Hello,
While I am tackling Power Rail SS4, there are few things that I would like to bring up to the developers attention (I hope they are reading....)
1. Missing important features such as place plan/ profile note and tracking. In rail design these commands are critically important when we have to follow the standards such as turnout/ xover placements, minimum required tangent lengths between geometry elements, and definitely the electronic QA/QC process.
2. Heads-up display (do we need it? This is not a Corvette) tends to mess up all the entries and rely on graphical elements rather than engineering judgement and calculations. For instance, in the corridor management in the point control entries even if I try to use the normal box, I still have to scroll through the routine either by hitting tabs or clicking screen. Waste of time, loss of logical line of thoughts, and inevitability of an error since there is on acceptance button to lock the entries.
3. Mid-snap is not working properly (one of the best things about Microstation). For instance, when entering a point control such as diverging track at PITO, tentative snap toggles to a different alignment instead of selecting a point. And since tracking is no longer available, go and try to figure out how to identify precisely the PITO which belongs to both alignments- main and diverging tracks.
4. Are there good options to export corridor into multiple surfaces and share data? For instance, due ti its geometry constraints and operations nature the track design predetermines further site, utility of drainage design. The track subgrade has to become an essential component of further general civil.
5. How do i export corridors?
6. Why do I need all these DGN files and features to get design done???? Various models and views? All in graphics instead of versatility of Inroads legacy file formats that can be launched all at the same time in the same DGN file just as a background. It is a dramatic step backwards, diminishing productivity and impacting workflow.
7. The problem for us, engineers, is that we are proficient in Inroads/ Power Rail and less in Microstation, and now we have to learn basic Microstation just to get design done. Kinda backwards.... since we always have CAD techs to do the Microstation part.
8. Cross section display and generation are absolutely horrible. I would rather say non-existent. In railroad construction we deal with cross sections instead of grading plans.
9. Various SS4 commands have woodoos inside: disappearing boxes, locking up SS4 part of the program while the legacy Inroads interface is still running perfectly well.
10. Unfortunately, the developers are forgetting that Bentley is an American product for US users. Our railroad engineering, which is primarily freight, it is private and massive. It is totally different from European government-owned and controlled passenger rail supplemented with light freight haul. Their design standards are useless for most of what we do in our freight rail engineering. And yet the new SS4 is geared for foreign applications, maybe because the development has been done by non- US task force, with lack of understanding how we operate, whether is is rail or DOT work.
11. The interface has some AutoCad-ish features which is NOT a good thing...... I hope Open Roads won't start crashing every 5 minutes like ACAD does.
The list is longer than I thought, so I will stop here... for now.
Cheers!
Save the planet and roads, ship by rail.