HST BVE4 & Richwel;l Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bill EWS

Member
Joined
10 Feb 2006
Messages
635
Location
Didcot
Hi everyone,
I have now tried the BVE4 HST on the Maybank Day & Night Routes, with Ezzypeezy's (Tom's) HST Divergence route and the Edinburgh-Aberdeen Rout. Congratulations to everyone involved with the new HST. The Cab looks good and the sounds very realistic and the train handles pretty well. There's been a few pieces of additional equipment since I last handled these trains during divergence work, but otherwise it looks great to me. It was worth waiting for.

I know you'll throw something at me, but, could a BVE4 47 and a class 60 be in the pipeline before long!!!! Ouch!!!!

I also downloaded Richards latest updates to the Richwell route. Again congratulations to Richard for putting so much into them. The evenining light graphics are very good and I appreciate very much Richard adding an EWS Depot and line up of EWS Loco's for me to feel at home with.

He has also done very well with the signalling changes that I mentioned and all but the 'single yellow, for Naughton, which is still green in most routes. I think I would prefer a single yellow inspite of the fact that you receive a Bell instead of a buzzer at that signal. A yellow follows through much easier and you can ignore the AWS bell, but jumping from a green to a red signal just doesn't sit right with me. Hopefully he will be able to get this signal correct before long. It is obvioulsy a limitation within BVE 4.

It looks good getting the subsidiary signal at Naughton to go onto the depot, which is the correct procedure and a much more realistic 5mph on the depot.

Likewise the 25 mph restriction board with the left facing arrow for the crossover at Fairfield looks right too and he has done away with the feather to go into the loop at Aston. BVE isn't perfect but there is a lot you can do yourselves to make the signalling work as with the real railway.

It looks like his v3 route is going be quite something too. A tip for those of you who plan to make a 125 mph route. Anything under 30 miles is completely uneconomical for such a train. It travels the second 16 miles twice as fast as the first 16 miles, therefore needs all of that space and more to make your BVE route realistic and the HST to get anywehre near to cruising at 125, rather than hammering up to the maximum, if it ever gets that far, only to start braking for a stop or a speed chack. It must have four aspect signals too, otherwise there isn't the brakling distance available.

My favourite loco was always the Class 47, they handled just about every type of train going and could work over the majority of routes. Never cared for the hydraulics, they should never have been built in the first place, but the Hymack and the Western's were pretty powerful machines and did well in the circumstances, just a pity that they chocked you to death with oil fumes. Of all the hydraulics I would say that the Hymack was my favourite.

The Class 60 is a fantastic machine and is what every new loco following should have been like, with the addition of the latest technical advanatges, but, Oh Dear, the Class 66 followed and the only thing you could say about them is that they were 'New' and very reliable. They only beat the 60 because of their 60 mph maximum, but a 60 will pull anything the railway throws at it. If it had been a 75 mph loco there would have need no need for ther 60's, probably!

Whatever, my thanks again to everyone involved with the new HST and all the great BVE4 routes that keep coming out and simply get better and better.

Regards.

Biill EWS.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Tomnick

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Messages
5,374
I'm sadly still missing out on both of these contributions, until I get back to a decent computer that can handle it :(. That'll be Friday then...not too long to wait! Looking forward to both very muchly.

Bill EWS said:
He has also done very well with the signalling changes that I mentioned and all but the 'single yellow, for Naughton, which is still green in most routes. I think I would prefer a single yellow inspite of the fact that you receive a Bell instead of a buzzer at that signal. A yellow follows through much easier and you can ignore the AWS bell, but jumping from a green to a red signal just doesn't sit right with me. Hopefully he will be able to get this signal correct before long. It is obvioulsy a limitation within BVE 4.
I'll have a look at that one once I've downloaded and driven the route, but I'd have thought it pretty unlikely that BVE wouldn't allow the signal preceding a red, to display yellow. I think anyone would be more than slightly worried to find that situation in real life...and the AWS indication would surely suggest a 'wrong-side' failure? Though hopefully, if Rich can get the signal to display a single yellow instead, the proper AWS indication will follow.

Bill EWS said:
It must have four aspect signals too, otherwise there isn't the brakling distance available.
Maybe I'm being pedantic here, but there's surely no reason why 3-aspect signals couldn't be used (obviously a greater distance between signals would be required, for the reason you state), or even 2-aspect stop signals with an associated repeater braking distance in rear (for even longer sections!). I was under the impression that 3-aspect signals were not unknown on the 125mph west of Reading, with a few longer sections protected by 2-aspect signals too? I don't know the area much at all, so I'll happily be proved wrong on that one!

Bill EWS said:
Never cared for the hydraulics, they should never have been built in the first place
Can't say I disagree with you on that one though ;).
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
Any signal can be forced to display any aspect by adjusting using the section command,

eg for a three aspect signal which needs to be forced to display a yellow or red aspect only use section 0;2;2 instead of the normal section 0;2;4.
 

Tomnick

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Messages
5,374
That's what I thought - couldn't remember the exact command though! Could Rich be using the command .section 0;4;4 to allow the signal to display a green instead of red as it should do? Is the next signal actually a signal, or a stop board or similar? Either way, I'm thinking (and hoping) this should automatically produce the correct AWS indication!
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
Section 0;4;4 would just give red or green aspects. Section 0;2;2 would be need to show just red / yellow aspects.

Regarding stop boards, fixed distants and buffer stops, these can all be treated as signals. Coding for stop boards would depend on the exact situation but fixed distants are easily achieved by using a freeobject for the fixed distant itself and hiding a signal forced to single yellow aspect (section 2;2) under the track or off to one side.

Similarly bufferstops are effectively a red signal so at these hide a 2 aspect signal forced to red (section 0;0). This seems a sensible way of ending a route (at a terminus) as it ensures the approaching signals show appropriate aspects.

Normal TPWS and AWS implementations can be made in these situations as necessary.
 

Jim

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
3,162
Location
Wick
Tomnick said:
Maybe I'm being pedantic here, but there's surely no reason why 3-aspect signals couldn't be used (obviously a greater distance between signals would be required, for the reason you state), or even 2-aspect stop signals with an associated repeater braking distance in rear (for even longer sections!). I was under the impression that 3-aspect signals were not unknown on the 125mph west of Reading, with a few longer sections protected by 2-aspect signals too? I don't know the area much at all, so I'll happily be proved wrong on that one!
Correct. The main Paddington - Didcot part of GWML is 4 aspect, before going down to 3 aspect. Then there is a 2 aspect section between Thingly & Bathampton JCN, Castle Cary & Cogload as well as a block or 2 before the Bristol - Swindon PSB boundry
 

Bill EWS

Member
Joined
10 Feb 2006
Messages
635
Location
Didcot
Hi everyone,
Four aspects are the general rule for 125 running. There are places where three aspect are used and these may well have a reduced speed in the area involved. Even on the Southern mainline to Bournemouth, which is only 100 mph maximum four aspects are the norm. Prior to the new signalling between Banbury and Leamington you had 2 aspects, and even semaphore signals where HST's run regularly but the line speed was 90 mph and distant signals were well spaced out for that running. The Oxford-Worcester is another good example, and is even a single line for the most part.

I was talking in general about Richard's Route and as it stands two and three aspects is fine. But forh the new HST route I would suggest that four aspects be used and a reasonable length of line to allow the HST to get up to speed and be able to cruise over a reasonable distance before the next check or stop. Even in the Maybank route I find that it's hardly worth going for 125 as another signal or speed restriction crops up before long and you have to start all over again, never really reaching the potential of the high costs that these train sets and the railway to run them on would cost in real life. Using an HST as a stopping train isn't very economical. They were designed for long distance cruising such as on the East Coast up to Scotland or on the Western, down to the west country and south Wales. Over the period up to the Privatisation of the railways and since, the HST has taken on many roles that it was never meant for.

The Blighton Route is pretty good, in regards to having space to run but I don't like the yellow over green signals that is used and is completely unrealistic for an HST train, or indeed, most B.R. type routes.

Its good that you are talking about the problem Richard has with the Distant to Naughton signaling. I have been aware of the dodges that you can do to override the restrictions within BVE. But should you really have to set up ghost signals etc to gain the correct working pattern!! However, if that is the way you can get around these problems then it shows good thinking in regards to BVE restrictions.

By the way, in regard to Dennis' comments about Stop Boards etc. These ARE all treated as signals and passing any of them is treated the same as if it was a SPAD and taken just as seriously.

In the case of the advanced warning board for the Fairfield crossover, personally I don't think it is necessary at that line speed followed by a single yellow and a speed approach signal, but it isn't actually wrong to have one, except to say that in the economics of today's railway the chances are that they wouldn't bother with one, in this case. "It costs money".

Whatever, keep up the great work it shows in the fantastic improvements that each new train and route produces. The only negative side for me is that they are pushing my computer to it's limits and I am getting frame rates as low as 5 & 6 and not much higher than 11 in places. Looks like I need to seriously consider upgrading my graphic card!!!

Regards to everyone.

Bill EWS.
 

wumpty

Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
58
Location
Deepest Darkest Brum
Bill EWS said:
The Blighton Route is pretty good, in regards to having space to run but I don't like the yellow over green signals that is used and is completely unrealistic for an HST train, or indeed, most B.R. type routes.
Hi Bill,

Just a side note. Because the Blighton route is for BVE2 there isn't customisable signalling as in Maybank and Richwell, so the Japanese defaults will be shown if you run the route in BVE4. If you run this route in BVE2, there are replacement signals here http://www.trainsimcentral.co.uk/misc.htm

Steve
 

Simon_G

Member
Joined
19 Mar 2006
Messages
115
Bill EWS said:
The only negative side for me is that they are pushing my computer to it's limits and I am getting frame rates as low as 5 & 6 and not much higher than 11 in places. Looks like I need to seriously consider upgrading my graphic card!!!
Eeek! That's even lower than mine and my graphics card runs on coal. You might also consider more memory as a relatively cheap way to improve things as the .NET framework seems to think it's a limitless resource and behaves accordingly. I find things can often be smoother after a reboot, too (shouldn't be necessary in 2006, but...).
 
T

Tom

Guest
Simon_G said:
as the .NET framework seems to think it's a limitless resource and behaves accordingly.
Well it shows it has some Vista stuff in it, it will require 512MB for desktop!
 

eezypeazy

Member
Joined
4 Jul 2005
Messages
626
Location
UK
Hmm.. the frame rate issue has been bugging me for some time, too. My modestly spec'd PC manages to produce frame rates no beter than 30fps, and often as little as 10fps. So I thought that replacing my Radeon 7000 card with 64Mb of memory with a Radeo 9250 with 128Mb memory might improve things... £48 spent, and not a flicker of improvement!

So, Bill, if you want my old 64Mb card, drop me an email....

Meanwhile, how to improve frame rates... I did all the usual things (latest drivers, defrag hard disk, etc), but nothing. Then I went searching the net, and found a utility that was supposed to speed up games in XP - it used XP's prefetch - but again, nothing. Then, I found a graphcs testing utility here: www.passmark.com
and ran this (it's shareware with a 30 day trial period), and, much to my surprise, my machine managed 35fps on the most demanding test.

So, the finger of blame points to BVE, then... so back to it I went. To me, it seems that the "new generation" of trains for BVE 4 consume an awful lot of computer resources... Try this: load a route with the new HST, then press F4 to maximise the timetable bitmap. On my machine, the frame rate jumps right up to 45fps! And try this: use the del key on the numeric keypad to "zoom" through the window. Again, on my machine significant frame rate improvement. I find that there is an "optimum" zoom position, such that the Keys explanation is hidden (OK, I can't see the cab levers, but I can see the speedo and other instruments!).

Of course, the other thing you can do is reduce BVE 4's drawing distance: right click on BVE 4, and go to display options, and drag the pointer down from 600 metres to something less. This does improve frame rate, but at the expense of having distant scenery "jump" into view; this is most noticable on long, straight sections.

I've tried a few other tweaks - such as reducing the color depth of cab images - but that didn't help (in fact, the HST seems to be already optimised). I've noticed that the sound .wav files are quite large, but as the engine isn't running when the HST loads, I don't think it's those to blame (you would expect performance to fall as each sound started otherwise).

So, what conclusions have I drawn? Firstly, I must optimise the graphics I'm working on for Tyne Valley, otherwise I could end up with beautiful stations that no-one will be able to drive through... secondly, memory is important; thirdly, it seems as if I can't squeeze any more peformance out of this PC, so I might have to consider getting something an awful lot faster...

Regards
to all

eezypeazy.

PS: nice route, Richard!
 

Bill EWS

Member
Joined
10 Feb 2006
Messages
635
Location
Didcot
HI Everyone,
Thanks for your comments Simon, I have tried a cold start and shutting down all possible programmes running in the start bar but the improvement is very minimal. Also tried reducing the distance level too. Haven't done a defrag for a while but I think too that may not make a lot of difference. I first noticed the drop in frame rate when I downloaded the last update with Birmingham Cross City Route, when the night time route was added, although frame rates are higher in night routes and come up to double fugures, probably due to the large area of blackness and little or no objects in the background!! Entering New Street in the daylight route saw the frame rate drop to '5'.

I discussed thie frame rate problem with Tom (Ezzypeezy) a little while back and he suggetsed upgrading the graphic card and/or memory. Your comments here Tom are very interesting. I went to the PassMark web site but it shows two programmes for downloading, at the top of the page, and I wasn't sure which one to download. Which one did you use, Tom?

You are right too about the size of the BV4 Trains and Routes, the last two trains I downloaded were around 16mb each and the Route files look quite long too!

It may not prove anything, but what if you saved the Routes and Trains onto a CD and ran them from there, obvioulsy with all the respective folders and files, Would that make any difference? Or is that against the Rules!

Thanks for the information regarding the new Graphic Card results, Tom. I will give your old card some consideration and get back to you on that.

Whatever, this has brought the subject to the fore and it is interesting that everyone is having loss of Frame Rate to some extent. Perhaps this will be sorted out through these pages.

My thanks too, to Wumpty. I downloaded the signal files you mentioned and let the download overwrite those already on my drive. I noticed some change but still had two signals at different parts of the route with a yellow over a green and wondered if this was supposed to be! No! There is one section that has semaphore signals that look B.R. enough.

Thanks again for all your replies.

Regards.

Bill EWS.
 

eezypeazy

Member
Joined
4 Jul 2005
Messages
626
Location
UK
Bill EWS said:
I went to the PassMark web site but it shows two programmes for downloading, at the top of the page, and I wasn't sure which one to download. Which one did you use?
You want the program called performance Test (the second from the top of the page)

eezypeazy
 

wumpty

Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
58
Location
Deepest Darkest Brum
Eezy,

You are spot on where you say that the BVE4 trains sap resources. When developing the HST cab with Simon we found fps below that of using some of the other trains, the train has more animated elements, two bitmaps to make up the cab and this does use extra memory.

By removing some of the animated cab elements from the Panel2.Cfg file we found that fps starts to increase. I've removed the light switches and the centre desk reading light from my personal copy, they're not essential to the experience, and it brings me up to speed. The Voyager's sounds consume more memory than the HST, yet fps is higher with this train, so I can only assume the main memory muncher is cab bitmaps.

My graphics card is fairly high spec, so frame rates are 45 ish on some thing like Maybank. Its the odd pause and judder aside from fps, as BVE loads scenery into memory that makes me wake up and realise that I'm not driving a real one after all!

Steve
 

Nitro

Member
Joined
20 Nov 2005
Messages
475
Location
London
Ive always found that if you switch off and anti-virus or anti-spyware or other utilities like P2P etc. then you do get an fps increase, problem is when turning off anti-virus/spyware you leave your pc at risk!
 

66's are evil

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2005
Messages
51
Hi gang,
Some fascinating points raised in those last few posts. I've also noticed the frame rate drop with the HST. I just had a look at fps using the 1400 Maybank using the 158 and HST and found about a 20% reduction in fps with the HST which is not too much of a problem at the moment.

My question is to steve: As bve developments are getting more detailed all the time, how long do you think it will be until we all need quite a high spec graphics card (maybe £100+) to run bve at an acceptable frame rate?

Also a point to Bill, i am having a go at a bit of signalling coding on the Southern Electric route as i fancy blasting the HST along it! I have never coded before but there are instuctions with the Br Sigs pack for BVE4. I have successfully inserted the first signal so far, only another 30 to go!

If you fancy putting the BVE 4 signals in this route, i found some even better help in the Southern route files themselves. Have a look in the Text Document: to bve conversion (2 KB) and see how you get on!

Regards
(Another! Richard)
 

Nitro

Member
Joined
20 Nov 2005
Messages
475
Location
London
Yes I agree with you about the fps drop 66's are evil, i usually find fps dropping when you rev up (even from N to P1) and my grapics crad barely handles Maybank anyway. Because my pc has built-in graphics card I cant change it unless I get a new pc so its a question of time before I ll be getting like 5-6 fps on majority of routes.
 

66's are evil

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2005
Messages
51
Nitro said:
Yes I agree with you about the fps drop 66's are evil, i usually find fps dropping when you rev up (even from N to P1) and my grapics crad barely handles Maybank anyway. Because my pc has built-in graphics card I cant change it unless I get a new pc so its a question of time before I ll be getting like 5-6 fps on majority of routes.
Are you sure you can't get a graphics card, Nitro?

I had a built in Intel card but got an ATI Radeon which was well worth the money (under £50) as fps have improved greatly.
 

wumpty

Member
Joined
20 Jul 2005
Messages
58
Location
Deepest Darkest Brum
66's are evil said:
My question is to steve: As bve developments are getting more detailed all the time, how long do you think it will be until we all need quite a high spec graphics card (maybe £100+) to run bve at an acceptable frame rate?
I think it all depends what each person is happy with. I remember running BVE1 with the billiard table Japanese routes at 5-6 fps and being quite happy for a long while. I wouldn't upgrade personally just for BVE, but 6 months ago I decided to have a new setup which runs detailed BVE4 routes pretty well, at 45fps. (except New Street on the X City!) It's not just the graphics card, I'd upgrade the ram before even thinking about the card. There ain't a fat lot of difference in performance between a 128Mb Geforce 3 series and a 256Mb 7 series, but ram does seem to help a lot, not to mention good hard drive housekeeping and shutting down all unused programs.

If you fancy putting the BVE 4 signals in this route, i found some even better help in the Southern route files themselves. Have a look in the Text Document: to bve conversion (2 KB) and see how you get on!
I didn't know that was in there :P. I did start some 12 months ago to upgrade the signalling, add AWS and the darkness in tunnels, and those were my notes. Nothin' incriminating in there is there?!
 

class 313

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2005
Messages
6,477
Location
St Albans
I do belive BVE uses the processer more than the gra card... Thus getting a better processer should be better then getting a better graf card.
 

devon_metro

Established Member
Joined
11 Oct 2005
Messages
7,561
Location
London
class 313 said:
I do belive BVE uses the processer more than the gra card... Thus getting a better processer should be better then getting a better graf card.
BVE requires a good preocessor, although its better to have a larger amount of RAM aswell as a good graphics card.

I would say that more RAM would improve Frame rates aswell as improving your graphics card.
 

Tom B

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2005
Messages
4,552
Kill anything in the background - you don't put your machine at risk unless you're connected to a network without any other firewall. Of course if you're behind a firewall on a router you're fine anway.
 

ChrisCooper

Established Member
Joined
7 Sep 2005
Messages
1,787
Location
Loughborough
I think BVE 4 has more issues with memory than graphics cards, and I expect that in most cases buying more memory would give more benefit for the same or less cost, than upgrading the graphics card. I'd say 1GB is the minimum if running XP. The points about shutting down unnecacary programs is very worthwhile, in particular things like Virus Scanners and Spyware detectors. Not only do these tend to use a lot of resorces, but unless you are browsing or downloading from the internet or checking e-mails, their is little or no risk to turning these programs off. Just remember to turn them back on before doing any of the above. Even firewalls can be turned off, although it's best to disconnect from the internet first (if on broadband, either unplug the connection from the modem/lan, or disable the connection using the network connections part of the control pannel, or just switch the modem off). One think you really need to be careful of are programs which automatically do things like scan, defragment, update etc, since not only do these really slow down BVE, but they can also cause it to minimise, and if in full screen you probably won't get it back properly, or it might even crash. Make sure these are either turned off, or at least the automatic part is turned off, or set from some time when you won't be using BVE (e.g overnight). One very big thing though, that is common sence really, although it's suprising how many people do it, is not to have things like web browsers, word processors, e-mail programs etc open whilst playing BVE, or even un-needed windows, since these all take up resources and effect frame rate. Oviously when coding you need various other things open as well as BVE, but frame rate isn't an issue then really. Not having too much open does help loading times though. Of cource regular maintenance is a good thing and can make a big difference. Defragmenting really helps, an really should be done after installing a new route or train to make sure it's files are nice and tidy and not spread randomly throughout the drive. Virus and Spyware scans help by making sure nothing nasty is taking up resources (or worse).
By the way http://www.grc.com/ has some free utilities that allow you to safely shut down some un-needed windows processes, not only freeing up resources, but also protecting you're computer from potential vulnerabilities. It also has various other useful things.
 

Guinness

Established Member
Joined
13 Jun 2005
Messages
3,737
I've found programs running in the taskbar mainly MSN Messenger, Openoffice.org Quickstarter, Winzip "Quickstarter" and so on takes up a lot of resources once all of them are put together. I found a utility built into Windows XP that prevents such "Quickstart" items from running when you start Windows which in the end means XP loads up a lot faster.

Another bit of useless information from Chaz's head of crap knowledge.....
 

Tom B

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2005
Messages
4,552
The OOo quickstarter can be set to only run the first time you load OOo - then it will stay if you need to open new instances.
 

66's are evil

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2005
Messages
51
wumpty said:
I didn't know that was in there :P. I did start some 12 months ago to upgrade the signalling, add AWS and the darkness in tunnels, and those were my notes. Nothin' incriminating in there is there?!
No, not that i can see!

I'm glad i found it, has been most useful!
 
Joined
29 Jul 2005
Messages
39
There is a problem with the HST download file. When extracting the .exe file, a message comes up saying "some files are corrupted, please download again". All the files extract except for Run1.wav, where it says "CRC failed in Train/HST/Run1.wav".....
 

Bill EWS

Member
Joined
10 Feb 2006
Messages
635
Location
Didcot
Hi.
Thanks for all the tips. Yesterday evening I gave my computer a complete defrag plus deleted a number of large sound and graphic files. I rebooted from fresh and closed all possible stratbar programmes. The result was, hardly a bit of difference, one frame rate actually!!! All the reports following are with Maybank and the new Trains. I only tested each route over the first three stations. so save time, and my sanity!


I started with the new HST and it showed 6fps, as to 5fps previously and that didn't increase more than 7fps except in tunnels when it jumped to double figures but back to 6/7 in daylight.

The Cl66 Freight produced 7 to 20fps
The 170 13 to 22fps
The 156 19 to 16fps
The 158 11 to 12fps
The 220 8 to 12fps
The 323 10 to 12fps
The 323(night) 11 to 20fps
The Cl37 11 to 26
The Old (B.R.) HST 29 to 32 (That's pretty good)

The 170 and 158 are on the branch line, so doesn't start with the heavy object Mainline station.

So it looks as if the new trains and route files are really putting the pressure on our procesors and graphic cards. If anyone can make more of this it would be interesting to hear about it.

It would be nice to have higher frame rates and anyhting from 40 to 80fps sounds great but providing you can keep in double figures (Ten or Above) you get a steady enough motion. It's when it drops to single figures that the image appears to be 'floating'. This is akin to cine film. The professional standard is 24fps and 16mm and 8mm drops to around 18/16fps but when you drop to 9fps as some 8 & 9.5mm cine camera and projectors could use, then you notice serious flicker. This lower speed would be used when the available light became too low for film emulsion speed of the time and 9fps would gain one full stop in aperture and give a passible image, if a bit blurry and flickery. Present day TV and Computer imaging must work to similar laws of nature but probably produce different image/screen effect and appearance due to the different technology.

Whatever, In hope this adds something to the debate. I have not downloaded the programme that Tom (Ezzypeezy) mentioned, yet, but will do so later. We are not long back on line after a 3 hour power cut. Will be downloading the Edinburgh-Aberdeen updates too.

Regards.

Bill EWS.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top