resolution is nearly unlimited, and with the 1 pixel/stud res I can do
quite large layouts. Our 9*4m layout for Rail2004 was done that way without
problems.
> Regarding Cary's choice of implementing TrackDraw with .Net which limits
> its
> portability, that discussion has been rehashed several times. I will
> concede that TrackDesigner may work better under WINE on Linux. TrackDraw
> wouldn't be the first application which only ran on Windows nor will it be
> the last.
True, but see below.
> What I do find somewhat surprising is how tightly many people continue to
> hold on to TrackDesigner when there is virtually ZERO chance of it ever
> being updated. I would think the Train Community would be working
> feverishly to make sure TrackDraw does everything we need it to but that
> doesn't seem to be the case.
I no longer have any machine with Windows, so that's my reason for not using
TrackDraw. Simple as that. It's a principle thing, being sick'n'tired of
the mess that is called Windows.
Don't get me wrong, TrackDraw is indeed technically in every way superior to
TrackDesigner, but due to it's requirements just not feasible for me (nor
for many others still running Win9x, AFAIK even Win98SE can't handle .NET
very well/at all)
--
Jan-Albert van Ree | http://www.vanree.net/brickpiles/
Brick Piles | Santa Fe B-unit
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Chio Siong Soh wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Cary Clark wrote:
> > In lugnet.trains, Chio Siong Soh wrote: • ...
> Besides samples of track plans, user-friendly documentation would be
> appreciated in the release.
No question; the documentation needs a lot of work. For instance, the keyboard
shortcuts merely says that "'Tab' alternates the last track added." Lame. That
means nearly nothing, much less suggesting that 'Tab' will rotate the connection
points.
Sometimes I can't see the big picture for all of the small details. It would be
helpful for me to get more questions about how to do things, for me to see what
the documention is missing. And as Mike said, I am happy to include any
contributions to TrackDraw -- documentation, parts, code, sample layouts -- in
the next release.
> Another idea is to have symbols of straight and curved tracks where we have
> cut the magic 5 cm gaps (for DCC). So that we don't have to go to another
> Paint program to add them.
As Mike suggested, you can add colored lines or rectangles, or modify a set of
parts to include the DCC modifications. Without knowing what you do in the paint
program, I can't be more specific.
> Also, a part symbol for the train connecting lead (part #5305) and maybe the
> speed regulator (part #4548), too. You'll have to think of a way to manage
> the wires - maybe get Kevin Clague's help. So that we can have a full
> picture of the layout with all the electrical connections included.
To present a simple schematic, you could use the existing line drawing
capability to show where the wires go. Let me know if this is not sufficient,
and what you visualize the lines looking like.
> The goal is that, we can then send a copy of the complete TrackDraw layout to
> someone else in any other part of the world and he/she would be able to
> duplicate exactly our layout. (Like we can now do in LDraw).
Unless I'm mistaken, you can't send a layout to anyone anywhere in LDraw,
because there are no LDraw representations of points / switches in 9V. The curve
finally came available in the last part release -- hooray for that!
> Look what you have got yourself into ;-)
Since TrackDraw is a completely public domain, open source, cooperative project,
the answer is "not much". Fortunately, folks like Thomas Woelk and Mike Walsh
have contributed greatly and made TrackDraw much more exciting than if I had
worked on it by myself.
Cary
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Jan-Albert van Ree wrote:
...
> TrackDesigner has a (somewhat limited though) zoom function. And it's
> biggest plus : it will work under Linux (and probably MacOS X) using WINE,
> which is definately not the case for TrackDraw :(
There is a project called Mono ( http://www.go-mono.com ) that will allow
TrackDraw to run under Linux and MacOS X at some date in the future, if all goes
well.
Cary
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
...
> Cary has said he is not going to do a TrackDesigner converter. His
> perogative.
I don't recall saying this -- I probably did though, I just don't remember --
but what I meant to say was "I don't know how to do a Track Designer converter".
I've tried a few times to get in touch with Matthew Bates, the original author,
but have had no success. A five minute conversation about the storage format,
however incomplete, would be very helpful.
If someone has reverse-engineered the format or cares to do so now, I will
happily add to TrackDraw support for a converter.
...
> I would love it if some clever person did a converter. Even a partial,
> imperfect, compromise riddled one that only worked 90% of the time. (that's
> the sort of thing Cary would not do, I expect, he's someone that I believe
> wants everything to be perfect if it's associated with him...
Larry, this made me smile. I don't know what I did to deserve this reputation,
but I hope I keep it up!
> Also I am not sure that people think the formats are finalised enough to
> where older layouts that they do now will work next year. Are they? Is all
> the XML now finalised? Or at least going to be forward compatible going
> forward?
The layouts are absolutely 100% guaranteed to be forward compatible. I have no
plans to ever obsolete any parts or layouts that are compatible with the current
version.
...
> It needs better PR. It needs people singing its praises and giving clinics
> and making sample layouts available and lots of splash and pizazz. That's
> not Cary's style. He is so self effacing, it's not funny. (some of the best
> programmers are that way, you know). He needs a PR agent to say how
> wonderful he is. (and he is wonderful you know!).
Well, you lost me here. I guess this should go into off-topic debate or
something, but I'm not sure TrackDraw or I need a PR agent. Nor would I want one
who would accept 10 or 20% of nothing as renumeration.
Cary
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Cary Clark wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Chio Siong Soh wrote:
> > The goal is that, we can then send a copy of the complete TrackDraw layout to
> > someone else in any other part of the world and he/she would be able to
> > duplicate exactly our layout. (Like we can now do in LDraw).
>
> Unless I'm mistaken, you can't send a layout to anyone anywhere in LDraw,
> because there are no LDraw representations of points / switches in 9V. The curve
> finally came available in the last part release -- hooray for that!
Oops, sorry, should have been "(Like we can now do *for models* in Ldraw)".
I was making an analogy between TrackDraw and LDraw - the ability to reproduce a
train layout (TrackDraw) and a model (LDraw) through the respective data files.
C S Soh
|
|
|
