RouteBuilder and beacons

I have a question... Is it possible to manually add csv code (like .beacon, signalling etc.) to the tracks somehow inside routebuilder? Of course I can manually correct it inside each exported csv, but that'd mean doing it in all exports and after each slight change inside routebuilder, as the export will simply overwrite the existing file. That's what's so daunting about it... I need to build the demo route which is used in all DB exercises, and if it is to be useable, OpenBVE must be more than the landscape simulator it is with most routes, which are operationally static.

My idea ATM is to build the stations in route builder, each as a single project, and in every one of them export every possible run for entering the station and every possible run for exiting the station. Then I'll write a simple program (maybe Java, but maybe instead in PHP so as to have it webbased) where one can select, via GUI, what is needed, and the program then would join the needed CSV snippets into the final CSV file. Besides having all possible runs there will also be such things as signal dropping back to stop while approaching, burning train oncoming etc.

Hand-coding would mean, thanks to the antique one-track format structure, writing every station dozens of times, which of course leaves far less time for landscape. For a railway simulator, operational realism is far more important than landscape. If I have no time for both, it will clearly be the latter one that will come short.

Supplement:

The route consists of a two-tracked main line, beginning with entry signal A of Westerhausen in km 149.1 and ending with distant signal of entry signal F of Kleinstadt in km 167.5, and a single-tracked branch line, beginning in Saalstadt on the two-tracked main line (entry signal A in km 153.8, entry signal F in km 155.3) with km 0 and ending in Kleefeld station in km 16.5.

The main line has the following stations:

Westerhausen station. Three tracks, with the following layout:

... ==3===\
... ==2====\===== ...
... ==1=====\==== ...

So it's five different pre-set routes: 1 to regular track, 2 to regular track, 3 to regular track, 2 to wrong track, 3 to wrong track.

Saalstadt station. Six tracks, 2 and 3 being the throughout major tracks of the main line, 5 the ending throughout major track of the branch line, 1 and 4 loop tracks, 6 a spur track. For trains it's 6 possible pre-set routes for entry from the regular track from Westerhausen, 4 pre-set routes for entry from the wrong track from Westerhausen, 4 for exit on regular track to Westerhausen, 6 for exit on wrong track to Westerhausen, 4 for entry from Baukau junction on regular track, 6 for entry from wrong track from Baukau, 6 for exit to regular track to Baukau, 4 for exit on wrong track to Baukau, 4 for entry from and 4 for exit to Dahlburg. In sum, 48 pre-set routes for trains. Additionally 16 shunting-pre-set routes, so 64 pre-set routes overall.

Baukau junction, framed by block signal A in km 158.4 on regular track from Saalstadt and block signal B in km 158.6 on regular track to Saalstadt. Trains can continue on the regular track (2 pre-set routes), on the wrong track (2 pre-set routes), change from the wrong track to the regular track from Saalstadt (1 pre-set route) and change from the wrong track to the regular track to Saalstadt (1 pre-set route), overall 6 pre-set routes (as the line branching off in Baukau isn't depicted, we don't need routes towards there, otherwise it'd be 4 more)

Zobelheim station. 3 tracks, same layout as Westerhausen, but we need both directions now. Begins with entry signal A in km 160.6 in the regular track from Baukau, begins with entry signal F in the regular/FF in the wrong track in km 162.3 from Kleinstadt. 10 pre-set routes.

Forst stop.

Kleinstadt station. 4 tracks. The route isn't depicted further, so no entry and exit routes are needed for the direction from/towards km 200, only from Zobelheim. For track 1 it's two from the regular and two from the wrong track as they can be with long or with short overlap, in sum it's 5 for entry from the regular track from Zobelheim, 7 for entry from the wrong track from Zobelheim, 6 for exit onto the regular track to Zobelheim and 4 for exit onto the wrong track to Zobelheim, making it 22 pre-set routes for trains. Additionally there are 12 shunting pre-set routes, so it's 34 pre-set routes in sum.




The single-track route:

Saalstadt station, see above.

Fichte stop at km 3.0

Dahlburg station, two tracks, 8 routes. Entry signal A from Saalstadt in km 8.4, entry signal F from Fieselbach in km 9.0

Fieselbach between A from Dahlburg in 12.5 and F from Kleefeld in 13.9. Two main tracks and one spur track, 10 pre-set routes

Kleefeld station is the final depicted station. However the route continues to Baukau (but, as stated above, the conection is not depicted). Tracks 1 to 4 are accessible from the branch line from Fieselbach. 5 and 6 are dead-end spur tracks, ending in the direction of Fieselbach. 1 is a dead-end spur track ending in the direction of Baukau. There are 4 entry and 4 exit routes onto the branch line and 18 shunting routes, 26 in sum.

This means in the current route format I'd need to write the stations 163 times, every time recalculating object positions due to the track lying otherwise, although it's only 8 operation sites. And the stations still have to be identical. There are several routes for BVE and OpenBVE with changing tracks, though of course not that extensively as described above but only two or three possible track changes. And there you see slight inconsistencies in signalling depending on which way is taken. I hope it is quite understandable that this is not acceptable under no condition. I thought about putting the whole stations into a .animated-file; this would take a big part of work from it, but much would stay. Signalling would need to be redone for every route, and the points as well.

I'm describing this to make clear, why I consider the current file format of OpenBVE/BVE strongly deficient. It is great to make well-looking routes - but railway and thus simulation isn't about the look alone. It's operations as well, and for at least most simulation users this is even more important than the landscape. Hey, look at Zusi, that's pathetic graphics! And yet look how many active users, also devs, there are! And it's not only lousy graphics, it even costs quite a bunch.

I hope this made it somewhat clearer, why we either need a current, flexible route editor, which takes object repositioning over, or a extension to the current format towards multi-trackedness - which might be doable as an extension of csv or might require a completely new format.

One more thing; I know people tend to overinterprete some things while I'm somewhat deficitary when it comes to emotional aspects in communication (though not as much as Michelle) so I'll clear one point to make absolutely sure I'm not misunderstood.

This is in no way an attack on or criticism towards any route developer. Saying OpenBVE is partially more of a landscape simulator than a railway simulator is not intended as a reproval towards such great route developers as Graymac, the dev of Santhia-Biella, of Birmingham-X-City, of the Chashinai network and many more virtuosi of the BVE/OpenBVE-route development! On the contrary, they make the best of what is possible. Only it isn't enough for some ends, sadly.