SCARM vs AnyRail?

I used Anyrail5, but I am not familiar with the term RCS, I used the gargraves and fastrack library with good results for MY needs, it is fairly intuitive and easy to negotiate between features, layers and printing.

Thanks Ron. I should know better than to abbreviate without first defining it at the front of the post: Ross Custom Switches. I use both switches and sectional track from Ross. 

I will download the AnyRail demo and play around with it. Let me know if you have any tips or traps to mention.

My biggest learning curve, was to learn when to add a layer, I often got halfway through a section only to smack my forehead and have to go back and redo it properly. I really like how it prints, you can do reduced print for a quick reference, or do a 4 page print with great detail. Also, save your work often so you can return to the last good iteration with a unique name, I would save every so often with the next number, it saved me a lot of time being able to return to a good layout without highlighting and canceling tons of track.

There are 340 pieces to the Ross library, as complete as the Lionel Fastrack and Gargraves, now that I knew where to look for you.

I also went through 6 different renditions before I got what I wanted, My wife thought I was being anal, but it would look good for several days until I ran the layout through a mental run and decide it was too tight in some sections, or not enough track in another, being able to go back and look at previous tries added inspiration for my final layout.

Anyrail allows you to download your plan into Train Player.  This allows you to run trains on the design.  I found it very valuable to do this.  Showed me errors in my design that did not hold up when operating.

Turtlelinez,

Is there a website for train player?  I am just beginning to glue the roadbed down and would like to verify my design before get a head smacking episode from derailing.

I used the free version of Anyrail 5. I found it easy to use.

SCARM is a bit harder but can be manipulated well enough.

The 3-d view zoom, and ability to "build anything" are huge for visuals.

But SCARM is not a MAC program last I checked. Some Macs can run it virtually, but not a lot do it well from what I gather.

Len B,

I use the two software and they are complementary for me.

The 3D rendering in SCARM is enough to have an idea of what you think; sure, all is green and the buildings are not easy to create, but it's well enough for a free software.

ANYRAIL, for me, is the best, and they are working on a 3D rendering; more, you can transfere your plan on sketch up. If you use it for create the support of your layout, you can place the track plan on and check if all is good. Below an example of layout support in Sketch UP

Ron S,

Here you go.  Free demo is all I used....It does not take long to see your mistakes when operating.   LOL

http://www.trainplayer.com/

First I have Anyrail, but have not used it since 2011-2012 when I switched to RR-Track v5. I have SCARM but have only dabbled with it a couple of times. I use Atlas-O track, so have never tried the RCS libraries in any of these programs.

SCARM is probably a little more capable than Anyrail feature wise, but also has a steeper learning curve (at least it seems that way to me). Anyrail is quite capable and much easier to learn (again it was for me anyway). They are both still being upgraded regularly by their authors with feature additions used requested changes and fixes. I don't think either has quite the extensive libraries as RR-Track, but are both gaining with the constant additions and work from their authors. Anyrail and SCARM also have more modern, updated user interfaces than RR-Track.

There are quite a few folks her that have started using SCARM and there was even a thread where they were making their own buildings, accessories and other things and posting for others to use. I think it is pretty highly thought of here by most folks. Atlas has also partnered with SCARM to replace their previous track design program. I would suggest getting both SCARM and Anyrail and try them out for yourself and see what you think and which is easiest for you to use.

Looks like your choices are still somewhat narrowed but...

 A link to how to go about running scarm with a mac.

Anyrail with a good 3d would be a breeze.

 I like that SCARM got me using more traditional in depth program menu habits. That the point and click stuff doesn't afford much of that. IE I'm using my right click more again and finding forgotten options here and there. 

Adriatic,

You can look at ANYRAIL forum in a topic where I posted (same pseudo- version française- topic: vue en 3D) and see the rendering of their future 3D aspect; it's more rocky and less green than SCARM; what do you think about this project?

Link me next time I'm a lookin.......in a minute

I think old Anyrail did have a 3-d view, but it wasn't really "maneuverable".

 I like the ability to "create" SCARM has! Even block-like graphics (for the average Joe) can be overwritten within the open program code (easy when you finally find exactly where).

  Those loco "objects" in the library now were user created. If you see something you like in another Scarm layout, you can copy/paste it as a "grouping" and move it to your Scarm layout.

 You can open it many times to ease copy paste, building, and layering chores. 

  I bet its an easy change from a green table to whatever, and can be done by replacing the default command code for green!

 You can also build a table in the "figures" option, but would loose the "snap terrain to bottom" on the objects properties.

 To get around this, I do both. One green table, one brown block table occupy the same space. The brown block is a fraction of an inch taller (.oo2"?), so you see brown. Skip "snap terrain" and call it close enough or lower/raise brown or height of object till they match. You still lose the terrains ability to curve up & down, but its manageable.

Any snap terrain now forms a green "high ground" too, and looks ok as an effect done right.

A new look there. It looks like Anyrail has a good drawing feature now too! But I didn't see anything about new 3d.

Gee I wonder why they would've added that user created drawing feature?

 It seems upstart SCARM has really had the older software guys scrambling to please us again What else do we want?

Thanks everyone. Your feedback has been extremely helpful.

I spent the better part of the day playing with both applications. I run Windows 7 just fine on my Macbook Air and both applications perform extremely well.

As many of you have stated, AnyRail seems a bit easier to use off the mark. It helps that they have a pretty detailed yet easy to consume Getting Started manual. I also like how easy it is to work in fractions. Even though my track plan is mostly implemented and I am just redrawing what already exists, the Trainplayer aspect still intrigues me enough to want to give it a try.

The only drawback for me, which admittedly is minor, is AnyRail does not have the Ross 280 #8 double crossover in its library. I didn't realize this at first and inadvertently used the smaller 175 crossover as my starting point. Talk about head-scratching when my parallel track spacing and length was wrong on the other side of the layout. Once I figured it out I compensated by adding length to the 175. Everything now lines up close enough for the purposes of my exercise.

The SCARM interface is indeed a bit less intuitive and I had to watch some of the tutorials before I started working (the tutorials by Ruud were helpful). It took me a bit longer than I think should be necessary to do things like cut custom-sized track or force joins. That said, once I figured out these actions it all seems fine - not as straightforward as doing them in AnyRail - but still fine. One thing that I really like is having the coordinate markers right on the rulers so you know exactly where your pointer is relative to your layout dimensions. Using the space bar to add tracks is also pretty handy.

I'm still playing and will give it another day or two to allow me to try some more advanced tasks before I make a final decision. Thanks again for your advice.

I used both regularly, till I was choosing use by the needs of my end results.

Ie, if I wanted it quick & easy, I used AR-5. If I wanted a custom 3d I'd use SCARM.

Eventually my SCARM learning curve caught up and "leveled" the ease of use till it was the "go to", and I was using AR if I was to busy to "build" an object available in AR.

SCARM-"Right click is your friend"-moonman of ogrf

When moving SCARM files outside of the program, it may get changed to a .TXT file.

Just replace the text file ending with .SCARM and its ready to open in SCARM.

You can view files in raw form by reading them with the txt ending vs .scarm end.

That will give you an idea how easy the program is to work deeply, in the code.

(the engine is just a normal build, done for fun) 

Len B,

Finding what works for you is what it is all about, I'm glad your getting a useful tool, no matter what program you use.

I used the free version of AnyRail until 3-4 years ago. It's easy to learn but the free version limits you to 50 pieces of track (or so it was back then). SCARM has a bit more of a learning curve but it does great 3-D views, is being continually enhanced with additional features, and is free. I've even figured out how to build my own trains to add to the 3-D views !

Ace,

 If that work is anything like your past track designs, I think many would love to see more objects you've done. (Maybe in the main thread?)(which likely needs a recent post by now) 

 With files, so we can swipe them too.....Please.... Someday?