Old track shapes

[jonpd]

I have a route that I added all the track on 10 to 15 years ago and by today's standards the track looks awful, especially the rails which look like steel bars rather than rails. The route uses X tracks. Is there any way to upgrade the look of the track without relaying the entire route with a newer track library?

[rdayt]

You mean something like this?
Track.JPG

[geepster775]

Really only 2 options

Lay your track with ScaleRail, or convert any Xtracks route over to USTracks. http://dbtracks.com/


USTracks uses the substitution method, meaning you lay track in Xtracks, and then modify the world files later by changing out the prefix for any and all references of the track in the world files. This changing of the prefix is what allows you to generate 4 different track styles within the same route while the original track laying process limited you to 2 (wood or concrete). To me this is the power of the USTracks system, no other can do the same. On the down side, the guy who made it only got to 90% completeness before he passed away, so there are some exotic Xtracks shapes that never got their companion UStracks upgrade yet.









UStracks is a great system for upgrading the older payware routes that lacked any complex track pieces, like MLT's old Cascades route or Rogers Pass route. Freeware routes, on the other hand, where builders went bonkers and used just about every exotic track piece available in Xtracks, well, they are a different story.

[eolesen]

You can't do what you're asking without having to re-do some track.

With Scalerail, I've seen 80-90% of track able to be replaced by running one of the rename utilities, but you'd still have to work the outliers.

I'd caution against simply changing the prefix -- you really need to do an explicit find and replace of the exact filenames so you don't wind up with missing shapefiles you then can't select in the editor to delete.

Scalerail will allow you to do concrete or wood ties. I fake out my concrete ties to be wood ties so I can have two different ballast colors and switchstand styles.

[geepster775]

I'd caution against simply changing the prefix -- you really need to do an explicit find and replace of the exact filenames so you don't wind up with missing shapefiles you then can't select in the editor to delete.

I probably should add that USTracks is really a "final step beautification process". Once you build your route using Xtracks, edit it using Xtracks, and convert it at the very end of development, the track layout is not really an editable product afterwards. The diversity beyond the two normal primary track choices (wood or concrete) you are able to apply is what makes it ineligible for any further track editing afterwards. You could have US1, US2, US3 and US4 prefixes all in the same route, and any route editor would only be looking for the primary two of wood or concrete.

The final Xtracks copy would be your 'master copy' to be retained and used if any track mods grab your fancy a few years down the road.

Before conversion, take the route, run it through route riter to generate the report on track sections used, and verify those sections have UStracks equivalents.

[Rick-MONON]

Really surprised no one has made like a 5mm conversion track shape that would go from A1t to US3 tracks like real railroads do when the have different pound rail connecting. You could change it out in the world file and then use it again to go back to US3. Put a little grass over the tracks in that area and it would hide it pretty much.

[rdayt]

If you have more than one route installed, which I'm sure you do, just search for acleantrack1 and acleantrack2. Pick out a couple that you fancy and use those.
Some are better than others and there are some really good ones. Try out several, it's easy.

Randy

Edit to add: The bigger .aces have more resolution and are usually better.

[jonpd]

Replacing acleantrack2 was a major improvement.