Routes Identified for Cleanup

[NW 2156]

I grew up along the New York Susquehanna & Western RR. NYSW running over the Conrail route through Binghamton NY was a common sight. I also saw the CPR on the other side of the river running the old D&H mainline.

I'd like to keep AVR NYSW SD40T-2 Three Pack by Shawn Kelley.

I'd also like to ask for the preservation of Jeff Link's MP54 cars. These are needed for the Long Island Railroad route in the file library.

Thanks.

Robert

[CSRX]

I grew up along the New York Susquehanna & Western RR. NYSW running over the Conrail route through Binghamton NY was a common sight. I also saw the CPR on the other side of the river running the old D&H mainline.

I'd like to keep AVR NYSW SD40T-2 Three Pack by Shawn Kelley.

I'd also like to ask for the preservation of Jeff Link's MP54 cars. These are needed for the Long Island Railroad route in the file library.

Thanks.

Robert

Robert, I was actually the one to tag those SD40T-2's for removal, as I plan to eventually redo them on a much better shape from TS, but I suppose they can be kept if Eric desires.

[eric]

It's up to the authors. Jeff also tagged his cars for removal.

[eric]

There are some routes which need to be unlisted and kept in the Library from "Removal Candidates - Routes" as I know these routes and their owners very well and don't have any previous or new versions.
<snip>
ncrv1_a.zip

These are all restored with the exception of the NCR -- since that is an incomplete route without all the files, it's been redirected to the Google Drive link in the ReadMe.

[landnrailroader]

If it is apparent that a newer route just adds to & thus supercedes a previous route as is mentioned with the M&M (which means Montgomery & Mobile) and the WA, I have no problem with discarding an older version. An exception would be where a newer route requires the original route to be operational. I avoid this kind of thing with my own routes and so I make each route "stand alone" even if it does supercede all or a portion of a previous route. To help the site management a bit, I recommend that all route creators avoid having to use old routes to successfully set up new ones and when a new route is created & released there should be a note, perhaps in the specifications that tells the site manager what he can remove.

J. H. Sullivan
(aka landnrailroader)

[NW 2156]

I'd just like to point out that the different versions of Raton and Glorieta reflect changes between ATSF and BNSF. This route was famous for it's old semaphore signals. BNSF has removed almost all the semaphores from the Raton and Glorieta Pass route.

I think Bob reflected these changed in the two different versions.

Robert

[Orbita]

I'm a little perplexed as to why the Lehigh & Hudson River 1940 is on the removal candidate list. It's different from v4.0 (set in 1968).

I found a few old threads that go into detail about the differences between the two:

https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/showth...6amp%3Bhr+1940
https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/showth...6amp%3Bhr+1940

[landnrailroader]

In this case, both versions of Glorietta & Raton should be kept. I believe all the semaphores are gone now except perhaps a very
few near Springer, NM. I was fortunate enough to ride the SWC over these lines in 2001 when many original semaphores
still existed. Bob Wirth did a magnificent job in creatinig all or at least most of the AT&SF line from Chicago to LA. He is a
retired AT&SF officer and thus knew a great deal about his subject. I hope he is still with us although I haven't seen new
material in quite a while. He did live in SW Florida.

J.H. Sullivan
aka landrailroader

[eric]

I'll take a look and reset both of those thanks