Marlkin C track geometry is incorrect
Posted: 15 Nov 2020, 18:16
I recently bought the software as I plan to build a layout after many years that I have not used my Marklin train collection. I have to say I was enormously disappointed that the C track geometry has issues. I have now written to developers and I hope they address these issues or offer a refund.
I first noticed the problem using two concentric curves with R2 24230 and R3 24330. The R3 was "short" compared to the R2 and on a 90 degree or 180 degree curve the end of the curved tracks would not be aligned. I looked at the elements to see if maybe the lengths were incorrect but they seemed just about right. But on the layout there clearly was an issue.
I then also noticed that using the the turnouts, 24611 or 24612, to set the 77.5mm track spacing there was something wrong there as well. Using 2 attached turnouts to set the appropriate spacing the straight tracks on either side of the turnouts were not parallel- in my case going in one direction spacing was widening the further from the turnouts the straight tracks were laid down. I only noticed this with longer straights using 6 or 7 straight tracks.
And this is what I think explains why the R2 and R3 curves do not align properly. The issue is that on a larger layouts these discrepancies compound and make it difficult to determine what track and how much of it is required when making adjustments if one strays from the perfect c track geometry- in other words you cannot tell how much is due to the software's incorrect geometry and how much is really the adjustment needed when laying down the actual track and what track lengths are effectively needed.
The problem now is also I do not wantto test all the radius geometries to see if there are issues elsewhere.
I think this is very poor for a dedicated model railroad software- particularly for a track library that is so widely used.
I first noticed the problem using two concentric curves with R2 24230 and R3 24330. The R3 was "short" compared to the R2 and on a 90 degree or 180 degree curve the end of the curved tracks would not be aligned. I looked at the elements to see if maybe the lengths were incorrect but they seemed just about right. But on the layout there clearly was an issue.
I then also noticed that using the the turnouts, 24611 or 24612, to set the 77.5mm track spacing there was something wrong there as well. Using 2 attached turnouts to set the appropriate spacing the straight tracks on either side of the turnouts were not parallel- in my case going in one direction spacing was widening the further from the turnouts the straight tracks were laid down. I only noticed this with longer straights using 6 or 7 straight tracks.
And this is what I think explains why the R2 and R3 curves do not align properly. The issue is that on a larger layouts these discrepancies compound and make it difficult to determine what track and how much of it is required when making adjustments if one strays from the perfect c track geometry- in other words you cannot tell how much is due to the software's incorrect geometry and how much is really the adjustment needed when laying down the actual track and what track lengths are effectively needed.
The problem now is also I do not wantto test all the radius geometries to see if there are issues elsewhere.
I think this is very poor for a dedicated model railroad software- particularly for a track library that is so widely used.