Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 45

Thread: How do you deal with the NAVS car files???

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crstagg View Post
    You used ShapeViewer to select an S file to open a Shape file. Gerry was referring to ShapeViewer's tool to select a WAG or ENG file to open its shapefile. Note that he pointed out that the reason is ShapeViewer does not recognize Include statements. Shape files do not contain Include statements.
    While all of this is true the .s file will open in ShapeViewer and show the overall dimensions of the car.
    Gerry said he narrowed the body shape. The car started out as 10 ft 6 inches wide, how much did he narrow it by and why.
    I can see that the NAVS cars are wider than the cars next to it but at 10 ft 6 inches isn't it correct?
    Plate C has a max width of 10 ft 8 inches.

    Randy

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    4,870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rdayt View Post
    While all of this is true the .s file will open in ShapeViewer and show the overall dimensions of the car.
    Gerry said he narrowed the body shape. The car started out as 10 ft 6 inches wide, how much did he narrow it by and why.
    I can see that the NAVS cars are wider than the cars next to it but at 10 ft 6 inches isn't it correct?
    Plate C has a max width of 10 ft 8 inches.

    Randy
    I thought you were referring to Gerry's post #27 by posting a picture of Shape Viewer displaying a NAVS shape. But if you were referring to another post I am confused as the ONLY posts I find in this thread that discusses width is your post #31 and Geepster775's #25.
    Charles

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    known universe
    Posts
    2,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rdayt View Post
    While all of this is true the .s file will open in ShapeViewer and show the overall dimensions of the car.
    Gerry said he narrowed the body shape. The car started out as 10 ft 6 inches wide, how much did he narrow it by and why.
    I can see that the NAVS cars are wider than the cars next to it but at 10 ft 6 inches isn't it correct?
    Plate C has a max width of 10 ft 8 inches.

    Randy
    Randy, if you reread the thread, you'll see that it was geepster775 in post#25 that mentioned narrowing the body shape, not me.
    Cheers, Gerry
    It's my railroad and I'll do what I want! Historically accurate attitude of US Railroad Barons.
    Forever, ridin' drag in railroad knowledge.


  4. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    745

    Default

    Sorry, I was replying to his post but of course it dropped it at the end of the thread.

    Randy

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    745

    Default

    Oh, and you can view NAVS stuff in shapeviewer.
    flat.jpg

    Randy

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    4,870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rdayt View Post
    Oh, and you can view NAVS stuff in shapeviewer.
    flat.jpg

    Randy
    Then how do you explain this? ShapeViewer will not display this NAVS file.
    Navs.JPG
    Charles

  7. #37
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Worksop, UK
    Posts
    2,585

    Default

    Hi All,
    This thread has gone a little off topic!!
    I hope Doug has been able get the hoppers displayed and consist/s created

    Cheers,
    Ged

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crstagg View Post
    Then how do you explain this? ShapeViewer will not display this NAVS file.
    Navs.JPG
    I'm old.
    For the stuff for my railroad I use the MSTS style of file structure. Everything in one place.
    Cars and textures, trucks and textures, decals all in the same folder.
    The cars are individually lettered too. It's not like I'm using 100s of them. A set of four of something is usually more than adequate.
    While I find what Erick is doing is cutting edge and very interesting like I said I'm old and find it much easier to work on stuff this way.
    I do run his unaltered stuff using his file method though and no, shapeviewer doesn't work on those.

    Doug,
    What's the prognosis?

    Randy

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    4,870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rdayt View Post
    I'm old.
    ,,,,,,,,,,,
    Randy
    I'm less than a month from being an Octogenarian. I do not accept "being too old to learn new tricks". However my wife reminds me daily that some are technically challenged.

    While I'm not happy with the file structure brought on by the Include statements, I do believe that it would have been better if Kuju had gone that way to begin with. However it does make a number of MSTS/OR tools, that we have grown use to using, unusable.
    Charles

  10. #40

    Default

    If only ShapeViewer could be patched so that it could view NAVS style wags with "include" statements....

Posting Permissions

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