Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Routes Identified for Cleanup

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • eolesen
    replied
    I'll take a look and reset both of those thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • landnrailroader
    replied
    In this case, both versions of Glorietta & Raton should be kept. I believe all the semaphores are gone now except perhaps a very
    few near Springer, NM. I was fortunate enough to ride the SWC over these lines in 2001 when many original semaphores
    still existed. Bob Wirth did a magnificent job in creatinig all or at least most of the AT&SF line from Chicago to LA. He is a
    retired AT&SF officer and thus knew a great deal about his subject. I hope he is still with us although I haven't seen new
    material in quite a while. He did live in SW Florida.

    J.H. Sullivan
    aka landrailroader

    Leave a comment:


  • Orbita
    replied
    I'm a little perplexed as to why the Lehigh & Hudson River 1940 is on the removal candidate list. It's different from v4.0 (set in 1968).

    I found a few old threads that go into detail about the differences between the two:


    Leave a comment:


  • NW 2156
    replied
    I'd just like to point out that the different versions of Raton and Glorieta reflect changes between ATSF and BNSF. This route was famous for it's old semaphore signals. BNSF has removed almost all the semaphores from the Raton and Glorieta Pass route.

    I think Bob reflected these changed in the two different versions.

    Robert

    Leave a comment:


  • landnrailroader
    replied
    If it is apparent that a newer route just adds to & thus supercedes a previous route as is mentioned with the M&M (which means Montgomery & Mobile) and the WA, I have no problem with discarding an older version. An exception would be where a newer route requires the original route to be operational. I avoid this kind of thing with my own routes and so I make each route "stand alone" even if it does supercede all or a portion of a previous route. To help the site management a bit, I recommend that all route creators avoid having to use old routes to successfully set up new ones and when a new route is created & released there should be a note, perhaps in the specifications that tells the site manager what he can remove.

    J. H. Sullivan
    (aka landnrailroader)

    Leave a comment:


  • eolesen
    replied
    Originally posted by Karthik90 View Post
    There are some routes which need to be unlisted and kept in the Library from "Removal Candidates - Routes" as I know these routes and their owners very well and don't have any previous or new versions.
    <snip>
    ncrv1_a.zip
    These are all restored with the exception of the NCR -- since that is an incomplete route without all the files, it's been redirected to the Google Drive link in the ReadMe.

    Leave a comment:


  • eolesen
    replied
    It's up to the authors. Jeff also tagged his cars for removal.

    Leave a comment:


  • CSRX
    replied
    Originally posted by NW 2156 View Post
    I grew up along the New York Susquehanna & Western RR. NYSW running over the Conrail route through Binghamton NY was a common sight. I also saw the CPR on the other side of the river running the old D&H mainline.

    I'd like to keep AVR NYSW SD40T-2 Three Pack by Shawn Kelley.

    I'd also like to ask for the preservation of Jeff Link's MP54 cars. These are needed for the Long Island Railroad route in the file library.

    Thanks.

    Robert
    Robert, I was actually the one to tag those SD40T-2's for removal, as I plan to eventually redo them on a much better shape from TS, but I suppose they can be kept if Eric desires.

    Leave a comment:


  • NW 2156
    replied
    I grew up along the New York Susquehanna & Western RR. NYSW running over the Conrail route through Binghamton NY was a common sight. I also saw the CPR on the other side of the river running the old D&H mainline.

    I'd like to keep AVR NYSW SD40T-2 Three Pack by Shawn Kelley.

    I'd also like to ask for the preservation of Jeff Link's MP54 cars. These are needed for the Long Island Railroad route in the file library.

    Thanks.

    Robert

    Leave a comment:


  • magmateus
    replied
    Originally posted by landnrailroader View Post
    You can remove these items:
    RMD 1st Div (2007)
    RMD 2nd Div (2004)
    RMD 3rd Div (2009)
    RMD 4th Div (2005)

    These were replaced when Lukas Lussar combined the 1st & 2nd divisions to make the RMD-EAST and when
    he combined the 3rd & 4th divisions to make the RMD-WEST.

    The Wallace Branch (wallace.zip) can be removed. It was later included in the RMD 4th Div. which then became
    part of the RMD-West itself.

    Black Canyon, both versions, can be removed. This was a piece of a route I did for Don Karch so
    he could do the Gunnison to Montrose line, so it is now part of the Colorado Mega Route.

    The 2008 version of the Hook & Eye is fullly MSTS compatible while the 2015 version runs much
    better on ORTS. Both versions should be kept - I didn't do the 2015 version.

    Blue Ridge Sub. 9-9-2002 version can be removed. Keep the 9-13-2002. It is the same as the
    9-9-2002 version except signals are better.

    Kingsport Sub. should be kept.

    As I create new routes, and if a route is a workover of some previous route I will make this known
    when I upload it so that the site manager can keep disc usage in check. For example I have a route
    in the library now that should be superceded later this year and if so, at that time I will recommend
    removal of the earlier version. In that case the new version will be identical in part to the older
    version but will have more main and branches added so it will be about twice the size of the earlier
    version. In a case like that it makes no sense to keep an old route.

    I checked and the two Idaho Division route sets are not the same. The later version is ORTS only
    but needs more completed scenery. That is not my route. The earlier one is mine and will work
    on either MSTS or ORTS. Both versions should be kept.

    J. H. Sullivan, P.E. (retired)
    Very useful information, thank you.
    Best regards.
    Mateus

    Leave a comment:


  • landnrailroader
    replied
    Eolesen,

    There is a file in the library that refers to the Black Canyon being added to Don Karch route in 2017. That one was superceded by the 2019 version of the Colorado Mega Route that I completed after Don passed away. You can delete the 2017 file. There are two files that refer to a seperate version of the Black Canyon, but since the Mega Route has been completed those are redundant too and can be dropped.

    J. H. Sullivan

    Leave a comment:


  • eolesen
    replied
    Thanks, Jerry.


    For those who noticed, the downloads were broken for a couple hours this morning -- that's been resolved.

    Leave a comment:


  • landnrailroader
    replied
    You can remove these items:
    RMD 1st Div (2007)
    RMD 2nd Div (2004)
    RMD 3rd Div (2009)
    RMD 4th Div (2005)

    These were replaced when Lukas Lussar combined the 1st & 2nd divisions to make the RMD-EAST and when
    he combined the 3rd & 4th divisions to make the RMD-WEST.

    The Wallace Branch (wallace.zip) can be removed. It was later included in the RMD 4th Div. which then became
    part of the RMD-West itself.

    Black Canyon, both versions, can be removed. This was a piece of a route I did for Don Karch so
    he could do the Gunnison to Montrose line, so it is now part of the Colorado Mega Route.

    The 2008 version of the Hook & Eye is fullly MSTS compatible while the 2015 version runs much
    better on ORTS. Both versions should be kept - I didn't do the 2015 version.

    Blue Ridge Sub. 9-9-2002 version can be removed. Keep the 9-13-2002. It is the same as the
    9-9-2002 version except signals are better.

    Kingsport Sub. should be kept.

    As I create new routes, and if a route is a workover of some previous route I will make this known
    when I upload it so that the site manager can keep disc usage in check. For example I have a route
    in the library now that should be superceded later this year and if so, at that time I will recommend
    removal of the earlier version. In that case the new version will be identical in part to the older
    version but will have more main and branches added so it will be about twice the size of the earlier
    version. In a case like that it makes no sense to keep an old route.

    I checked and the two Idaho Division route sets are not the same. The later version is ORTS only
    but needs more completed scenery. That is not my route. The earlier one is mine and will work
    on either MSTS or ORTS. Both versions should be kept.

    J. H. Sullivan, P.E. (retired)
    Last edited by landnrailroader; 03-06-2023, 02:46 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • eolesen
    replied
    Thanks, Karthik.

    Leave a comment:


  • Karthik90
    replied
    There are some routes which need to be unlisted and kept in the Library from "Removal Candidates - Routes" as I know these routes and their owners very well and don't have any previous or new versions.

    ir_swr.zip

    western_railways_v5.zip

    003-irmsts_guide-ii_part-3.zip

    surupdate3.zip
    surupdate2.zip
    surupdate1.zip

    mumbai2011_d.zip
    mumbai2011_b.zip
    mumbai2011_c.zip
    mumbai2011_a.zip

    braghanzaghat.zip [Different Owner

    konkan.zip

    pune-sholapur-1.zip
    pune-sholapur-2.zip
    pune-sholapur-3.zip
    pune-sholapur-4.zip

    mumbaiupdate.zip

    indrail5.zip
    indrail4.zip
    indrail3.zip
    indrail2.zip
    indrail.zip

    dhulghat.zip

    mumpunea.zip
    mumpuneb.zip

    sholapur.zip

    bragzt1.zip [Different Owner]

    ncrv1_a.zip

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X