Which track editor are you using for your SCX Digital layouts. The only two I know besides pencil and paper or trial and error are Track Power and Ultimate Racer. If there are others then please advise.
I'm a big fan of UR but I'm starting to find it crashes when my layouts get more exotic. I don't mind sending some money to the UR developer but if I'm spending my hard earned cash it will be for something that can handle the exotic layouts one can create with SCX Digital. I am suspecting that TP will handle this better.
I tried UR and it kept crashing on my PC, so I purchased TrackPower. Sometimes its not completely accurate, but it gets me close enough.
I definitely have problems with UR running on Vista system but my older XP boxes run it well except when the tracks get a bit complex. It is only a matter of time before my XP box gives up the ghost and I will have to move all my stuff to the Vista box.
I have both Trackpower and UR30. I do use Trackpower all the time since that is what I started with first and I'm just too lazy to learn another system. However, now that I know UR30 crashes quite a bit (never had that problem w/ TP), I guess I won't be changing anytime soon.
Also, as Cardini mentioned, it is apparent that there are build errors on TP in respect to closing the layout and also adding R3 Banked Curve Borders (I have to go back to version 1.61 to bring it back). I'm sure there will be a correction someday since the developer is constantly updating the program and providing free updates to anyone who purchases the program.
Otherwise, I am very satisfied w/ the program and it has been the biggest help in designing my very elaborate layouts.
I use Google SketchUp. I tried a couple of downloads, but reverted to a software I already knew how to use.
I made a library (posted to 3D warehouse) and now I can design a track very fast. And I always start with a file that contains the pieces I have, so I know I can build what I design. Oh, and since I have a model of my house, I can check if and how the track fits.
Perhaps SketchUp is an overkill, but I already knew the software...
I noticed people mentioning closing precision. My experience was that I used to spend a lot of time calculating where to use those SCX Digital 80mm closing straights to make the track fit perfectly. Then, one day, I forgot a 90mm track piece () and the track closed all the same (). Now I don't waste too much time closing the tracks in design-time.
I noticed people mentioning closing precision. My experience was that I used to spend a lot of time calculating where to use those SCX Digital 80mm closing straights to make the track fit perfectly. Then, one day, I forgot a 90mm track piece () and the track closed all the same (). Now I don't waste too much time closing the tracks in design-time.
100% agreed. YOu will go broke trying to get your track perfect. Also UR 3. will tell you if the gap is too large to be a force fit. With enough experience you really don't need the software to help you there. Just get the ends close enough and there is enough give and flex to connect the ends.
Also, try and find the 80 mm closing straights. They were out of stock nearly everywhere when I last checked. Alos, don't know how the borders would work so I would keep away from connecting a closing straight to any curves if possible.
Yes, there is a problem with borders and closing straights. The slot for the border is in the middle of the piece, ergo 40mm from its centre to the end of the piece, which doesn't match the usual 45mm from "normal" pieces. If someone from SCX reads this post, I suggest they try and fix this.
This is a tough one because you don't know from which side to measure the 45mm for the slot. Maybe they need 80mm and 90mm border peices. I always avoid 90s (and 80s) between curves where i want a continous border. But so far it has not been too much of a problem for me.
What if they made the hole too big but included an adapter one could use from the inside to make the opening work for one way or the other. Just put the adapter in the hole and then plug in the border. However, the number of combinations of borders and tracks for this to work for is pretty limitted. Might be just easier to tweak the layout to eliminate the border issue with the 80s closing straights.
This is a tough one because you don't know from which side to measure the 45mm for the slot. Maybe they need 80mm and 90mm border peices. I always avoid 90s (and 80s) between curves where i want a continous border. But so far it has not been too much of a problem for me.
What if they made the hole too big but included an adapter one could use from the inside to make the opening work for one way or the other. Just put the adapter in the hole and then plug in the border. However, the number of combinations of borders and tracks for this to work for is pretty limitted. Might be just easier to tweak the layout to eliminate the border issue with the 80s closing straights.
Yes, you are right. It's tougher than I first thought. I was thinking that whichever end the 45mm was measured from didn't matter, but, although that is correct for one specific point in a layout of mine (a 90mm followed by a 80mm after a curve), it is not general.
The "hole too big" idea seems promising. And I think no adapter would be necessary if the border could be attached to the next piece (if the 80mm were the only piece between curves, then no deal...).
My way of solving this so far has been just to use no border and cope with it in the driving. And it saves some quid too.
I was just scanning the SCX web site and came across the SCX track planner. I had seen it before but quickly forgot about it. It looks like an interesting start but is not complete. It is missing track components, borders, accessories. It cannot make a pit box and lead-in tracks are labeled as "coming soon." It looks like an interesting bit of flash player development and could lead to very interesting abilities to create and post track layouts into a web site.
I broke down and bought TrackPower. So far so good. One very VERY nice feature is that when you get the file-open dialog you get a preview of the track before you open the layout. This is very nice for scanning through your designs looking for the one you want to work on.
Ultimate Racer is what I use. To describe it, I would use the terminology "marginally satisfactory".
It takes awhile to learn how to use it. There are many 'situations' that you will encounter while using it.
One of those situations happens when you use 4 or 6 lane layouts. Since I had it crash multiple times when running 4 lane configurations, I simply do not use the 4 lane configuration any more. I think I might be smart enough to decide that I can do a 2 lane configuration by using outside radius and inside radius rather then letting UR do the math. I've never had any situations since then.
Just one of the things you need to familiarize yourself with.
Another issue that I find 'cute' is if you decide to remove a crossover or replace a crossover, then both lanes are tied together, even when you remove or replace the other crossover. But if you use the 'delete' key to get rid of the crossover, then just insert a straight section, all is well.
The 'properties' is very interesting as it allows you to find lap length for both lanes, amount of left and right turns in degrees and I like that feature.
Something else that is quite humorous is the integrity of the error messages. One of my favorites is when you attempt to 'supress gap' on the configuration it will tell you that the sides are not parallel. Obviously one of those 'I don't know what to put in this message' type of wordings that software developers come up with in the wee hours of the morning.
But knowing the pitfalls - and you can only find them by trying to do things - I find it does the job I need and one can not beat the price.
Personally, if the developor were to come up with a correction package for the issues that he knows exist, I could be tempted to help support them.
Which track layout editor do you use?
) and the track closed all the same (
Hybrid Mode
