New Steam Route: Peak Forest Ambergate - Buxton And Chinley

Haha, I had the exact same reaction. What railway from where to WHERE?

 

I know in MSTS, possibly TSC too, it is possible to have rolling starts and finishes where the train is already moving so maybe that's the plan here. Or maybe every Express will be getting a SSO at Ambergate!

 

Just to put some numbers to the route length discussion, I can't find an exact mileage but the route looks like it's currently around 30 miles for the Ambergate to Chinley section with a further 4 miles for the Buxton spur.

Going to Derby instead of Ambergate would add roughly another 10 miles.

 

Just found a image of ambergate station during the 60s we might be getting another loco that they haven't announced for passenger services.

 

A rather vast amount of photos and history of the line can be found at the below link courtesy of the late David Heys and local Buxton dentist / rail enthusiast / photographer ER Morten:

David Heys steam diesel photo collection - 52 - RAIL CAMERAMAN ER MORTEN (davidheyscollection.myshopblocks.com)

Also I'd say that this is a really well-chosen route to re-use the locomotives we have already as the 8F and Jubilee appear to be a common theme throughout - I'm hoping this is DTG listening to my / our constant whinging about the lack of layering in UK content

The 4F is also an extremely common type and will fit well in many potential future routes...

 

Yes but since the name of the route includes 'Buxton', what makes you think the tracks between Millers Dale and Buxton will not be there?? There is no other path to Buxton than that branch line, therefor, it must be included or else they couldn't say "Ambergate to Chinley and Buxton"

 

I love the choice of route, it would have been one of my top ten steam routes in a poll. I just don't understand the scope of the route. It is clearly a financial decision, Derby isn't a huge distance away but of course was a major rail centre with a major railway works. But then, so is Crewe.

If there isn't something to run the Millers Dale to Buxton service that will be very disappointng and will be what hinges on my purchasing it.

You wouldn't model the Ashburton branch but not include an Autotrain!

 

I didn't say they wouldn't be there! I was speculating on whether the passenger service would be represented, which should be a DMU in the time period set. Of which we only have the class 101 which from my research last night wouldn't be accurate as Buxton only had a couple up till around 1959, but would be better than nothing. A class 104 would be ideal or one of the four class 111 units allocated there in 1963.

 

Agreed, for DTG the logical (least "expensive") choice would be the 111 as it would just need a few tweaks to the 101, but a 104 would indeed be luvverly!

 

Would have this as a day one but wary after SoS, the physics still don't seem to be fixed and the lack of AI steam sounds would mean a wait for sales unless those issues are remedied.

 

I was trying to find an old Sectional Appendix last night to ascertain the mileage. If it is only 30 miles from Ambergate to Chinley (plus the Buxton branch) then really Derby ought to have been included, even if not fully modelling the area to the south and east of the station.

For anyone interested there is a Don Coffey video Hindlow to Crewe - YouTube which shows part of the line (Buxton - Tunstead - Chinley) albeit as it is in the modern day. The section down from Buxton to Tunstead is exceptionally scenic and the gradient should make this challenging going uphill to Buxton.

 

Explains the the recent bug fixes, updated steam physics, and the work being done to getting the manual firing working?
It seems to me DTG used the broken SoS as a test bed for this new route?

I'm thinking that the strange start and end points on this new route are deliberate and designed to leave room for route expansions?

I must admit that I am so excited about this new route. The only thing that worries me is, will this be another bug fest like SoS?

Must think positive thoughts.. It's going to be ok, It's going to be ok, It's going to be ok,

 

I was hoping for a Southern steam route but this seemed to make more sense.

As steam was very varied I guess it allows the use of the already existing stuff while also hopefully layering new stuff into SOS.

I like the inclusion of the 4F but it still seems like we're crying out for a tank engine of some description so I'm hoping that some of the gaps they alluded to on stream are big enough for a tank engine so to speak

 

One thing that did jump out at me was the use of flatbottom rail in the pics. Now I don’t remember which year BR started using it, but steam age railways always seem to be synonymous with the smaller bullhead profile (like on SoS).

 

Yes. Jubilee and 8f but not sure if it's a layer or included

 

Is this the route?

 

Is the Monsal Trail part of where this route was or is that a different route? I walked that a few years back and the area is lovely.

 

I think so?
I have also walked it and it is fantastic!

 

Correct on both counts

 

The two pictures in my Bradford Barton book, which are dated 1967, show flat bottom rail so would imagine the route had a mixture of both. One thing for certain though, none of it would have been welded rail so I hope DTG are working on enhancing the jointed track sound. (As well as the Mk1 Buffet Car ).

 

Sometime around the 1950's iirc.

 

It's got trains on it

 

Im still waiting for a nice wagon dlc finding its way into tsw. This could be like a vintage wagon pack, freight wagon pack and civil engineers wagon pack. The kfa rhtt is made very well beside the static bogies, which was probably a bug.

 

It's intriguing really how much of the Midland Railway route from Chinley to Ambergate is still open. A former mainline, carrying express passenger trains well into the BR era, they took the big decision to close it to reduce costs - and then actually succeeded in closing hardly any of it. Just enough to break a valuable link between Derby and Manchester.

Ambergate to Matlock remains open as a branch line, Matlock to Rowsley as a preserved steam railway, and Blackwell to Chinley as part of the freight route shown in the video, connecting quarries to the mainline. The only bit actually missing is Rowsley to Blackwell, which can't be more than about 12 miles. Admittedly that's a pretty challenging section of railway, with extensive viaducts, tunnels, cuttings and embankments, but the fact that it's maintained as a footpath/cycle path means it's kept free of new houses, roads and other obstructions.

I'm going to add its re-opening to my list of 'things to do when I'm a billionaire' (although it's unclear exactly how that is ever going to come about).

 

Bakewell to somewhere beyond Miller's Dale is about 8.5 miles (as is the Monsal Trail) so that's only roughly 3.5 miles of missing stuff

 

Reminds me,
Miller's Dale Station!

 

...That's the only thing I was asking.

I don't see why you felt the need to reply to my message.

 

Well, that looks lovely! The route will definitely have a very different scenery compared to SOS, and there seems to be a surprisingly high amount of stations judging by the map posted above. Might be a nice purchase if the remaining steam bugs are ironed out alongside.

 

Matt was being really broad. He said the 8f would be seen running along the route. Never mentioned if it was a layer or a sub. You might want to rewatch the video. It's not in a good enough state right now to talk about layers and subs or whatever

 

What about the NEW 060 would it be a main line engine on this line or just a yard shunter?I'm guessing it probley at least a good branchline or factory shunter locomotive..

 

I strongly disagree that it's too early to be asking this. Back in the early days of TSW when we got route announcements way earlier in development they usually had the locos nailed down from the beginning. You only had a few instances to the contrary, Clinchfield, which swapped out the SD40-2 with a plain SD40, and Sherman Hill, which got the SD40-2 added later on, but that's two routes out of a dozen or so.

Even if we assume it isn't decided yet then it's a rather dumb decision to show the 8f at this stage. They shouldn't be putting content they don't know for fact's gonna be included into PR photos without massive disclaimers on stream and in the article. Either it is included, and they can confirm it, or they've just done something incredibly stupid.

 

Seems they are not sure at this point which sections will be cut away due lack of time.

 

More will come in a future article on what will be included. But considering the 8f was in the photo, I would assume it's included..

 

Excellent point and why not reopen this as a rail with Trail the example for this is R6 Cynwyd 30th st Norristown line Ivy Ridge to Norristown section which is a Rail with Trail

 

I'm really looking forward to this route. Hope they do Matlock Bath and surrounding area justice. Especially now what's know as the "Heights of Abraham" which towers over Matlock Bath and the station. My family spend may happy days with the youngest during the summer in Matlock Bath.

 

Playing SoS again last night I have to hope the steam sounds get a bit of love. The safety valve blowing continues to mute just about everything else, even the limited track run sounds. Above about 30 MPH the exhaust chuff just becomes a wall of noise, with occasional dropouts too, not like a steam loco at speed should sound.

Assuming we are going to be doing quarry operations, route really calling out for a shunting loco of some description. Shunting with an 8F or even the 4F not realistic. Either a saddle tank or Jinty, even a 2-6-2 or 2-6-4 tank loco which could then also sub in to local services on this route and SoS.

 

It wouldn't have been used as a shunter per-se but would have carried out shunting in some circumstances, for example branch line pick up goods. They were very versatile and could be seen on branch and mainline freight trains and lighter loaded passenger trains, for example on the Somerset and Dorset railway and the ex Midlands and South Western Junction lines.

 

I'd be suprised if there wasn't a shunter/tank engine dtg know the community has been calling out for something and they did say they left gaps purposefully as its still very wip

Not sure if thats me being optimistic though

 

I hope they don't forget about SOS. That also needs a shunter and a local train and at least goes between to major stations.

This route will be stunning scenically and quite a challenge to drive but I think for me the Liverpool to Crewe route will feel more like a complete route.

 

As I said in the Q&A thread, for all my anticipated love for this route, it's a bit like starting NTP at Stalybridge or BML at Wivelsfield!

 

Exactly. Can you imagine the absolute meltdown if DTG had stated their attention to build a modern route with the start point a rural/semi-rural junction station, Barnt Green on CCL was one I thought of? There would be so much anger it would probably be enough for DTG to change their minds.

It is as if they are saying, people want steam so we will give them what they want they won't care too much about anything else.

This route could be epic, even Derby to Chinley would have been a bit of a disappointment as I dared to hope it would go to Manchester but I thought I was hearing things when they said it was from Ambergate. I have a freeware TSC version which is quite old but very scenic and has lots of interesting features as well as challenging grades. I am genuinely baffled by it.

Can you imagine a scenario for the Palatine express, it could have been take this express from Derby over the peaks to Chinley, with this route it will be watch this express roar past you in Ambergate and try and catch it at Matlock for a short drive to Chinley!

And I can't see them putting in a Millers Dale to Buxton passenger service, unless it is an unrealistic mash-up, it seems realism isn't important in period routes. However even the wrong ballast is enough for a change to be made on a modern route.

I won't be purchasing it unless there is a surprise yet to come or some kind of DLC pack further down the line.

 

I would guess they have took one look at the track work at Derby and put in the too hard drawer. Crewe in SoS must have took a while and scenery wise they have stripped it down to track and ballast in a lot of places. I agree though Ambergate will feel an odd place to end runs although it's not much different to the likes of Finnentrop on Rhur Sieg Nord a route that should have gone on to Siegen.

I still stand by my comments from past posts that as train sims roll on routes get shorter. When Train Sim Works Rail 2100 comes out there will be moans that it's Waverley to Haymarket for 300 quid....

 

Yes I can see what made them stop there, however I can't believe someone didn't see the proposals and say but what about immersion, what about game play, what about realism? I agree about Finnentrop although that was an early route and Finnentrop is larger than Ambergate as far as I know.

Half the services on the route didn't even stop at Ambergate junction so how are they going to address that? A rolling start (not exactly realistic), ignoring the timetable and having them stop there (not realistic), starting at Matlock, well that is a chunk of the route not driveable for those services?

If they can model Crewe, they can model Derby surely! What are future steam period routes going to look like? Just avoid every major station, town or conurbation, in fact is that a rule for all routes now? No Doncaster for example, rule it out if they have to lay more than ten sidings!

What will the Buxton passenger services be, a Jubilee or 4F with some mark 1's, like the Brixham branch on TSC's Riviera in the 50's with a Pannier running back and forth with a Collet brake end as a pseudo autotrain?

I realise there are limits to what can be produced within a budget but surely there are limits to what you will sacrifice?

 

Not sure playability is considered now. The Edinburgh to Glasgow mess shows how shiny trains with TMS get wows despite the route being a glorified conveyer belt. Even in SoS a lot of freight runs end with the loco staying on the train.

I would guess Ambergate will see a lot more trains stopping than did so that element of realism is not required by the devs if so....

I couldn't think of a better example than Finnentrop but St Austell is another from a UK DLC.

 

Yes of course St. Austell is good example, to be fair to Rivet, although I think it is a big disappointment that WCL ended there, there is a lot of route between there and Plymouth.

I suspect you are right and all services will probably start/stop at Ambergate and no one will care as we have a new steam route. It seems only boring anoraks like me are bothered about detail. As I said though, they would likely not attempt a fudge like this on a modern route, they wouldn't get away with it.

 

So you're saying routes have gotten shorter when clearly some of the newer routes are longer. Rivets route was 48 miles. Trenton to nyp is 58 miles which is even longer compared to the 24 miles we got with harlem. That's compared to bcc which was like 35 miles and bro which was 44km. And before you complain about niddetalbahn and shgs route being too short, those are made by small teams. If you think building hundreds of miles of track with complex scenery and multiple new stations, gradients and curves then feel free to do that before complaining about route length.

So you're expecting a skw for every dlc? And with that I'm assuming you want multiple new trains and the highest quality possible with no bugs?

 

Yes please thats what most are asking for....

 

But if you look at it realistically, it's not possible. A route with multiple stations, constantly changing scenery, gradients, twists and turns and complex scenery elements makes it much more complicated and time consuming to build a route. It's more than just the track

 

Matt has said repeatedly on streams that laying the track is actually quite easy and trivial, so that's not likely to be the reason not to include Derby.

 

Granted Derby in the 1960's would have had a lot of track work and various yards and the works of course. But as I said so has Crewe and they managed that.

I can't think of any other reason why they would start a route from a fairly inauspicous junction station in a rural location rather than a major station down the track which would have been likely where a lot of the trains would have started their journey or likely where crew changes happened. For me one of the most important aspects of TSW is immersion and this kills it to be honest.