Problems with using RTS 5.0

[jrbernier]

I agree with Dave - the fit and finish of Atlas section track is good - maybe the new Kato stuff is better, but it should be at the price. The RTS program is typical computer, it does everything perfect, that why you can adjust the tolerences. And remember, RTS 5.0 is 'free'! I have used it to draw a track plan of my 25' by 20' layout and it came out nice. It was sort of 'reverse engineering' since I build the layout, then got a copy of RTS after the layout was built. The only real limitation is only Atlas track componants are in the libraries, and there is no way to design your own turnouts and other special items.

Jim Bernier

[dave9999]

You need to adjust the tolerances in the software. It will alow you a little more
"play" when joining the track sections. Dave

[Anonymous]

Anybody use RTS 5.0 for their trackplanning? I think it's ridiculous how you can go to a MRR sectional track plan, use the exact Atlas parts for the design, transfer them to RTS and nothing lines up or comes out right. MRR and even Atlas's track plans all say that in 'real life' the sectional track plans are all 'tried and tested' plans that will work in the end, but when you check the RTS help file all it says is that in real life you can 'fudge' the pieces a little in order to 'make them fit' and the reason the plan won't work in RTS is because of how 'exacting' the calculations for mating track are.... if you ask me, RTS has some design flaws. I mean how can you expect to take a sectional track plan from the pages of MRR or one of the Kalmbach books as your starting point, and then expand from there using the RTS software if the track plans won't mate up on RTS anyway?? Took me 4 hours last night to make the Turtle Creek Central fit on RTS in a 4x8 section. I was going to mate it, branchline, and one of the switching layouts from "48 Top Notch Track Plans" to make a killer start for my layout, but nothing would line up right. Whatcha think?