Want to buy Tunnels for Trains / Railway Tunnels

[Rahjital]

I agree, the problems with tunnels are so numerous it would take a long time to get it right, most likely too long to be worth it.

BTW: Similar problems happens also with player on a bridge.

Well, the train doesn't disappear when it goes on a bridge, so the only remaining problem out of those you mentioned is what happens when a bridge gets destroyed/mined and there's a train/player/whatever on it. In which case, it should just be destroyed. Watch out for biters chewing a bridge from under your feet

[ssilk]

I won't say it is not possible to fix all issues with tunnels and that it is not worth it, but, yes, bridges might be much easier to handle - depends on how they are implemented.

Bridges are definitely (*) easier to implement and have the same benefit. So me as developer would say "Ok, let's implement bridges first"...


(*) ... well I don't want to discuss here, if this is true, but I'm nearly 100% sure it is in every aspect

[thetoolcrafter]

Well, some things I want to mention:
- what if the train stops out of coal inside the tunnel?
- what if you are in the train, if your are in a tunnel out of coal?
- what if you jump out of a train in a tunnel?
- can I run through the tunnel?
- If yes, then the biters might also run through it.
- and maybe some cases I forgot.

Everything is solvable, but I think with bridges this is much more easier.

let me try and explain, in my mind, solutions to these problems:
before i start, i want to mention that my idea means you can walk to a tunnel entrance, and it will take you to an environment which looks "underground" where you can walk around etc.

- what if the train stops out of coal inside the tunnel?
simple, it will just stop. You will see a coal icon and the entrance to the tunnel and you can just go in and refuel

- what if you are in the train, if your are in a tunnel out of coal?
you can hop out, and you are underground in the tunnel

- what if you jump out of a train in a tunnel?
you will be in the tunnel

- can I run through the tunnel?
yes. Biters can also run through it

there are also some more issues i think there could be with this, and i will list my solutions:
- what if i break the tunnel entrance+ exit while there is a train in the tunnel?
it will break, and the train+ goods etc. will be transferred to your inventory. The tunnel/the tracks will be demolished, similar to if you break an underground conveyor with goods in it.

- what will it look like from a train when i get into the tunnel?
the same as if i walked in, stone on the walls, with the tracks being on the ground

- will i be able to make curves/intersections underground?

i hope, if this got added, this would be possible via the track planner. I think signals could be added however i think train stops wouldn't work


Thanks for reading, i hope a dev reads this comment and that this feature will be added in the future


(side note: i think bridges are a good idea too, then there would be 3 levels that train tracks could reach)

[ssilk]

This remains still with so many issues (need for an extra surface for each tunnel, need for extending biter path algorithms, need to connect two surfaces etc. - just to name the most important) that I doubt, that this will come before 1.0 release.

[thetoolcrafter]

This remains still with so many issues (need for an extra surface for each tunnel, need for extending biter path algorithms, need to connect two surfaces etc. - just to name the most important) that I doubt, that this will come before 1.0 release.

I agree, this would take so long to implement. The devs are focused on a lot more major things right now than a developing idea, but i am keeping my fingers crossed for this coming out in the future

[alanovich]

merged with existing topic --daniel34

Hello everybody, engineers of factorio, I have an idea, because need more room (space) for your factory and without need of interrupting your way of rails in your train, the solution in the next "train tunnel", no is easy but, by the technology (Underground belts) and inspirations of mod factorissmo (in the little room of system "Assembling machines"), but is the question ¿good idea or obsolete (bad) idea?

[Xenomorph]

This is all wee need:

You can't realize that. For crossing the tracks below you must lower the tracklevel about 12m. Your ramps look like they are 12m long, so the train has only 12m to get 12m deeper. Thats impossible for a normal train! Trains can handle a 4% gradient, your idea cause a 100% gradient!

viewtopic.php?f=194&t=7292&start=20#p234092


And why you need a tunnel for a crossway? Use signals and everything is fine.

[ssilk]

How did you come to 12 meters? I come to 5.20 meters. Let's say 7 in the worst case.

You need to multiply the millimeters by 87.

[Xenomorph]

The distance for a bridge over a track can be much closer than the celing of a tunnel.
You must handle the airstream inside the tunnel. Is it too small you get trouble with the compressed air.

And sure you can lower the track only so deep you need to get the train under the ground. But if you want to place something over in you need some more space for the groundwork.

And even you say 7m are enough the needed distance is still 350m long (175m for each side wirh 4% gradient)

[ssilk]

It's a Chuck Norris train, that can do 400% ...

[MeduSalem]

Well, I think for the sake of it being a game one can take a little backstep from realism.

If it's like a 15-20% gradient nobody would really complain except some overly correct reallife engineers.

So a ramp with 35-50 tiles would be absolutely sufficient.


But what I fear more than an extraordinary long ramp is actually that it might never come into existence because the devs would absolutely hate the weird perspective changes that would happen if a train goes down/up a ramp... so they'd have to do a lot of additional renderings.

[Xenomorph]

It's a Chuck Norris train, that can do 400% ...

Oh, at this point I'm checkmate

Well, I think for the sake of it being a game one can take a little backstep from realism.

If it's like a 15-20% gradient nobody would really complain except some overly correct reallife engineers.

So a ramp with 35-50 tiles would be absolutely sufficient.


But what I fear more than an extraordinary long ramp is actually that it might never come into existence because the devs would absolutely hate the weird perspective changes that would happen if a train goes down/up a ramp... so they'd have to do a lot of additional renderings.

Okay, that's sound like a good compromise, but after all I don't see the advantage of a track below the surface. And the graphic problems are the less fear for the programmers. I think the "hatetrain" begins with the pathfinding of the creepers through a tunnel network and the problem when the fuel runs out in the middle of a tunnel.

Tunnels through hills or mountains should be realized if they realized hills or mountains.

[MeduSalem]

Okay, that's sound like a good compromise, but after all I don't see the advantage of a track below the surface.

Well there are some situations, especially with high traffic, where a tunnel/bridge would help alleviate the throughput problems imposed by at-grade intersections.

I think the "hatetrain" begins with the pathfinding of the creepers through a tunnel network.

I think they probably wouldn't be able to path through there.

and the problem when the fuel runs out in the middle of a tunnel.

Nyahahahaha. Tear down the whole tunnel.

Tunnels through hills or mountains should be realized if they realized hills or mountains.

I think it would also be sensible to have them then, but I also think that hills/mountains probably will never be a part of the game, sadly. Maybe something for Factorio 2 in 10-15 years from now.

[ssilk]

Hm.

I point to viewtopic.php?f=80&t=12771 Terrain elevation, hills and mountains with fake cliffs

There is a good example, how tunnels could work:


viewtopic.php?f=80&t=12771&start=40#p202481

What's needed to come to this point?

Factorio needs
- Surfaces. That is already implemented. http://lua-api.factorio.com/latest/LuaSurface.html
- display of two (and more) surfaces in the same screen. We need "transparent" tiles. The world-generator needs some rework.
- graphical elements, that "fake" the borders between the surfaces. Rocks, stone...
- exchange of items and entities between surfaces (e.g. if you build a ramp, where the train goes from lower surface to upper surface or paths, where the character can walk up/down, or enable underground belts to be able to exchange entities between the surfaces). I think this is the most complex part. Think to trains, that are out of fuel exactly between the borders: One part of the train is in the upper surface, the other in the lower.
- Grouping of surfaces, so that - for example - a mod can search entities on grouped surfaces and doesn't need to handle the connections between the surfaces itself.
- A way to spare memory of grouped surfaces (what you can see in one surface must not be created in the other and vice versa).
- A way to create/generate small hills yourself, so that you can create crossings like shown in the pic.
- ...

[Xenomorph]

If somebody noticed. The tunnel goes straight through the mountain, only belts and pipes change the altitude

[MeduSalem]

@ssilk: Oh well that does look quite interesting indeed.

Now I wish elevations would be a part of the game... but I guess it will be a dream for quite some time.

[joesmine22]

i dont know if this was already mention previously, but what if there were upper highways, you could build concrete iron steel and mabye even wood elevated platforms, as you could travel from one to the next if you trying to save space for a heavily industrialized area,this would be very usefull, and you would have to light up lower levels, and depending on what you use to make the elevated levels allows you to have more or less levels above original ground level.