Transport Tycoon Forums

I think that 5 stages are enough:

• Used very often - shiny, no grass, concrete sleepers
• Often used - normal color, very little grass, concrete sleepers
• Normally used - a bit rusted, little grass, concrete (maybe wood?) sleepers
• Rarely used - rusted, some grass, wood sleepers
• Never used - very rusted, lots of grass, wood sleepers

it's not a complete solution, but you _can_ place a waypoint, and it will show some stats about how many trains passed it last moth and last year (i think)

edit;
nvm, it seems it were a miniIN feature a while back, NB9550ish dont seem to have it...

Desolator wrote:I think that 5 stages are enough:

• Used very often - shiny, no grass, concrete sleepers
• Often used - normal color, very little grass, concrete sleepers
• Normally used - a bit rusted, little grass, concrete (maybe wood?) sleepers
• Rarely used - rusted, some grass, wood sleepers
• Never used - very rusted, lots of grass, wood sleepers

It wouldn't make sense to me that sleepers change just overnight.. It would be a lot more realistic if sleepers are OR made of wood OR concrete. Not changing depending on usage.

(small side-idea: How about after a certain date you would automatically place concrete sleepers?)

Desolator wrote:I think that 5 stages are enough:

• Used very often - shiny, no grass, concrete sleepers
• Often used - normal color, very little grass, concrete sleepers
• Normally used - a bit rusted, little grass, concrete (maybe wood?) sleepers
• Rarely used - rusted, some grass, wood sleepers
• Never used - very rusted, lots of grass, wood sleepers

Sorry for my bad english, but I think that "never used" wont be used, because if a train pass over it once in its life, it can't be "never used".

I think that is better this: "Very Rarely used":

• Used very often
• Often used
• Normally usedsleepers
• Rarely used
• Very rarely used (or other word better)

Other idea: five stages needs 3 bits, and four stages needs 2 bits / track.

By never used I mean it barely has any trains passing it every 5 years.

jpmaster wrote:So then, with the normal tracks and the rusty tracks.
If i had rusty tracks somewhere, and i sent a train down them. Would they suddenly turn back to normal tracks?

No! Not at all! If this was true, than looking at normal track provides no feedback regarding its usage; it might have laid there for ages without usage, and then one train suddenly came over...

The primary goal here is the correspondence between track state and usage frequency. So the overall appearance should be simply selected from a table similar to the following:

shiny new - 10+ trains in month
new - 5-10 trains in month
standard - 4-5 trains in month
old - 3 trains in month
rusty - 2 trains in month
megarust - 0 trains in month

(just a quick draft...)

I think that we can use eight stages (3 bits), and it can be used with the number of trains in the last 12 months.

Eight stages will produce more smooth results, but needs more sprites than five or six stages.

ondras wrote:

jpmaster wrote:So then, with the normal tracks and the rusty tracks.
If i had rusty tracks somewhere, and i sent a train down them. Would they suddenly turn back to normal tracks?

If this was true, than looking at normal track provides no feedback regarding its usage; it might have laid there for ages without usage, and then one train suddenly came over...

But that's the way it works IRL. Rust is impressively weak stuff. It doesn't take much weight (relatively speaking) to polish all the rust off the top of a track and reveal shiny track again. If you're going for realism, the relevant detail is the time since the most recent train.

Yes, but in the original topic it was intended to have speed limits on rusted tracks, so the rust won't go away so easy. If a Pendolino crossed that rail at 150 km/h it'd be shiny instantly, but if it went at 10 km/h then rust would remain.

DaleStan wrote:

ondras wrote:

jpmaster wrote:So then, with the normal tracks and the rusty tracks.
If i had rusty tracks somewhere, and i sent a train down them. Would they suddenly turn back to normal tracks?

If this was true, than looking at normal track provides no feedback regarding its usage; it might have laid there for ages without usage, and then one train suddenly came over...

But that's the way it works IRL. Rust is impressively weak stuff. It doesn't take much weight (relatively speaking) to polish all the rust off the top of a track and reveal shiny track again. If you're going for realism, the relevant detail is the time since the most recent train.

Agreed. However, my initial goal (when starting this topic) was not realism, but track usage analysis

Hmm, it can be realistic, too. You could make it so rust needs 2 trains to pass over it to go away. But if the trains pass rarely (over 1 year between passes) it could build up again.

Desolator wrote:Hmm, it can be realistic, too. You could make it so rust needs 2 trains to pass over it to go away. But if the trains pass rarely (over 1 year between passes) it could build up again.

Makes Sense

The only problem is checking the train speed & weight on the fly. If a train goes to 200 kph on that track, the rust would go away instantly, but we decided to have speed limits on rusty tracks, so it can't happen. Well, a very heave train would surely clean the track of any rust.

So if the train is a simple shunter with a few light wagons, the rust won't go away so easy. But if it is a train carrying heavy wagons (coal, iron ore, etc.) the the track would shine instantly.

i also think that the length of a train would have an effect on how much rust was removed

i also think that where the trains start to brake would remove any rust, no matter what their weight, speed or length was

AIUI, even the lightest engine is more than heavy enough to polish all the rust from even the rustiest rails. Some of the lighter cars, alone, and unloaded, may well not be, though.

Anyone with RL experience or hard numbers is welcome to correct me, of course -- I failed to find any information of the compressive strength of rust.

Just a random suggestion;

Maybe if you don't have a train on a piece of track for long enough, it'll rust through, then when a train goes over it, the track breaks and boom, so does the train.

Doesn't work like that. Once the surface of the rail is covered in rust it is effectively sealed against further corrosion. Clever stuff, that rust...

I think this is a good idea. It would be really helpfull!
Using rust on tracks is helpfull as well, but in my opinion an overlay is much more handy, because than you get an easier overview of the entire network.

Archonix wrote:Doesn't work like that. Once the surface of the rail is covered in rust it is effectively sealed against further corrosion. Clever stuff, that rust...

Tell that to my car :\

Rails are made from weathering steel. I suspect your car is not.