Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 78

Thread: CNW-Harvard Progress 2012

  1. #1

    Default CNW-Harvard Progress 2012

    Starting up a new thread for work done & released in 2012...

    If you haven't already read the earlier threads, start here:

    2010: https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/showth...rvard+progress
    2011: https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/showth...rvard+progress


    Route download site: http://pages.lanehog.com/CNW
    Last edited by eolesen; 12-30-2011 at 04:31 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Stations, stations, and more stations...

    This has been on the punch list for a while... Some of the stations in the current route release were placeholders only until I could get around to building prototypical ones...

    The most basic piece missing was at Clybourn... Last year, I built the base of the station, but never got around to the platform shelters. That was a pretty simple add:



    While I was rebuilding Deval last week, it was time to tackle the closest station... Cumberland:



    As stations go, it's pretty basic. The previous station burned down in the late 50's and was replaced with the pre-cursor to an AmShack... Palatine and Dee Road had similarly simple & boring stations, with Dee Road replaced in 2006, and Palatine in 2001.

    The station in Harvard is almost as boring -- a brick 20 x 60 structure with a peaked roof:




    It's quite similar to the old station at Edison Park, which was replaced in 2007.

    Cary is a variation on the boring theme, except for the cupolo roof, which matches the decor of downtown Cary...



    Prior to the 50's, CNW had a couple standard designs for stations, and the one in Crystal Lake pretty much fits:




    This design with a 100' x 30' footprint and a bay-window for the station agents was quite common in Illinois and Wisconsin. The stations in Crystal Lake, Woodstock and Rochelle are identical structures, almost down to the brick and trim. Norwood Park, Park Ridge, and McHenry are also similar.

    In stations where passenger service didn't survive, the old structures were kept and used for use by the signals & track department:



    When Arlington Park's station was rebuilt in 1975, they kept some of the same design elements from the traditional CNW design, i.e. the bay window, but dispensed with the gables and went with a standard hip roof:




    Next on the list... custom stations for Arlington Heights, Barrington, and Palatine...
    Last edited by eolesen; 12-30-2011 at 05:48 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hanover Park, Il., USA.
    Posts
    9,321

    Default

    Nice work. Love to see your updates.
    Neil

    Here at home, in the railroad mayhem capital of the world.

  4. #4

    Default

    Can't wait to add in the interactive crossings! This update seems like it will fix much of the bugs and add in a lot of eye candy. Me like!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    561

    Default

    Looking good! I cannot wait for the final release of this route! I use the Harvard line to get chicago, since it's the closest (by closest I mean 2 houses) rail line next to my house! I can see Metra Trains right from my bedroom window, and during the winter, I have a clear view!

    Uchuu Senkan Yaamaatoo~
    --Anime Fan, Railfan, Aviation Fan, Aerospace fan, Amateur Astronomer, History Buff--
    Youtube Channel-- https://www.youtube.com/user/Amtrak712

  6. #6

    Default

    One mostly down... lots of decoration missing from the clock tower...




    Palatine was probably the most complicated of the three, with the angled building and gabled roof, but Barrington and Arlington Heights are more ornate....

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    2,662

    Default

    FYI
    This area will be FPS "Terrible"
    The car groups in the parking lot severly!!!!!, lower the frame rates.
    Looks good, put I suggest you put more low poly and fps vehicles in a line and then copy and paste them and remove all these from your route.
    Once you get ALL.... the scenery in, it will be barely drivable.

    Rick

    http:\\mononrr.com

    MONON-2


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Home is the Chicago suburbs
    Posts
    2,389

    Default

    Just a though but see how the route runs in OR before going back and stripping out shapes for low poly versions?
    Just say NO to Fictional Railroad Foaming...

  9. #9

    Default

    Thanks, Rick. I'll take a look at that next week. FPS is all relative -- I'm working with an outdated laptop with pitiful memory and crappy onboard video, so single digits is the norm on most routes... Thats why I stick to gilding instead of playing.

    And yes, OR does seem to run far better FPS in comparison.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Home is the Chicago suburbs
    Posts
    2,389

    Default

    My point being we should start designing routes that will utilize the improvements that OR is already providing and leave the restrictions behind from MSTS.
    Just say NO to Fictional Railroad Foaming...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
-->