Quast65's TramTrackSet (v002 released on BaNaNas 30-05-2023)

[Quast65]

Q65TTS_01.png (146.52 KiB) Viewed 5542 times

Requires minimal OpenTTD version 1.10

This set offers tramtracks.
Some vehicles that use labels from the Standardized Road/Tram Type Scheme can be used on them.
Further than that, the tracks are NOT compatible with the Standardized Road/Tram Type Scheme.
More information about that here: viewtopic.php?t=90715

Information about compatible vehiclesets here:
Dutch Metros As Trams: viewtopic.php?p=1261332#p1261332
Quast65's Vehicles For Invisible Tramtracks: viewtopic.php?p=1261330#p1261330

Currently in the set:
V002
RAIL 50km Tramway
ELRL 50km Electric Tramway
QTM0 150km Highspeed Tramway
QTM1 150km Highspeed Electric Tramway
MTR0 100km Metro, Rural
MTR1 80km Metro, Urban
MTR2 80km Metro, Urban & Concrete
MTR3 150km Metro, Highspeed
MTR4 150km Metro, With Grass Roof
MTR5 150km Metro, With Concrete Roof
MTR6 150km Metro, With Fake Airport Concrete Roof
INVI 300km Invisible Tramlanes

V001

[+] Spoiler

RAIL 50km Tramway
ELRL 50km Electric Tramway
MTR0 100km Metro, Rural
MTR1 80km Metro, Urban
MTR2 80km Metro, Urban & Concrete
MTR3 150km Metro, Highspeed
MTR4 150km Metro, With Grass Roof
MTR5 150km Metro, With Concrete Roof
MTR6 150km Metro, With Fake Airport Concrete Roof
INVI 300km Invisible Tramlanes

All tracks (except for Tramway & Electric Tramway) can be disabled via Parameter if you dont want them.
The speedlimits of the Tramway & Electric Tramway can be disabled via Parameter.
For Tramway & Electric Tramway (and the catenary of the Highspeed Electric Tramway) you can use a separate GRF to change the appearance, I recommend the LightrailTramtracks (also on BaNaNas): viewtopic.php?t=30593
Or replace them by using another tramtype-GRF (I advise loading that GRF after mine, so that those tramways get the properties of the tramways in the other GRF).
MTR4-6 (the roofed tracks), can also be used by regular trams as underground highspeed tramtracks.

Credits:
Coded by Quast65
Graphics (alterations) by Quast65
Very much inspired by ufiby, his pioneering work on a metro-tram-track was awesome! viewtopic.php?p=1251177#p1251177
Also inspired by Javelinnl, Erato, Andrew350, and all other road/tram-type developers.



Information about the powered_tramtype_list and alternative_tramtype_list
V002
RAIL (Tramway)(50km/h)(No Catenary)
Pow: RAIL, ELRL, QTM0, QTM1, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt:

ELRL (Electric Tramway)(50km/h)(Visible Catenary)
Pow: ELRL, QTM1, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt:

QTM0 (Highspeed Tramway)(150km/h)(No Catenary)
Pow: QTM0, QTM1, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt:

QTM1 (Highspeed Electric Tramway)(150km/h)(Visible Catenary)
Pow: QTM0, QTM1, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt:

MTR0 (Metro, Rural)(100km/h)(Invisible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAA3, MAB3

MTR1 (Metro, Urban)(80km/h)(Invisible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAA3, MAB3

MTR2 (Metro, Urban & Concrete)(80km/h)(Invisible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAA3, MAB3

MTR3 (Metro, Highspeed)(150km/h)(Invisible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR3, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAC3

MTR4 (Metro, With Grass Roof)(150km/h)(Visible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAA3, MAB3, MAC3

MTR5 (Metro, With Concrete Roof)(150km/h)(Visible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAA3, MAB3, MAC3

MTR6 (Metro, With Fake Airport Concrete Roof)(150km/h)(Visible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAA3, MAB3, MAC3

INVI (Invisible Tramlanes)(300km/h)(No Catenary)
Pow: INVI
Alt: EAAN, EABN, EACN

V001

[+] Spoiler

RAIL (Tramway)(50km/h)(No Catenary)
Pow: RAIL, ELRL, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt:

ELRL (Electric Tramway)(50km/h)(Visible Catenary)
Pow: ELRL, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt:

MTR0 (Metro, Rural)(100km/h)(Invisible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAB3

MTR1 (Metro, Urban)(80km/h)(Invisible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAB3

MTR2 (Metro, Urban & Concrete)(80km/h)(Invisible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAB3

MTR3 (Metro, Highspeed)(150km/h)(Invisible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR3, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAC3

MTR4 (Metro, With Grass Roof)(150km/h)(Visible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAB3, MAC3

MTR5 (Metro, With Concrete Roof)(150km/h)(Visible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAB3, MAC3

MTR6 (Metro, With Fake Airport Concrete Roof)(150km/h)(Visible Catenary)
Pow: MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5, MTR6
Alt: MAB3, MAC3

INVI (Invisible Tramlanes)(300km/h)(No Catenary)
Pow: INVI
Alt: EAAN

******************************************************************************************************
If YYYY is in the Powered_Roadtype_List of XXXX, then:
-Roads can cross, Graphics (Catenary) YYYY is dominant.
-Vehicles linked to XXXX can drive and be bought on both.
-Vehicles linked to YYYY can only drive and be bought on YYYY.
-ONLY vehicles from alt-list of XXXX will drive (and be bought) on YYYY
-Vehicles added via XXXX being in the pow-list of ZZZZ, will NOT drive (and be bought) on YYYY

If both are in each others Powered_Roadtype_List, then:
-Dominant graphics of the crossing, depends on which road was placed first. First is dominant.
-Except for when one road has catenary. Road with catenary is always dominant.
-Vehicles can drive and be bought on both.
-Vehicles added via the Powered_Roadtype_List will only cross if their road was layed first
(For example, in this case, the trams from RAIL and ELRL can be bought in depot MTR6. However, they will only cross MTR3 if a MTR6 road was layed first. They will not go into MTR3)
-Not sure if this is also the same for vehicles added via the Alternative_Roadtype_List...

Tram is always dominant over road


If I am correct, no matter what tracks are enabled/disabled, then:
RAIL vehicles can go on ELRL-tracks.
ELRL vehicles cannot go on RAIL-tracks.
RAIL and ELRL vehicles can go on Roofed Metrotracks.
RAIL and ELRL vehicles cannot go on Unroofed Metrotracks.
MAB3 vehicles can go on all Metrotracks, except for Highspeed Metrotrack.
MAB3 vehicles can also not go on RAIL- and ELRL-tracks.
MAC3 vehicles can go on all Metrotracks.
MAC3 vehicles cannot go on RAIL- and ELRL-tracks.

If label YYYY is put into alternative_roadtype_list of XXXX, label YYYY remaps to XXXX (as long as there is no roadtype that has YYYY as it's own label)

Unanswered:
With regards to remapping of labels via the alt-list: What sort order is leading? The order of the roads in the code or active ones ingame?
******************************************************************************************************

CHANGELOG:
V003
-Added the NO_HOUSES flag to all tracks (so that NO_HOUSES flagged roads stay that way)
-Added a bunch of Eyecandy tracks (default disabled, can be enabled via Parameter)

V002
-Changed sort orders, my tracks start from number 200.
This should put them last in the list (when used in combination with other tramsets)
-Added parameters to disable speedlimits of RAIL & ELRL
-Added EABN & EACN to alternative_tramtype_list of INVI
-Added MAA3 to alternative_tramtype_list of MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5 & MTR6
-Added high-speed tramtracks

SUGGESTIONS:
- Make the the tracks appear in the build-list, dependant on the when applicable vehicles appear.
Rejected: I want all tracks to be always available, even if no vehicles are available for them yet. As placefillers and/or eyecandy.

[Quast65]

Sources V001:

Q65TRAMS_v001.rar

(1.55 MiB) Downloaded 156 times

[Brickblock1]

Hi

This is a very nice set that you've made, however it seams that you have missed the part of the standard which says that all terrain/stability classes should be supported. Your implementation also seams a bit weird since MAB3 isn't compatible with MAC3 which is should be MAA3 on the other hand is supposed to not be able to run on MAC3. This might however not be against the standard as you don't provide a track which is comparable to MAB3.

Either way you'll have to add MAA3 to the alternative_tramtype_list for MTR 0, 1 and 2.

I also think the standard will have to be amended to add both catenary and ground power for your three last types. I think Z would be the best fit as it is already used by the railtype standard.

Your invisible track is also missing EABN, and EACN in its list.

[Quast65]

Hi

Hello, thank you for taking a look at this.

you'll have to add MAA3 to the alternative_tramtype_list for MTR 0, 1 and 2.

Your invisible track is also missing EABN, and EACN in its list.

Aha, I see that I need to include all of those from the Powered Roadtypes-column in the proposal, to make sure the set is prepared fro future vehicles.
Will be done, Cheers!

I also think the standard will have to be amended to add both catenary and ground power for your three last types. I think Z would be the best fit as it is already used by the railtype standard.

That sound logical, as I believe there are a couple of reallife vehicles that can switch from 3rd-rail power to wires.

Your implementation also seams a bit weird since MAB3 isn't compatible with MAC3 which is should

This I would like to debate a bit...
I would like my highspeed metro-track to be reserved ONLY for highspeed vehicles, to prevent the clogging up of traffic.
Is there a way to do this, following the standard?

[Brickblock1]

This I would like to debate a bit...
I would like my highspeed metro-track to be reserved ONLY for highspeed vehicles, to prevent the clogging up of traffic.
Is there a way to do this, following the standard?

The standard is built around the premise that vehicles with label XXBX will be able to run on all tracks with this in mind your implementation is wrong, however if we consider that you metro types are just as much XXAX as XXBX it makes more sense.

Ideally you would have MAA3 in your set as this would allow you to have all three levels and thereby you could have the slow ones use MAA3 with the fast ones using MAC3 but this would require one more tram type which isn't always wanted. This would require you to also change the metro train grf so that the slow ones go on MAA3, the faster trains could then be changed to MAB3 but this isn't neccesary if you don't want them to run on all tracks.

There is also the option of just keeping it the way it is and arguing MTR1 is MAA3 and therefore not compatible with MAC3 but that MAC3 is compatible with MTR1 as it would be MAB3. The disadvantage of this option is that it might confuse vehicle authors who chose MAB3 expecting it to run on MAC3.

[Quast65]

.

How do you envisage the look of a track that is suitable for MAA3 vehicles?
Is it in your mind something like the MTR0-track (track on ballast)?
Or more like I see it, more as just a track on bare ground, with a very low max speed?

[Brickblock1]

.

How do you envisage the look of a track that is suitable for MAA3 vehicles?
Is it in your mind something like the MTR0-track (track on ballast)?
Or more like I see it, more as just a track on bare ground, with a very low max speed?

I don't really know something like that probably, I never really thought someone would want to use the terrain class for trams. My first thought was to make it hidden but that is a bit lame.

[Quast65]

.

I'll see if I can think up of a suitable looking Metro-tramtype.

Still, just realised that that doesnt change anything regarding that MAB3-vehicles should be allowed on highspeed metrotracks.
Will also make those changes, I do want to follow the standard
Most of the time I dont think that various types of metrotracks will cross each other anyway, so slower vehicles wondering off on highspeed tracks will not be likely to happen if you give a good think about how to lay your tracks.

[Kruemelchen]

I like the idea of having a dedicated high speed track.

In a real life scenario, you would have fast light rail run on tracks for heavy rail (aka standard rail) as well as tram-like rail when on streets (though usually, they would run separated from road traffic)
Also these look more like a metro train than like a typical tram.

The point is, however, that they would run mainly on 1500V tracks, as opposed to the 600/750V of standard tramways. Thus, standard trams cannot use this special track.

Also I think it is possible for some to share standard rail lines with 15kV.

So I would recon, for vehicles this could look like this:

Code: Select all

RAAE = very light rail = early trams, max 30kph etc.
RABE = 600/750V system = majority of standard trams
RACE = interurban 600/750V system = modern high speed trams
RADE = 1500V system = very high speed light rail

However, RADE would be out of standard

----

In the case of metro trains though, I don't know, if this differentiation even exists

One solution could be to have two high speed tracks, of which one would a general high speed track and also allows MAB3,
and the other being a specialised track only allowing MAC3.

In theory, we have the speed letter [*X**] for the speed of tracks, however, that is not usable to distinguish vehicles.

[Brickblock1]

So I would recon, for vehicles this could look like this:

Code: Select all

RAAE = very light rail = early trams, max 30kph etc.
RABE = 600/750V system = majority of standard trams
RACE = interurban 600/750V system = modern high speed trams
RADE = 1500V system = very high speed light rail

However, RADE would be out of standard

----

In the case of metro trains though, I don't know, if this differentiation even exists

I don't think it does.

One solution could be to have two high speed tracks, of which one would a general high speed track and also allows MAB3,
and the other being a specialised track only allowing MAC3.

In theory, we have the speed letter [*X**] for the speed of tracks, however, that is not usable to distinguish vehicles.

This would be an option, it doesn't add much which isn't already possible with just A, B and C tho. Since trains which shouldn't be able to run on MAC3 can just use MAA3. Doing it the way it is right now also gives more power to the vehicle author. Using the speed letter for this seams complicated as the terrain one basically already does the same.

btw Quast65 any change of adding a parameter to completly isolate the metro tracks from the regular tram tracks? Currently loading your set with another standardized set will couse issues as only some trams would show up on your metro and regular tracks. By adding this as a parameter you would avoid these issues.

[Quast65]

btw Quast65 any change of adding a parameter to completly isolate the metro tracks from the regular tram tracks? Currently loading your set with another standardized set will couse issues as only some trams would show up on your metro and regular tracks. By adding this as a parameter you would avoid these issues.

I dont understand?
The whole idea of the roofed metrotracks is that they can also be used by all tramvehicles (for if you want to make underground tramsystem, with highspeed).
That's why MTR4, MTR5 and MTR6 are powered in RAIL and ELRL.
No regular tramvehicles can ever show up on other metrotracks.

[Kruemelchen]

This would be an option, it doesn't add much which isn't already possible with just A, B and C tho. Since trains which shouldn't be able to run on MAC3 can just use MAA3. Doing it the way it is right now also gives more power to the vehicle author. Using the speed letter for this seams complicated as the terrain one basically already does the same.

Well, in theory the "stability" letter should differentiate, how heavy the tram is, meaning, how much support it needs. So a C-tram would be a heavy tram, whereas an A-tram would be a very light one, which can run on unsupported rails.
This corresponds roughly with speed, as heavier trams tend to be bigger and faster.

Since (at least in JGRPP) we now have waypoints, it's not a big problem of "sorting" trams according to their speed within a tram network.
Which is why, we came to the conclusion to ignore speed for vehicles.

I still think, though, it should be possible for track authors to define a road or track for special cases, that only allows A-vehicles or C-vehicles. This shouldn't be the rule, but it should be something, that is somewhat thought of (and it is nothing that would need more letters than A, B, C).

[Brickblock1]

I dont understand?
The whole idea of the roofed metrotracks is that they can also be used by all tramvehicles (for if you want to make underground tramsystem, with highspeed).
That's why MTR4, MTR5 and MTR6 are powered in RAIL and ELRL.
No regular tramvehicles can ever show up on other metrotracks.

I understand that but have you considered it might cause issues if your set is loaded with one that provides RAAN, those vehicles would then not be able to run on your metro tracks which would cause confusion. That's why I wanted the option to dissable it so that none of the regular trams work instead of only some.

[Brickblock1]

Well, in theory the "stability" letter should differentiate, how heavy the tram is, meaning, how much support it needs. So a C-tram would be a heavy tram, whereas an A-tram would be a very light one, which can run on unsupported rails.
This corresponds roughly with speed, as heavier trams tend to be bigger and faster.

I don't fully agree with this an offroad vehicle is usally slower and heavier, that's why I consider it more based on road speed in most cases.

Since (at least in JGRPP) we now have waypoints, it's not a big problem of "sorting" trams according to their speed within a tram network.
Which is why, we came to the conclusion to ignore speed for vehicles.

I still think, though, it should be possible for track authors to define a road or track for special cases, that only allows A-vehicles or C-vehicles. This shouldn't be the rule, but it should be something, that is somewhat thought of (and it is nothing that would need more letters than A, B, C).

Doing this wouldn't be against the standard, so I don't see any problem with it being done, it could even be done so that you have a track which only A is compatible with. I just didn't see the point in doing it for this set when the same thing could be achieved with only standard labels.

[Quast65]

I understand that but have you considered it might cause issues if your set is loaded with one that provides RAAN, those vehicles would then not be able to run on your metro tracks which would cause confusion. That's why I wanted the option to dissable it so that none of the regular trams work instead of only some.

Ahhh, I see.
As the roofed Metro-tracks are meant to be suitable for all "regular" tramvehicles, then cant I just simply add lables like:

Code: Select all

RAAN, RABN, RACN
RAAE, RABE, RACE
RAAG, RABG, RACG
RAAZ, RABZ, RACZ

to the alternative_tramtype_list of those 3 roofed metrotracks?

And also:

Code: Select all

PAAN, PABN, PACN
PAAE, PABE, PACE
PAAG, PABG, PACG
PAAZ, PABZ, PACZ

And should I also include the I-versions (Industrial Site)?




With regards to the discussion about the terrain/stability.
(quoting Kreumelchen to alert him about this discussion)

.

Could all of this not be easily fixed by changing the powered roadtypes from:

Code: Select all

 A | Unsupported | AB
 B | Regular support| ABC
 C | Highspeed rail | BC

to

Code: Select all

 A | unsupported | A
 B | Regular support | ABC
 C | Highspeed rail | C

As I also cant imagine "normal" trams (like those for public transport) running on unsupported tracks as they would be too heavy.
And they should not be allowed on highspeed, for them being too slow.
Regular support should still allow all 3.

What was the reasoning to have AB and BC?
I am trying to understand why that option is needed.

[Brickblock1]

Ahhh, I see.
As the roofed Metro-tracks are meant to be suitable for all "regular" tramvehicles, then cant I just simply add lables like:

Code: Select all

RAAN, RABN, RACN
RAAE, RABE, RACE
RAAG, RABG, RACG
RAAZ, RABZ, RACZ

to the alternative_tramtype_list of those 3 roofed metrotracks?

And also:

Code: Select all

PAAN, PABN, PACN
PAAE, PABE, PACE
PAAG, PABG, PACG
PAAZ, PABZ, PACZ

And should I also include the I-versions (Industrial Site)?

That won't really help since the problem is that if another trackset provides RAAN those won't be able to run on the roofed tracks while RAIL vehicles would which is imo confusing.

With regards to the discussion about the terrain/stability.
Could all of this not be easily fixed by changing the powered roadtypes from:

Code: Select all

 A | Unsupported | AB
 B | Regular support| ABC
 C | Highspeed rail | BC

to

Code: Select all

 A | unsupported | A
 B | Regular support | ABC
 C | Highspeed rail | C

As I also cant imagine "normal" trams (like those for public transport) running on unsupported tracks as they would be too heavy.
And they should not be allowed on highspeed, for them being too slow.
Regular support should still allow all 3.

What was the reasoning to have AB and BC?
I am trying to understand why that option is needed.

The reason for the three types is that for regular road vehicles you have vehicles that shouldn't go on motorways and those use RAAN while other vehicles shouldn't use offroad/rural road and those use RACN and then you have roads which support both which is RABN.

If we want to carry this over to trams it becomes obvious that fast trams should be MAC3. regular trams are harder to place personally I would probably chose MAB3 but we will have to make them run on MAA3 since you didn't want them to run on MAB3. In this case I would probably make MAA3 hidden but that doesn't have to be done. Mind you there isn't really a need for MAA3 to be very different visually it just has to exist.

I can see two options:
1 unchanged

Code: Select all

 A | Slow | AB
 B | Medium| ABC
 C | Fast | BC

2 extended

Code: Select all

 S | Very slow | 
 A | Slow | SAB
 B | Medium| ABC
 C | Fast | BCF
 F | Very fast |

To me personally option number two seams a bit overkill. Which is why I would recommend the first option.

[Quast65]

I will leave the RAAN-issue for the moment and come back to that after solving the:

MAA3 issue

Ok, if I understand it correctly, the way for my set to behave like I want it to, but still be within the standard-scheme is to:
- Put MAA3 in the alternative_roadtype_list instead of MAB3, for all tracks (except highspeed roofless one offcourse)
- Keep MAC3 in the alternative_roadtype_list of the highspeed roofless one
- Somehow remap/"downgrade" MAB3 to MAA3
correct?

And I should then use a hidden roadtype to do that remap?
like this:

Code: Select all

item(FEAT_TRAMTYPES, item_MAA3, 00) {
	property {
		label:                       "MAA3";
		alternative_tramtype_list:       ["MAB3"];
}
}

EDIT:
After a little discussion on Discord,

Should this be the answer?

I should start by using a hidden roadtype to remap MAB3 to MAA3:

Code: Select all

item(FEAT_TRAMTYPES, item_MAA3, 00) {
	property {
		label:                       "MAA3";
		alternative_tramtype_list:       ["MAB3"];
}
}

I should remove MAB3 from the alternative_tramtype_list's
And should place MAA3 into the powered_tramtype_list's
Finally I should place the labels of the tramptypes that have MAA3 in their powered_tramtype_list also in the powered_tramtype_list of the hidden roadtype:

Code: Select all

item(FEAT_TRAMTYPES, item_MAA3, 00) {
	property {
		label:                       "MAA3";
		powered_tramtype_list:       ["MTR0", "MTR1", "MTR2", "MTR4", "MTR5", "MTR6"];
		alternative_tramtype_list:       ["MAB3"];
}
}

[Brickblock1]

Ok, if I understand it correctly, the way for my set to behave like I want it to, but still be within the standard-scheme is to:
- Put MAA3 in the alternative_roadtype_list instead of MAB3, for all tracks (except highspeed roofless one offcourse)
- Keep MAC3 in the alternative_roadtype_list of the highspeed roofless one
- Somehow remap/"downgrade" MAB3 to MAA3
correct?

The simplest solution is to just define MAA3, MAB3 and MAC3. You wouldn't have to change any of your current code other than making the non-highspeed tracks compatible with whatever you map MAA3 to. You have to add some track to behave as MAA3 it can be hidden or not, but it should only be powered on MAB3.

In order to then make the vehicles don't show up on the highspeed tracks you just give them the MAA3 label. For dutch metros this would mean changeing MAB3 to MAA3.

[Quast65]

For dutch metros this would mean changeing MAB3 to MAA3.

But that would mean that (some) of my tramvehicles aren't compliant to the standard-scheme anymore...

Have you read my edit to my previous post?

[Brickblock1]

But that would mean that (some) of my tramvehicles aren't compliant to the standard-scheme anymore...

It wouldn't, why would it?

Have you read my edit to my previous post?

I hadn't but I don't understand what MAB3 is doing there