Currently doing a run with the new-liveried 66 on WCML and I get the feeling that it not as powerful as it should be. I'm pulling 20 container wagons, total weight 1226.2 tons, on a 0.3 % incline and in notch 8 I can not accelerate above 55 mph. This train has headcode 4M18, and as such is a freight train permitted to operate at 75 mph but I seem unable to reach that speed, even on flat ground.
I think that might be accurate. I have a chart of approximate tonnage by grade and resistance goes up with speed, so at 60mph you end up with something like double the resistance you do at 15mph. At 15mph you can do about 3,000 tons with a Class 66. So if your resistance doubles, I can see that dropping to about 1,500 at 55-60pmh. It's not exactly where you are, but these are rough estimates, assuming the 66 generates it's theoretical maximum of 58,000 ft/lb at 15 mph. I know many locos in the game only generate 80-90% of their book value and was told that's "realistic" because you don't get the "book" value out of anything. I don't know from DTG if that's a thing, but that's also not factoring in curves, differences in track, weather conditions, or longer trains having different gradients (you may see .3% in the cab, but what is the back half of the consist on?) It MAY be a a 10-20% difference from the ideal calculation the engineers use. However, there may also be other factors involved. Having hauled a lot of freight (in game anyway) I find that you rarely get above 55mph, either by limits of the locos or limits of the track (speed limits) so that's reasonable they'd put a single Class 66 on that load at that grade because you'd stay around the speed limit naturally. Just because you CAN go 75 doesn't mean you DO go 75. =-) The faster you go, the more resistance you have to fight so the more fuel it uses. Freight companies often worry about fuel more than time. Going another 75mph would mean another 20-25% more fuel burn and be harder on the engines (can't keep going at notch 8 forever) Game tip: If you want to go faster (screw the cost, it's a game!) then just uncouple some cars at the end of the train. Unless you're doing a specific mission like filling coal cars, the game doesn't count your cars at the end, just that the loco and at least one car arrives. If you disconnect half of them, you'll shed weight and just FLY down those tracks! Or you can be realistic and only go a normal speed like 55mph. Your choice =-)
Thank you so much for that detailed explanation. I ended up reaching 75 mph eventually, and on flat ground I only needed notch 3 or so to maintain that speed, so I guess it's correct and I was just expecting too much.
Yeah, as it levels out that grade resistance goes away. 75 seems reasonable on the flat, on the straight. Maintaining speed is a lot easier than building it. Trains are NOT drag racers by any means. The 66 has a lot lower traction than say US models, but I haven't really seen a UK map yet that has lots of hills (over 1-1.5%) so it's not really that necessary. For as much disdain as it seems to collect on the forums, I rather like the Shed. It's not as "British" as a 47, but it does the job reliably and since they're EVERYWHERE in real life it fits in well anywhere.
It's a good job that all DTG's UK container trains are too short with 20 wagons. Typical length is 30 wagons.
I quite like messing with freight and the Class 66. I’ve yet to fully understand the braking system as it seems very difficult to judge just how much brake you need and for how long…. and the recovery time to get the speed rising again seems to take ages… I assume it’s like that on a fully freighted train… but with an empty one? Yesterday on a route pulling empty gravel wagons, my speed on a 0.5% gradient went down to about 5mph… and no amount of throttle jiggling would make it go any faster until the track levelled out.. I thought it was actually going to come to a complete stop I also seem to get a lot of empty container platforms that seem really heavy when it’s actually light… Throttling.. just how much do you need to get a train moving? I sat for ages waiting for a train to move, again with an empty container set, on throttle 1-2 .. anything more and the thing just revved and the power gauge just went into the red… I’ve tried to imagine how an actual train would react.. a bit like doing a hill start with a fully loaded truck (yep I used to be a trucker).. lots of power which you reduce as you get traction and motion If someone could explain these peculiarities I’d be grateful.. sometimes you can’t be sure if these are game or user errors.
Yes the Class 66 is TSW is very, very, very broken compared to real life! With 1226 tonnes, you should be hitting roughly 60mph at Watford Junction and you're climbing all the way from Wembley. Even with 1600+ tonnes you'd still be close to 55mph at Watford Junction. Spoiler - I drive these locos in real life!
Knowing it’s nothing like the real thing at all is pretty annoying.. I have mentioned FlightSim a number of times in other posts, but for £50-60 you do get something that actually works and is at least similar to the real thing and PMDG do very realistic aircraft. Xplane features real aircraft dynamics too so the flying experience is as close to accurate as possible for a pc game. Surely it’s not too much to ask for something that resembles the real thing is it? I ummed and ahhed for months about whether to buy a new pc and the newest FS or go down the route I opted for, a PS5 and TS. I find myself bouncing between positivity and negativity about this game. I like playing it but it’s frustrating to find your doing something which bears little or no resemblance to the real thing when what you want is a bit of realism.
Are you suggesting paying $60 for a Class 66? That's what Flight Sims do charge for one aircraft so if you want the same fidelity....
Can you answer me a question? In the game are the brakes on the container wagons (either type as I think Skyhook just copied the brakes from the DTG ones) far too strong or are they like that in real life. Other wagons, when hauled by the Class 66, seem fine to me but those things only need a tiny tickle on the brakes to come to a screeching halt and then take an age to release. It doesn’t seem right to me.
I'm not even sure the underlying game could handle full fidelity like DCS modules, and there is no way in hell a console could even come close to running something like that, not with there tiny 16gb RAM (more like 12gb in real life due to OS/overheads) but man would i love a game like that to exist LOL
The air braking system used by freight trains in TSW would appear to all in Goods timing modes, no matter how you configure the locomotive. In real life the intermodal wagons are very good at braking due to the passenger timings on the brake release, so you can scrub speed and release them quicker, unlike Goods timings which take ages to fully release throughout the train. Like I said, DTG and their train driver consultants got the Class 66 wrong when they introduced simugraph to the development. Instead of rebuilding the Class 66, they just keep churning out the same version, that somehow keeps getting worse every time it's released.
No but I personally think the Class 66 in its current form should be withdrawn and a new, built from the ground up should be developed and released free of charge.
Paid for by...who? It's not just "one 66"... there are several of them made by different people. You can't just "toss it out" since it's not ONE model.
I think he's also implying that's part of the problem mate, to many versions all being built on top of a flawed base, turning what should have been a simple problem to address into a nightmare as there are so many versions spanning so many routes now.
No you're wrong here. Everyone uses the DTG Class 66 and adds their own twist, which is why every single one is broken AF.
While I agree a single, better version that layers onto the others WOULD be nice... you're barking uphill if you want it for free. I've suggested before making it a "pack" in order to fund it. Bundle some new content with it and let it layer anywhere another 66 works in game with multiple liveries maybe. The key is not demanding more "free stuff" with no plan how to pay the person to make it. That's the second problem... it's the 66. Which people already have a love/hate relationship with. How about we start here... what is the BEST version and what's right and wrong about it? How much actually has to be done?
I can't prove or disprove that, but they do seem to drive differently and have different features. How much they are different or what's "right"... maybe a certain Shed driver should stop by the office for a chat =-)
None of them, for me they are all extremely inaccurate. Every single version has the same issues with power delivery (as they all use the original Class 66 from Great Western Express as their base model.) DTG are responsible for the core content. The Class 66 is a core content item, and therefore they can if they so wish redevelop the Class 66 and bundle it with new content if they so wish, but I don't think people who have bought the 7 different versions I think we are currently at from different paid DLC should have to stump up again. Also I'm not demanding free stuff, the Class 66 was included as a base freight locomotive, so therefore we've paid for it. Maybe DTG should "remaster" it.
If it's a matter of just tweaking the horsepower, that's hardly a "redevelopment from the ground up." That implies there are HUGE problems that you need to start over and that would require a completely NEW locomotive. If you're saying it's just a few tweaks, then that belies the statement it needs to be completely redeveloped. A new build will take considerable time. A tweak would be reasonable to fix a specific issue (like horsepower or light intensity) They're different things to ask for entirely. It's like if it's your car. You might be able to get your neighbor to install a headlight for free or change a tire if you ask nicely, but they're not going to do a complete factory rebuild for you for a cup of tea or slice of pizza.
It's not just about tweaking horsepower. The brakes are broken, the power delivery is broken, the cab is extremely low quality and from pre GSM-R days and its running on routes where GSM-R was present on the times in which they are based. There's no suspension on the Class 66 at present which would make a massive difference to how the loco performs, it's the most used in game asset, but has had ZERO love from DTG because they can't be bothered. Also referring back to your original post, in the UK the railway is mixed usage. If a intermodal train is pathed (routed) at 75mph, it's expected to get up to those speeds, otherwise if we as drivers just poodled along at 55mph we would delay all the faster passenger trains behind us.
Yes it does, but it's actually at 30-35mph it's when the traction motors switch from series to parallel (or vice versa) alignment, it's called transition.
I raised the issues back in TSW2, they decided that they wanted "yes it's fine" input from actual 66 drivers.
I’m certainly not suggesting £50 for a train. The aircraft sold for about £30 each, quite some time ago, but that was for something like a fullly functional Boeing 737 or 747 for example. They’re now about £50 ish. A 737 is in no way comparable to a train. These variants are for ultra realism… but a train with all of the systems working surely could be doable for considerably less
I would even say that the brakes work so strangely that the same German BR140 is in the G brake mode and the first 3 double ones are in the G mode, the remaining 14 cars are in the P mode, The brakes release much faster than the Class 66. You can easily drop your speed by literally a couple of kilometers per hour, unlike class 66, where it’s easy to drop by 10 miles per hour, not even kilometers per hour.
They still act like freight trains at least. Maybe not like the real thing, but they don't act like your standard EMU. That counts for something.
Times like this we need the likes of AP and there enhancement packs, if DTG doesn't have an interest in consolidating stuff maybe they should start outsourcing the work to known 3rd party developers with trusted records, hell even throw in some nice incentives for them, because in the end it only benefits them, they get a better reputation, the game gets better and maybe appeals to new customers more, and we get fixes that are very badly needed on some stock, we still have the class 66 hazard light problem, now the 220 does the same thing only on the rear for some reason, and that's just to name a few.
The main problem that i have noticed with the class 66 , is that notches 1 and 2 are in fact overpowered. at notch 1 especially it produces 633 hp in the game which is unrealistic. also the transition and general loading times are slower than in reality as EMD locomotives load relatively fast (this is in all EMD'S in the game). Today i did a run in GWE with 15 loaded cars (1757 tonnes) and it accelerated relatively easy at notch 8 . Also i was able to hold 57mph on flat level with notch 4.
Maybe it should be time for an expert Class 66 DLC to fix the physics issues. The two most annoying parts for me are how much current the traction motors output at the lower notches, making it difficult to start, and the many variants with subtle differences. Having one universal DLC of good quality would help a lot and certainly have enough replayability.
To give some context today in real life, I drove 4Z98 from Temple Mills Loop to London Gateway, this train was just over 2000 tonnes. I was able to pull away in Notch 2, up to 10mph, I then required upto notch 8 to get above 25mph due to gradients etc climbing out of Stratford. But due to railhead conditions etc, I needed to sit in Notch 6 or 7 to maintain the 50mph line speed for freight along the Tilbury Loop line. Yes I think a expert Class 66 is required, but I doubt anyone will be willing to chance their arm and develop one.
When aircraft for simming can be accurately reproduced, when there are significantly bigger issues to incorporate like flight physics, a working flight deck and complicated flight management computer, why why why is it so difficult to reproduce a few trains that behave as they do in real life? They only move in a linear manner after all and have simple operation systems.
This has been asked before, but believe it or not simulating flight physics is way easier than something like a train, where you have multiple independent bodies reacting to and off each other, also then having to factor in given power, tractive effort and friction to name but a few, it snowballs fast, yes aircraft systems are more complex than say a train, is it doable, probably yes but i would imagine its well beyond the scope DTG wants to get into, your probably talking a custom-made engine once you start getting to that level.
I’m no expert on the matter, but if that’s the case, if an engine required that amount of work to make it totally realistic and it was £30 a pop, then at least you know you’re getting the real deal and people would undoubtedly pay for it. If an engine like the 66 is so unlike the real thing, then why bother with it in the first place?
Not even close mate, take DCS for an example you're talking £40 for the base game (flaming cliffs) then between £50 to £60 per module (aircraft) or £30 to £40 for new tiles (location maps) then factor into that anywhere from 4 to 8yrs development time for each new aircraft, real simulation takes a lot of time and money, the only way the likes of eagle dynamics and 3rd parties manage it is because they make the bulk of there money through professional simulators.
