Didn't CFS1 have moving trains as targets that you could bomb?

CFS3 has them, too. I bomb them all the time just because I know they aren't going to turn into a valley and hide from me **chuckles**

Go to Europe, trains are not dying out there. Gas costs a lot there too. I think that's why trains remain a popular mode of transport in Europe.In fact I think as fuel prices climb in the USA, in the future you'll see a re-appearance of passenger trains in the USA.

I agree, with the increased fuel prices in North America, cargo and transit railroads might just get busier. Passenger service by train completely sucks in Canada, it costs less to fly lol. The only train I ever take is the "Go-Train" commuter train to Toronto if I have to go there for some reason, much easier than driving.A little off topic though lol.As for trains in FS, I think having one object that looks funny around turns would get too may complaints to justify doing it. It wouldn't bother me but I could just imagine the forum posts lol. (Mind you if there was a simple on off switch that defaults to off, that could let us have them if we don't mind them taking corners in an odd way).

Your right trains are very common in Europe. In fact France has an excellent reputation for its famous TGV service.The UKs system however is dilapidated and forever trying to catch up with its ever increasingly thrown together network.I'm not that bothered about trains in flight simulator. Making train stations would be quite a (boring) task too.NelsFrance

There is another problem with trains - in the US they are usually on single track, and only meet at sidings (small stretches of double track). I assume that FS wouldn't include siding logic, and thus two trains would "merge" on single track when traveling in opposite directions.BTW, trains in the USA are anything but going away (for freight). They haul more freight now than ever before. They just use many less people (and less trains) to do it.If Bush has his way (already announced), long distance US passenger service will end in a year or two, and short distance trains will be the responsibility of the states.Take care,--Tom GibsonCal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.comFreeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.comDrop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___

Thanks for that. I onyl know about the US -- I live a secluded life LOL. I just did a check out of mere curiosity to compare transport as I am flying my sweetie here to live with me March 1st.Bus ticket - 23 hour trip - 200 bucksTrain ticket - not possible due to locations (Amtrak doesnt even serve Oklahoma anymore -- can't blame then **laughs** I won;t go NEAR that state -- I even hate flying over it)Plane ticket, gets her here in 3 hours with 1 quick layover in Denver - 230 bucks LOL.Back on topic though, at least having train tracks by themselves, trains or not, is good for VFR purposes :-) Tracks are crucial in a lot of VFR flight :-) I was ever so glad when I installed UT Canada and UT USA and was able to actually find the rail yards in my hometown to be accurate (along with rivers, lakes, roads, etc.)

Why shouldn't FS have a siding logic? Cars will have to have some kind of a siding logic, so a similar logic can be used on trains. They don't even have to switch tracks if it isn't possible :)

Quote:++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++> http://www.kline.demon.co.uk/as9.jpg++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Sorry to derail (no pun intended, LOL) the topic, but I couldn't help but notice how blurry those VC textures are for the default Cessna 172/182 (I'll just say both since they're *nearly* identical). Have you tried the texture fixes by Tony Gould? They add high-resolution 32-bit enhancement that increases the sharpness and reality of the VC.Anyways.. Excellent scenery, though. :)

If Bush has his way we'd have nothing at all :-PThat sucks about that Pax trains though. I didn't know that was part of his evil little agenda. He's so busy wanting to hold other country's hands, but even busier tearing us apart :-(

My apologies as I posted that before running out the door to college. This isn't the place to discuss politics, and the forum refuses to let me delete my own post (why?).If a moderator reads this, at my request can you please delete this and the reply above? We need to stick to topic here, so again I apologize.

Train busting I did in CFS3 a few years back. (default rails...can tell cause they are too big. Fixed later..)

>My apologies as I posted that before running out the door to>college. This isn't the place to discuss politics, and the>forum refuses to let me delete my own post (why?).>>>If a moderator reads this, at my request can you please delete>this and the reply above? We need to stick to topic here, so>again I apologize.Perhaps you should also ask to have that crack about Oklahoma, in your earlier post, removed as well? (see #21)I live in Oklahoma and found that comment to be ignorant and uninformed. You are entitled to your own opinions just as I am, of you!Pete S.

Uhm . . no . . . because there was no personal attack in that thread. End of story.Back ON topic here . . . would the graphics and animation engine for CFS3 trains possibly be able to be reporoduced by at least 3rd party software developers in FSX? Is that a realistic expectation? Heck if Flight1 can accomplish what they did with UT, anything is possible.I also read in another thread where things like that would be framerate heavy. I disagree. Look at the awesome Frankfurt Pro scenery released recently (I think by UK2000) -- all the animation in that package and it has no frame hit whatsoever. Moving cars, trains, tarmac vehicles and AI and it's smooth as can be. It's all in the texturing and polygon counts, not the animation itself.I know Microsoft said they would not be modeling trains in, so my question is, would 3rd party developers be able to do it? Would the SDK allow such a feat?

whatever happened to the guy who developed 3rd party train stuff in FS2000?