Author Topic: pak128.USA (Read 118525 times)

rfg123 · « **Reply #105 on:** July 09, 2010, 12:59:22 AM »

Time for the next mini-update..

The next focus for me was railroad tracks. I modified the existing versions in pak128 for a full range of track types from the first railroads in 1828 to high speed rail, which is the most recent addition to the track types. The first high speed train (Acela Express) was introduced to the US in 2000, although the first true high speed rail line in the US will not be completed until at least 2015 (Tampa - Orlando). I added the high speed track slightly before the Acela was introduced for the purpose of realism.

I also modified the tram tracks. No screenshot yet, but basically the first tram track can now be built in 1836. It will be used by horsecars until 1889. In 1889 electric trolleys will be available, as well as an upgraded version of the track. Further track upgrades occur in 1953 and 1991. I also plan to add interurban railroads to the tram menu eventually..

rfg123 · « **Reply #106 on:** July 10, 2010, 07:53:03 PM »

I know it is a little early to be worrying about city buildings, but I could not resist experimenting with Raven's awesome graphics..

1750:

us (site down, do not visit) ]/image/show/-CnEPOK9I9/simscr00.png]

mid/late 1800s:

us (site down, do not visit) ]/image/show/UiFJrvJpwA/simscr01.png]

With the latter, I only have the completed pak files from the ancient pak128.usa, so it is not possible to edit their intro/retire dates. Raven also made a complete line of American steam locomotives that span the entire history of railroading, unfortunately they need rebalancing and there are no source files.

What I would like to know is what should be the established start date for pak128.USA? I was considering 1750 personally, since that is the date that stagecoach transportation would be feasible. Prior to that ships would have been the only means of transportation and the game might be a little boring.. Or we could set the minimum even later - around 1800 or 1850 when more transportation options are available..

prissi · « **Reply #107 on:** July 10, 2010, 09:19:50 PM »

These house are distinctively european, they are middle ages (before 1500) so not very american. I would rather ask the maker of the american desert graphics from OpenTTD for the permission to use their stuff I used in the thread further above.

ӔO · « **Reply #108 on:** July 10, 2010, 09:40:41 PM »

1880~1930 or so, there is an increase in red brick buildings.

VS · « **Reply #109 on:** July 10, 2010, 09:48:26 PM »

Concerning start date: For pak128 the preliminary plan is having fully playable timeline since 1870. Rationale for such relatively late date is that the game, as is, does not work that well with some parameters too dynamic. (I'd elaborate but typing on mobile is a form of torture) This means that at start, at least one transport mode must be mature by current standards... Then many things get simpler.

rfg123 · « **Reply #110 on:** July 11, 2010, 02:00:00 AM »

Quote from: prissi on July 10, 2010, 09:19:50 PM

These house are distinctively european, they are middle ages (before 1500) so not very american. I would rather ask the maker of the american desert graphics from OpenTTD for the permission to use their stuff I used in the thread further above.

The only problem with the OpenTTD buildings is they only fit one region of the US..

I rendered a house the other day that is American looking [see attached]. Probably would only fit the post-1990s era though..

Quote from: VS on July 10, 2010, 09:48:26 PM

Concerning start date: For pak128 the preliminary plan is having fully playable timeline since 1870. Rationale for such relatively late date is that the game, as is, does not work that well with some parameters too dynamic. (I'd elaborate but typing on mobile is a form of torture) This means that at start, at least one transport mode must be mature by current standards... Then many things get simpler.

In that case, I think 1830 or so would be a good place to start. It is around that date that US railroads were born, and there would be plenty of options for transit networks..

wlindley · « **Reply #111 on:** July 11, 2010, 12:55:46 PM »

Canals were prevalent even toward the end of George Washington's life (he was a founder of the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Company later C&O Railway), and shipping was certainly around before then. I am hopeful of a timeline similar to pak128.Britain's.

prissi · « **Reply #112 on:** July 11, 2010, 09:23:43 PM »

You can have the pak128.USA with climates; maybe tropical is rather plains, and desert is, well desert, where you could use those houses.

ӔO · « **Reply #113 on:** July 15, 2010, 07:38:29 AM »

Quote from: prissi on July 11, 2010, 09:23:43 PM

You can have the pak128.USA with climates; maybe tropical is rather plains, and desert is, well desert, where you could use those houses.

Isn't Florida tropical?
Mediterranean: California

by far the largest would be temperate climate, and that would include the prairies.

You can probably do away with tundra climate entirely.

Isaac Eiland-Hall · « **Reply #114 on:** July 15, 2010, 08:17:17 AM »

If Alaska and Hawaii are included, there is definitely a use for alpine and tropical...

And yes, south Florida is tropical - but since climate is still based on level, it's probably less important for just that part of one state.

rfg123 · « **Reply #115 on:** July 15, 2010, 02:48:41 PM »

Quote from: AEO on July 15, 2010, 07:38:29 AM

Isn't Florida tropical?
Mediterranean: California

by far the largest would be temperate climate, and that would include the prairies.

You can probably do away with tundra climate entirely.

If Canada is included in this set, the Canada specific objects could be limited to the tundra climate.. Of course not all of Canada is tundra, but at least that way it would be possible to create a specifically Canadian building set independent of the US set.

The tropical climate will probably be adapted to represent the Southern US, which has a humid subtropical climate and differs from the temperate climate of the Northeast, Midwest, and Plains regions. Alpine could represent the Rocky Mountains..

Of course, I would like to finish waytypes before working on buildings and such. Right now I am trying to fix a couple of graphical glitches in the roads, it is rather difficult to get the lines on the diagonal roads to line up properly..

wlindley · « **Reply #116 on:** July 16, 2010, 03:08:41 PM »

And Desert for the Southwest... tile-roofed buildings etc... hmm... I like the way this is going...

rfg123 · « **Reply #117 on:** July 16, 2010, 08:18:06 PM »

Quote from: VS on June 20, 2010, 10:20:13 AM

I got all 3 items - paks, decompiler and images. So... I should give this to whom?

Is there any chance of the images/dat files from Raven's US train and bus sets being shared here? Nearly all of his buses need re-alignment and an overhaul of their costs. Would be a shame for them to go to waste, because those really are some nice buses and trains.

jamespetts · « **Reply #118 on:** September 18, 2010, 09:32:31 AM »

Developments looking interesting so far - the birth of a pakset! Any chance of a Simutrans-Experimental version?

zc15-nyonker · « **Reply #119 on:** October 08, 2010, 12:04:06 AM »

It's good to see I'm not the only American that plays Simutrans!

Keep up the good work!

Isaac Eiland-Hall · « **Reply #120 on:** October 08, 2010, 02:44:59 AM »

*waves* Hello, fellow American!

IgorEliezer · « **Reply #121 on:** October 08, 2010, 02:52:57 AM »

Quote from: Isaac.Eiland-Hall on October 08, 2010, 02:44:59 AM

*waves* Hello, fellow American!

Y'know. Americans are rare. You found one here and one there. But Czechs are everywhere.

/bad in-joke

zc15-nyonker · « **Reply #122 on:** October 08, 2010, 08:28:23 PM »

Really, America is where transportation took off. For a long time, America was in the lead for speed, power, and new modes of transportation. The Internal combustion and airplane were invented here. The first train to ever exceed 100 mph was American, if I remember correctly. But simutrans is fun, even though it was not set up for the USA.

prissi · « **Reply #123 on:** October 08, 2010, 10:27:40 PM »

Combustion engine and cars were actually more an european effort (mostly France and Germany):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_internal_combustion_engine

As to which engine really reached undoubtely 100mph ... for 93 mph it would be a 1907 german, but for 100 mph it might be an american: http://www.germansteam.co.uk/Tonup/Tonup.html
(The fastest steam loco might be german: http://www.germansteam.co.uk/FastestLoco/fastestloco.html)

Anyhow, the need for speed was quite universal from the 1880ies (and thus many inventions are made in many places simultaniously), but only after the "civilisation" of the central plaines and the west and the recovering from civil war the USA economy could take off. So until 1900 (or even more until world war first) the USA was not yet the global player it has been since then.

This, on the other hand mean that vehicles (apart from railway engines) could be were well shared between different paksets for the before 1900 era.

jamespetts · « **Reply #124 on:** October 08, 2010, 10:43:36 PM »

The world record for a steam locomotive is held by a British locomotive, "Mallard".

Lmallet · « **Reply #125 on:** October 09, 2010, 01:25:50 AM »

The last two links Prissi posted from germansteam.co.uk are an interesting read. The writer is looking through available documents to see if what is accepted as record holders is actually true.

Class 05 002 held the record for fastest locomotive, but the Mallard beat it by 2km/h a couple of years later. The writer above argues that 002 should still be considered the fastest, as the Mallard's run was downhill, and had to stop after 40 miles due to overheated bearings, while 002 ran on level ground, and made it to the end. 002 also was able to repeat the high speeds, Mallard only has one other undocumented account.

As for the first to hit 100mph, that's hard to say. The first locomotive to officially hit 100mph was the Flying Scotsman. Four locomotives claim to have done it first, however their speed was measured using milepost timing (ie. measure the time between two mileposts), which is not precise enough to establish a speed record.

zc15-nyonker · « **Reply #126 on:** October 09, 2010, 12:24:58 PM »

I admit this: the Mallard was fast, and could hold that speed. It also holds the current speed record for steam. I got my facts mixed up.

prissi · « **Reply #127 on:** October 09, 2010, 05:09:24 PM »

The Mallard could not hold the speed, and was out of the track a short while after with an overheated bearing. Moreover the 126 mph was only reached for 60 yards? This sound more like a malfunction of the recording car. But reading the above links is really worth it, if you are into steam engines!

The fastest steam engines ever were probably even the Hiwatha class Atlantic and F7, which run up to 100-110 mph on normal schedule and had the power to exceed 120 mph. Why there was never a record attempt with them is not sure; maybe because also diesel-/electric engines would be surely able to beat them?

ӔO · « **Reply #128 on:** October 09, 2010, 09:29:13 PM »

I'm pretty sure, with steam, you can either maintain a certain power, or build up pressure to build up power temporarily. What will happen after giving that extra boost of power, is that the pressure drops and so does the power, which will basically cause the engine to limp to the next water station.
or something to that degree, because I can't remember exactly what was said, or where I've heard it.

zc15-nyonker · « **Reply #129 on:** October 10, 2010, 08:05:42 PM »

When I said that the US had the first locomotive to exceed 100, I meant NYC's 999, and the book that I read that described it said it hit 112, and did not say that in reality it only hit 82. It is similar about the Mallard. I read a book on steam trains that was published many years ago, before a lot of this was known, or it contained inadequate research so it was incorrect. When I said the US designed the first motorcars, I actually meant we were the first to pump petroleum. I apologize for writing these incorrect things on this forum.

prissi · « **Reply #130 on:** October 10, 2010, 08:48:46 PM »

Well, I am not ment to be nationalistic or so, but the first oil wells were done ca. 340 in china and even japan knows of petroleum in 7th century (according to encyclopedia brittanica). Even in the middle east they used petroleum and tar for paving streets in bagdad in 8th century ...

But I think this goes very much offtopic, and is better servered in the Lounge, while in the other paks rather the actual progress of the (very much sought after) pakUSA should be discussed.

paco_m · « **Reply #131 on:** October 12, 2010, 11:30:32 AM »

Quote from: prissi on October 10, 2010, 08:48:46 PM

Even in the middle east they used petroleum and tar for paving streets in bagdad in 8th century ...

This usage of petroleum is much older, they paved already the streets in ancient Babylon (around 1700 B.C.) with it and used it for hydro-isolation (houses, irrigation and boat-channels).

But here we are speaking about "natural" asphalt/petroleum that you can obtain from asphalt-lakes or from the ground, digging down until you reach the petroleum horizont - not pumping it from deep deposits. At least for construction purposes this so called natural asphalt has a much higher quality than the refined one and is still used: http://www.trinidad-lake-asphalt.de/english/index.php

rfg123 · « **Reply #132 on:** October 13, 2010, 01:36:25 AM »

Hello everyone;

I know I have been absent for a couple months, but rest assured I have been working on this project. Currently I am working on re-aligning, re-balancing, and adding night lights to Raven's USA locomotives. I quickly found that Raven's locomotives are generic and can stand in for numerous models, so the entire history of diesel locomotives in the US can pretty much be represented without having to paint very many new objects. About 40 locomotives have been finished so far, although stats still need tweaking.

One problem I noticed was American diesel locomotives actually peaked in top speed at 113 km/h in the 1970s. Freight locomotives have not increased in speed since that date, largely due to strict regulations that set high infrastructure requirements for anything above 113 km/h. Not sure how to handle this problem yet..

Lmallet · « **Reply #133 on:** October 13, 2010, 02:18:42 AM »

Quote from: rfg123 on October 13, 2010, 01:36:25 AM

One problem I noticed was American diesel locomotives actually peaked in top speed at 113 km/h in the 1970s. Freight locomotives have not increased in speed since that date, largely due to strict regulations that set high infrastructure requirements for anything above 113 km/h. Not sure how to handle this problem yet..

I say do like the real guys: passenger locomotives should be geared for speed and not power, while freight engines should be geared for power and not speed. The max speed of freight locos can be 113, but the locomotives should be balanced so that the stronger locomotive costs more, and needs to pull more to be profitable compared to the smaller locomotive.

ӔO · « **Reply #134 on:** October 13, 2010, 03:30:41 AM »

one possible way is to make the rolling stock heavier and be able to carry more.
double stack containers and triple deck auto racks are not an unusual sight in some places.

passenger trains sort of died out, starting around the 70's to the 90's due to the pricing and speed competitiveness of airlines and coach buses. There are still commuter lines, but by far, the most popular choice is a personal car.

One thing that makes rail so slow, is that the railway operators don't bother upgrading or adding more tracks to a line and run really long freight trains at a slow speed. It's not unusual to have a freight train consisting of more 3 or more engines and hauling 50~100 freight wagons.
On average, I think it's around 25 to 40 freight wagons per engine doing 80 to 100km/h, depending on terrain.

sdog · « **Reply #135 on:** October 14, 2010, 02:26:00 AM »

ot: those engines fascinated me quite a lot since i arrived here. very primitive, but apparently still economically enough. I live 1km away from the tracks in downtown toronto and i can hear the engines, that's the actual motors!

I only had the luck to see one of the trains rolling once so far. in fact 3 trains where running partially parallel. one extremely long, from the second i saw only the end, but the third one -- behind the second -- i saw entirely. I lost count, but the length was between 40 and 50 cars, with double stacked containers. Obviously no tunnels or catenary in eastern canada! The first train could have been even longer, i couldn't see beginning or end.

Quite fascinating was also to watch, and more importantly listen, to it stopping and starting again at a signal. I was surprised how much the space between wagons changes.

back on topic:
those extra long trains are rather unwieldy in simutrans. Platform lenghts of 20 or even 30 would be required.

ps.: i went on a trip to montreal, in summer. just 600 km, but definitely too far to use a car. it took me 7h with the bus. a pitty there's no usable passenger rail network available.

Lmallet · « **Reply #136 on:** October 14, 2010, 03:21:45 AM »

Quote from: sdog on October 14, 2010, 02:26:00 AM

I lost count, but the length was between 40 and 50 cars, with double stacked containers. Obviously no tunnels or catenary in eastern canada!

There are a few tunnels in eastern Canada, and I know at least one in northern New Brunswick which was modified 20 years ago to allow for double stacks. The 2nd St. Clair tunnel between the US and Canada (Sarnia, Ontario) was built with double-stacks in mind. http://www.tunnels.mottmac.com/projects/?id=3352&mode=type. There is catenary in Montreal, but no freight trains use that line.

Quote from: sdog on October 14, 2010, 02:26:00 AM

ps.: i went on a trip to montreal, in summer. just 600 km, but definitely too far to use a car. it took me 7h with the bus. a pitty there's no usable passenger rail network available.

VIA Rail is actually not that bad on the Quebec-Windsor corridor, Toronto-Montreal is usually a 5h trip, and there are plenty of trains. I find it more confortable than the bus, and often less of a hassle than flying. Toronto-Vancouver is another story, I don't think I could stay on a train for 5 days.

sdog · « **Reply #137 on:** October 14, 2010, 07:54:36 PM »

i started a new topic for the off-topic in the forum lounge:
http://forum.simutrans.com/index.php?topic=6085.new#new

checksumdigit · « **Reply #138 on:** December 01, 2010, 12:51:38 AM »

Just checking in to see if there is any progress here? I've developed some traffic signals, a road (still needs work) and am ready to start making more graphics for this set. I run into a problem though, we don't have anything together yet as a pak.

What we have so far (correct me if I'm wrong or missed anything):
- RFG123 has some great track and roads and a structure or two.
From what I understand we have permission to:
- use anything from pak128.britan
- use anything Raven created

So we really just need to start going through and picking out what is appropriate for the US or North American pack. This will give us a base to grow on. Since this hasn't happened yet, I'll volunteer to start putting together these pieces from existing packs and whatever else is donated. Unless someone else wants to or has already started, would anyone be opposed to this? I'm thinking of opening a new sourceforge project where we can store source files.

There are two other things I still wonder about though:
- There hasn't been much discussion on visual style. Can we try to nail this down? Suggestions?
- It was mentioned, but still seems to be open. Will this be Open source, or freeware? My choice would be Open Source

railfan727 · « **Reply #139 on:** December 01, 2010, 10:12:32 PM »

Let's have some accurate North American locomotives and rolling stock... I know it'll probably be too much to have every single type and subtype of locomotive ever built, but let's at least have the major ones.

And I'd love to see some honest-to-goodness covered hoppers of different types, specialized for cement (short 2-bay cars), grain (3-bays with gravity outlets), and plastics (4-bays with pneumatic outlets). Most covered hoppers in the US tend to be painted plain light gray with few logos or graphics. Though those owned by railroads as opposed to private shippers or leasing companies tend to be a bit more colorful.