Derailments in OpenRails

[eolesen]

I'd guess 95% of all derailments (e.g. those not involving an actual collision) are nothing more than wheels off the tracks with the cars remaining upright. Occassionally a few cars dump over catastrophically, but that's the exception more than the norm.

If anyone does program in derailments, it should be a simple "end of activity" message.

Having cars and locomotives going airborne is simply immature & childish.

[geepster775]

Flying railcars that go airborne is non-proto, and no, that doesn't have to be brought forward into OR. But there is nothing wrong with real world derailment physics being brought into the fold. Things like railcars that accordion in a major derailment and block all main tracks, or minor derailments that cause cars to lean but not necessarily foul one track on a two or three track main, or string-lining cars caused by outrageously bad train handling on curvy grades, all those are real world and legit content that could be incorporated. Events that lead to sim-triggered UDE. Absolutely NOTHING wrong with bringing those types of events into this sim.

Save the world this argument that its too traumatic for real world hoggers. That is political correctness at its finest. Kiddies who want to see railcars go airborne are a far lesser threat than the PC police forces guarding real world hoggers from re-living electronic tragedy.

If anyone does program in derailments, it should be a simple "end of activity" message.

Not necessarily. Nothing wrong with leaving your derailed cars behind and running for the end terminal. Or have a AI freight encounter a sim-induced minor derailment, say on the NEC, and forcing all the passenger traffic to fleet through on the one remaining open track. Waiting for your slot and running that gauntlet is 90% of the fun right there.

[muskokaandtahoe]

The answer is the OR team discussed it very early in the project and made a decision not to do MSTS style derailments out of respect to the men and women who have been injured or died in such accidents. Their loss was not a game and the team felt it would be very disrespectful to code that sort of thing as entertainment. The issue of prioritizing derailments over or under other features never came up.

Morons who don't agree can go and write their own simulator.

I was part of that discussion so I think this answer is enough to answer the question.

[dredick]

But there is nothing wrong with real world derailment physics being brought into the fold.

I concur with that. Not having a "sim" NOT model something in the real-world is not "realistic', IMHO.

Real world derailments are an ACCIDENT, and should be modeled in OR as such.

No one can control what an end user does with the product, simply.

[Dad]

Thank you for answering, this has been an interesting thread. I did not know that people actually did crash competitions on MSTS. I respect Open Rails's decision to not do "over the top" train crashes. Also, how do you make Random AI traffic, as I am on Windows 8 and my Activity Editor is kind of screwy?

[Snowman]

I did not know that people actually did crash competitions on MSTS. I respect Open Rails's decision to not do "over the top" train crashes.

Kids did them seven, or eight years ago. Not to mention roller coaster train crash videos are not realistic and not taken seriously and are immature and why most people over the age of 13 dont watch them. Im for the pop ups myself. Once again, I dont know how asking for some type of notification of derailment, either visual, or popup is immature. Derailments because of improper handling, or random track failures, fatigue is not immature. No one said anything about cars, people, cows ect.

[scottb613]

Hi Folks,

While I don't really subscribe to the moral high ground reasoning to not include crashes - as I've been known to enjoy putting an AIM-7 Sparrow up the tailpipe of many an adversary - or - a Mk-48 ADCAP on some unsuspecting Akula - simulating activities where many have died - - - I don't think ORTS really needs them as they would be wasting time that could be better spent improving the overall simulation... I do think that a train derailment message or something might be appropriate when you exceed plausible performance for a given piece of track - but again - I can think of so many more important things to include...

Regards,
Scott

[ftldave]

I recall that MSTS 2 was to have "more realistic" train derailments. I confess I'd never really considered the risk of how railroad companies might react, but Microsoft and its army of lawyers must not have had such concerns back when. The idea that some former railroader would suffer unbearable mental anguish at the sight is, well, a real stretch of the imagination. What next then? Maybe hard-coded speed limits so trains won't look like they are running dangerously fast on our screens and might scare someone? Of course, there are more important goals than realistic derailments for ORTS to become a better train sim.

But I ask you: What would Gomez do?

[seagoon]

If we must have the depiction of a catastrophic derailment, then do it the same way as is done in Train Master 4.....a siren sounds, a pop-up message appears and the player has to restart the scenario/activity.

[R. Steele]

But I ask you: What would Gomez do?

To veer off into sublime lunacy...Gomez would certainly want all sorts of mayhem and gleeful gore! But he's gotta be an exception to any rule.