Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 98

Thread: MILWAUKEE ROAD Spokane Extension

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    89

    Default MILWAUKEE ROAD Spokane Extension

    Hello Everyone,

    This topic is to post news and get some help regarding a slight modification and extension of the Milwaukee Road Idaho Division Route.

    A couple of weeks ago I started to add some scenery to this route, started from Avery ID, heading west. I added some new species of vegetation, wired poles, changed signals to searchlights (as they were in real life), replaced switchstands etc. When I reached Plummer junction, I decided to take a break in the detailing and create the MILW passenger route across Spokane.

    Thanks to the Cascade Rail Foundation, I've got the track profile and a few station maps from https://research.milwelectric.org. Fortunately, the ROW maps of the entire Spokane area is available there. It's very useful because in the 70's there were a slight modification of the track network at Spokane. In this route, the goal is to represent the earlier state of the network, with the GN and NP stations facing each other at the river, etc.

    At the moment, tracks laid down between Plummer and Spokane, the first test consist reached the MILW freight yard at East Spokane. Next task is the UP yard, which is adjacent to the MILW yard. After that, GN and NP freight yards will be created, and then we get into the middle of things, the multiple ROWs across Spokane downtown...

    As for the Spokane-Marengo section of the MILW passenger route, my plan is to import it from the BNSF Lakeside Sub route.

    I think I'll have a lot of questions in this topic. I'll be very thankful for every piece of help.

    I hope if I manage finish this and get the permissions to offer it to the Community, it'll be a fun for You all.

    Thanks: Peter

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    89

    Default

    As I mentioned, MILW freight yard is laid down. Here You can see the first test in OpenRails, and a small experiment to apply wornout tracks to the yard.
    Open Rails 2019-02-01 06-36-55.jpg Névtelen2.jpg

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Halfway between Portland and Seattle in the Shifting Sands
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Excellent! Keep plugging alone and good luck.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Carolina's
    Posts
    2,752

    Default

    Peter, I do worry this might not work in MSTS thus loosing the back compatibility of the Milw routes. This is a problem with TSRE5 and one Goku seems to not be aware of.

    Robert

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Post Falls, ID
    Posts
    1,052

    Default

    Sounds like a cool project. I was not aware of MILW using searchlights on the main, but perhaps I've seen pictures and I just didn't think about it.

    While it will take a bit more work, I would urge you against using the Lakeside route for the Spokane to Marengo portion, as the Lakeside route is very inaccurate on track alignment throughout. That's just my thoughts though

    P.S. The Spokane area is my home, so feel free to ask questions if you have any.

    Also, historical aerial imagery is your friend! https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer
    ~Sean Kelly~

    MRL Mullan Pass for ORTS
    https://www.trainsimulations.net/Pro...LLAN_ORTS.HTML

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    89

    Default

    Thank You for all.

    Yepp, there were searchlights on the PCE, AFAIK between Avery and Othello (except dark territory, of course).

    MSTS compatibility could be good, but I won't test it. We have a new sim and now also a route editor, and I think the time has come to exploit the benefits of them. Sorry, I know why You protest against ORTS, but I surely beleive that the problems You have with it will be solved.

    Meanwhile, tracks of UP yard finished, and I started to change the track textures to some kind of wornout ones in case of the yard tracks. The results can be seen here. Some of the tracks will remain the brownish one, a just had to batch rename every piece in the world files to the wornout ones and now changing back some parts to the brown ones. What do You think, is it nice enough to worth the effort of manual changing hundreds of track shapes, or I'd better save time and leave the same brownish track texture everywhere?

    Peter

    Open Rails 2019-02-05 04-14-51.jpg Open Rails 2019-02-05 04-15-26.jpg
    Last edited by oliver2; 02-04-2019 at 10:53 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    89

    Default

    Meanwhile, trackwork at the NP-GN-UP-MILW interlocking and the NP's Yardley-Parkwater Yard Complex is completed.

    Notice the brown curved tracks in the first screenshot. Although I changed the track shapes in case of the yard tracks at the UP yard, I realized that curved tracks remained brown. This is because of the OR's superelevation function. I don't want to turn off superelevation, so I guess the solution will be to replace curved sections with dynamic track, then explode them with dynatrack tool. I hope that after that I can change the textures of the exploded sections to the wornout ones.
    Open Rails 2019-02-07 06-01-23.jpg Open Rails 2019-02-07 06-52-27.jpg Open Rails 2019-02-13 04-52-20.jpg

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    89

    Default

    Track texture problem solved. I inserted 0,01m short dynamic track sections between the curved track sections. So, from the viewpoint of ORTS, there are multiple short curves, where superelevation won't appear.

    NP passenger station and its west lead has been layed down. Next task is the joint MILW-UP tracks and the east end of the Union Station. Possibly there will be a small cheating with grades because I didn't manage to lay down graded double slip tracks.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville,, FL, USA.
    Posts
    3,779

    Default

    The Idaho Division is my work, from a few years back and you have my permission to add whatever you wish to it
    as long as when you release the route, you footnote, or add in the readme file that fact that I was the original
    creator and then add comments as to whatever you have changed/added.

    I would advise against using the Lakeside route to provide the Spokane-Marengo portion, i.e. unless you are
    ready to have the gents in the white jackets, holding straitjackets, come for you. I was looking at using it
    along with a route I have digitzed, but otherwise not started, of the Camas Prairie, but I found that the
    creator used a different coordinate base than I did. I used UsaPhotomaps for most of my routes and when
    it was announced that data would be lost for this program, I downloaded all I expected to need in the
    future. So you may not be able to directly import the Lakeside route, and may be better off to create
    your own markers for the line and lay the track from scratch.

    J. H. Sullivan
    (aka landnrailroader)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    89

    Default

    Mr. Sullivan, Thank You for the advices and the permission. Of course You'll be noted as the original creator.

    Fine, Lakeside Sub is not an option. I think if I manage to build the Spokane track complex, the way to Marengo will be a piece of cake. However, regarding this section I have only one version of track profile, which is lack of signal positions. As this was a UP route with MILW trackage rights, I'd guess I can find something in an online UP archive, but I haven't find such yet.

    But it's way far from now, tracks and terrain comes first.

Posting Permissions

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