xUSSR Set [WIP]

[George]

-> Q: the (ECS) cargo abbreviations, are there already German ones? If yes, could you please post them?

there is none except here (if any) http://www.tt-wiki.net/wiki/ECS_Vectors_Translations

-> Q: ":Electrified double-system railroad" is AC/DC, right?
So, "Electrified double-system Rail Vehicles" is a vehicle for said track type. But what is "double-system railway locomotive"? Obviouosly a "non-electrified" but "double-system" vehicle, because it´s for "Electrified double-system railroad"?

double system railway is a way where AC and DC can be switched and provided (usually stations)
AC/DC locomotives are locomotives, that can run both on AC or DC electrified railways.
If you can suggest better terms to use - we would use them.

[michael blunck]

Thanks. OK, missing German abbreviations for bauxite will be "BX" and for building materials it´ll be "BM".

How about my other questions?

regards
Michael

[George]

BTW, what does «тяпнем горя 102 раза» (in STR_TG102_PURCHASE_HINT) mean?

let's say "we'll get 102 troubles". It was not a very good engine and it's nickname say it in such a humour form.

BTW2, ->STR_REFIT_SOUTHERN_RAILWAY:
I didn´t found any "Southern railway", only regional departments of RŽD with "south" in their names are:
- Ю́го-Восто́чная желе́зная доро́га (South-East Railway, Woronesch)
- Ю́жно-Ура́льская желе́зная доро́га (South-Ural Railway, Čeljabinsk)?

It is Ukraine

BTW3, what means "Sort."?

Sortirovochnaya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classification_yard)

[Wowanxm]

BTW, what does «тяпнем горя 102 раза» (in STR_TG102_PURCHASE_HINT) mean?

Smth like "Let's knock back 102 troubles". It's because TG102 was among the first locos with hydrotransmission, it was powerful, but very noisy and had a lack of reliability.

BTW2, ->STR_REFIT_SOUTHERN_RAILWAY:

It was found in times of Russian Empire and now it's in Ukraine. In USSR it was known like Southern Railway. South-Western Railway is now also in Ukraine. Moreover, only South-Eastern is a part of RZD now and it is situated at South-West of Russia.

[michael blunck]

@Wowanxm, George

Thanks for additional information.

Q: what means "им." -> "to them."?
Q: what means "Number of Motorized car must match to the number of Head car and Car"?

regards
Michael

[Wowanxm]

Q: what means "им." -> "to them."?

This is "имени", i.e. some institute named in honour of somebody. In this case depot "имени Ильича" should be like "Ilyicha depot"...

[George]

Wouldn´t it be a better idea to "unify" the purchase menu entries? I.e.:
type/name:
axle scheme:
builder:
(track type:)
<var text>

Like this?

1.png (32.06 KiB) Viewed 6191 times

[michael blunck]

Like this?

Approximately.

BTW: "3o-3o" is not a valid UIC classification. Should be Co'Co':

Co'Co'
Two bogies or wheel assemblies under the unit. Each truck has three powered axles individually driven by traction motors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UIC_classification

Or:

Co-Co is a code for a locomotive wheel arrangement with two six-wheeled bogies with all axles powered, with a separate motor per axle.
The equivalent UIC classification for this arrangement is Co'Co'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-Co_locomotives

BTW2: I think "Number of liveries" sounds better than "Liveries number".

regards
Michael

[George]

Approximately.

What do you suggest to change?

BTW: "3o-3o" is not a valid UIC classification. Should be Co'Co':

Should we use "axle scheme" instead?

BTW2: I think "Number of liveries" sounds better than "Liveries number".

Ok. What else to change?

Are other strings readable enough?
Is anything missing?

It would be a rude task to fix a template as soon as it is applied to all the vehicles, so we would like to fix the template first.

[michael blunck]

What do you suggest to change?

Well, in DBXL 0.9 I´m only using:

Axle scheme:
Track class:
Builder:

Plus a variable text string for other differing information, e.g. "Battery-driven rail car for local services on branch lines", or "3-part EMU for commuter and regional services", etc.

Since most of your locomotives come in sections, that should also be a fixed entry. About the number of liveries, I´m not sure.

Should we use "axle scheme" instead?

You could use either "axle scheme" or "UIC classification". But since the axle scheme is just one of UIC´s classifications, "axle scheme" would be more to the point, IMO.

Are other strings readable enough?
Is anything missing?

I think I´ve already mentioned a couple of inconsistencies with your English translation.

In the German translation I´ve fixed some of these shortcomings. This might be also preferable for the latter. E.g., a better distinction between "sections" and "multitraction", correct terms for type of wagons, real factory names, etc. pp.

But o/c, I´d have to take a look again into the English lng file to spot all the differences now.

It would be a rude task to fix a template as soon as it is applied to all the vehicles, so we would like to fix the template first.

Yes, I understand. And o/c, I won´t like to revise the German translation again.

regards
Michael

[George]

Yes, I understand. And o/c, I won´t like to revise the German translation again.

So, The following template is suggested

Code: Select all

{BLACK}Series:{GOLD} Name[ {LTBROWN}«Nickname»{GOLD}][ (Model)]
{BLACK}Type:{GOLD} {LTBLUE/BROWN/BLACK for both/BLACK}Passenger/Cargo/Shunting{GOLD} steam/diesel/electric locomotive[ ({BLUE/RED/BLACK for both}AC/DC{GOLD})]
{BLACK}Sections:{GOLD} number of sections, operated by one locomotive crew, list of series that can be attached under control of the same locomotive crew
{BLACK}Produced:{GOLD} From-[Till] (XXXX-XXXX)
{BLACK}Builder:{GOLD} Works names (Country if not USSR)
{GOLD}Other information

Is it OK?

EDIT: Please see below for an updated suggestion at http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php? ... 0#p1086840

[planetmaker]

Why is the 'series' actually needed and not part of the actual name which is displayed in the purchase list? To me it looks more recognizable than the many tow or three letters followed by two or three numbers.

[George]

Why is the 'series' actually needed and not part of the actual name which is displayed in the purchase list? To me it looks more recognizable than the many tow or three letters followed by two or three numbers.

Because there is no callback to change name during time. It was requested several time and the answer is NO

[michael blunck]

Is it OK?

Yes.

regards
Michael

[George]

Is it OK?

Yes.

I've split the strings. Please have a look if we got what we expected

[michael blunck]

I've split the strings. Please have a look if we got what we expected

Umph, you changed all the text colours.

Is this the final draft?


[edit]
BTW: for the diesels, having both "(Diesel)" and "diesel locomotive" seems to be redundant.
Since for electrics, "(Electric)" is missing (likewise for steamers), I´d suggest to get rid of the extra "(Diesel)".
[/edit]


[edit2]
I have problems with that many text colours being used now:

• {BLACK} normal text, <shunting>
  YELLOW name
  {GOLD} series, type, timeframe, manufacturer
  {RED} <freight>
  {BLUE} <passenger>
  {WHITE} <passenger/freight>

IMO, that many colours should severely be limited:

• {BLACK} normal text
  {GOLD} name, series, type, timeframe, manufacturer, axle scheme (missing, s.b.)
  {????} any additional custom text

(as an *example*, see picture)

Except from the risk of getting colour-blind, certain translations would get ugly if being forced to change text colour inside words:

{RED}Freight{GOLD} steam locomotive{}
->
{RED}Güter{GOLD}zugdampflok

customtexts.png (7.01 KiB) Viewed 5867 times

BTW: Has "axle scheme" / "UIC classification" been removed now?
[/edit2]

regards
Michael

[George]

Is this the final draft?

Yes

BTW: for the diesels, having both "(Diesel)" and "diesel locomotive" seems to be redundant.
Since for electrics, "(Electric)" is missing (likewise for steamers), I´d suggest to get rid of the extra "(Diesel)".

we provided 2 forms of text - long and short (see last commit)
Long texts should have such texts for all vehicles (work in progress hope to finish on weekend).

I have problems with that many text colours being used now:
IMO, that many colours should severely be limited:
Except from the risk of getting colour-blind, certain translations would get ugly if being forced to change text colour inside words:
{RED}Freight{GOLD} steam locomotive{}
->
{RED}Güter{GOLD}zugdampflok

Well, you can remove colours for German translations
As for English translation we would like to get some feedback from players first. Removing colours can be easily done with regexp, so we would do it (if we would) later.

BTW: Has "axle scheme" / "UIC classification" been removed now?

yes. In case provided it would be additional information, like liveries.

[michael blunck]

BTW: Has "axle scheme" / "UIC classification" been removed now?

yes. In case provided it would be additional information, like liveries.

Well, when using "realistic acceleration", the axle scheme would give an immediate hint about possible application, w/o having to take a deeper look into tractive effort or power numbers.

Just an idea - but again, it´s your set.

regards
Michael

[George]

Code: Select all

{BLACK}Series:{GOLD} Name[ {YELLOW}«Nickname»][{GOLD} Model]
{BLACK}Type:{GOLD} {BLUE/RED/WHITE for both/BLACK}Passenger/Cargo/Shunting{GOLD} steam/diesel/electric locomotive[ ({BLUE/RED/BLACK for both}AC/DC{GOLD})]
{BLACK}Sections:{GOLD} number of sections, operated by one locomotive crew, list of series that can be attached under control of the same locomotive crew
{BLACK}Produced:{GOLD} From-[Till] (XXXX-XXXX)
{BLACK}Builder:{GOLD} Works names (Country if not USSR)
{GOLD}Other information

[michael blunck]

work in progress hope to finish on weekend

OK, I´m waiting for that "final" version, preferably for the weekend, to re-work my translation again.

regards
Michael