Just Trains - Blackpool - Preston - Ormskirk Official Thread

I didn't want anyone prevented from running your favourite stock. I have regularly called for selectable layers to save myself from having to uninstall routes like NTP everytime I wanted a vaguely realistic experience. Maybe if they had supplied two timetables for WCL that would be another satsifying compromise.

I might be a borish purist but I don't want to see stock which never ran on the route at the time it was depicted let alone stock that never ran in the area. Is it wrong to want an immersive and realistic experience (as far as you could on WCL) on one of the few routes purporting to be a historical recreation of a time gone by?

 

No, it’s not wrong - it’s just one of those frustrations with TSW3 that the lack of ability to select the stock you want to use on a given timetable means people’s preferences and priorities will always conflict, to the frustration of all. I haven’t fully got my head around exactly what the TSW4 editor and free roam mode allow us to do yet, but hopefully one or other of them solves some of this, and we have greater flexibility to operate timetable mode with the trains we choose. That way each of us can adapt the experience as we want it, without spoiling it for others.

 

Hi JT crew - have seen that the 20 is only on the rail tours at the moment. Any chance it could be added as a low-probability substitution on some of the freight runs too for that extra hit of variety please? The trains might be heavy but having to absolutely rag it is half the fun of a BR diesel loco.



(I know this one is in blue but don't think it would be too much of a stretch to have it in RF grey)

Cheers - can't wait for this.

 

I'm with Xander1986, dedication to the source material shows, even in a few photographs.
I've little interest in Pacers, Blackpool or London Midland Region ("Eastern" til I die) but I've already decided this is a first day purchase as I'm really impressed with how much more "alive" it looks compared to many other TSW routes.

 

Regards to the Metal Shutters on the doors and the black rubber flooring, if there are any photos that are available to share with us from 1986 we may be able to accommodate such change. However i must stress that at this stage into development time is short now for such changes so please be aware of this. Thank you however for raising this to us.

The pacers are coming in BR Provincial only. We suspect people will soon be at hand in the creators club making more liveries.

Regards, Thomas

 

By the way it might be me running on no sleep and the heatwave but can you couple together the 142 into a 4 car formation for custom scenarios and whatnot or no? Im just curious because for a few routes coupling didnt really work.

 

2 and 4 car formations are already in place and coupling up is possible

 

the more i see and hear about this route.. the more i cannot wait for it to be released!

seriously great work so far to everyone who has created this route

 

Thanks for the quick reply!

Absolutely fabtabolous work.

 

I have actually found a rather interesting article from The Blackpool Gazette.

https://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/...atforms-and-people-in-the-80s-and-90s-4080644

Personally though I am just looking forward to playing it and really happy to see the old Blackpool line as I knew it as a kid.

 

Both the 31 and 20 need to be let loose elsewhere as much as possible. The 31 as in reality, cannot pull the skin of a rice pudding but it can make short work of a few mk1's or a parcels train.

 

Yes I agree, I certainly won't be route building but I will be having a good look at how to make timetables.

 

Hi,
A fellow forum member has asked about the class 20 subbing in on the freight with a probability factor being applied. Could you consider this before it gets too advanced and therefore too late.

I am unsure why this was not included and I feel that this is quite an important loco to add.

 

Afraid this isn't under consideration. Class 20's on the Fylde line were the exception rather than the rule. You'd be hard pressed in 1986 to see them working freights along the line on regular occurrences, same applies to years prior to 1986, Class 20's were not the chosen traction for trip workings along the route, certainly not on the Stanlow-Burn Naze, whilst they did substitute on one (or a very small number of occasions) day, this is not something that happened regularly, it was a pretty solid Class 47 turn.

TSW also has issues subbing single loco turns with pairs (I.E the train couldn't run with a Class 47/pair of 20's very easily when it comes to how TSW is set up).

Apologies for the disappointment but we've only seen a single photo of a Class 20 working the Fylde line on freight, which is a good indicator that it was a rare sighting, if they were common in 1984 (for instance), as Class 40's were on the line, then we might have considered it.

 

This route looks amazing and shows the beauty of train sims when they allow you to experience a world and time that seems long missed. I have never been on a Pacer but the Leyland National Buses took me to school for years in the 80s and I hope this Pacer is just as noisy and full of rattles. JT look to have done an amazing job and the attention to detail shows a lot of love. Thank you.

As a side question, I think there was some mention of a power station. I wondered is there a new model for pylons such as the attached photo as a common pylon around the UK? The current one used in routes is in need of an update as it does not look like any pylon that exists anywhere. Regardless though, ordering this as soon as I can.

 

Leyland National buses were dreadful, well the National 2's weren't so bad as they had nicer sounding engines than the rather high pitched strange sounding ones the originals were fitted with. The Pacers sound like neither.

 

I used to regularly use the WMPTE ones in the early 90''s, they were 20 years old then, and you couldn't have a conversation if you were sitting at the back over the engine, well you could if you shouted.

 

Pylons are something of a bug bearer for me, i know they are not great at the moment, i really would like to push for a better model if we can find time at the end of everything else. We did however make new Telegraph splines so far at least

Cheers, Tom

 

Thank you. I appreciate the reply and it’s not just me. Hope you may be able to do something with them at some point. I’m being a massive geek here but apart from the model not being ideal, the model currently used should only be used when the line changes direction (angle tower) and the pylon for straight lines (tension tower) is not modelled anyway but we did have it in tsc!
Minor thing I know but wanted to ask. Thanks again and really looking forward to purchasing this.

 

If you look at Lawn Mower Simulator then you have the reason why it is the same problem as in TSW.... Both are not the best quality sadly enough.

 

What train will run on the track with the 3rd rail?

 

The route only comes with diesel trains

 

Lets be honest, LMS is a gimic game at the very least.

 

None currently as that is where Merseyrail and BR 'normal' trains meet at the end of the route. In real life at that time I suspect it may have been 507s/508s but could be wrong on that.

 

Was racking my brains on that too, but yes reckon by that time the old Merseyrail units had gone and the PEP’s were running the service.

So the short answer is probably nothing. JT aren’t going to model an entire EMU for 800 yards of AI.

 

Only one solution then: make a route with the 507/508 and have it layer onto BPO.

 

Pretty sure some genius is going to work out how to make a mod so that there's a grey and yellow 313 in the metro platform at Ormskirk. It'll do until the Mersey Metro is a DLC. They're all going heavy on LMR region at the moment after all.

 

Its true but that's the point off lack off knowledge i think! JT has way more experience and thats what you noticed directly in the images! Its not only to learn the tools, like the editor but also the way off seeing the quality and loves the railway on its bautifull aspects! And JT knows that very well!

 

Another question - are there any refuelling opportunities on this route? (I don't know if it would be realistic but thought to ask as it was an interesting feature on WSR / SoS).

 

Will approach control and Rule 39a be implemented? Thank you.

 

Just in case anyone is unaware:

“The batsman is out Stumped, except as in 39(c), if a ball which is delivered is not called no ball, and he is out of his ground, and he has not attempted a run when his wicket is fairly put down by the wicket-keeper without the intervention of another fielder.”

 

Rule 39A states: "When a stop signal is at Danger the stop signal next in rear of it and worked from the same box must not be lowered for an approaching train until it is close to such signal and has been brought quite or nearly to a stand."< br> Obviously, 'lowered' also applies to 'raised'!

The Signalman will implement this, aided by his track circuits telling him where a train is, by waiting until an approaching train has come to, or has almost come to, a stand at the signal in question before pulling off the signal and allowing the Driver to take his train onward. The Driver will interpret this as an indication that the following stop signal is at Danger.

 

So... approach control?
For those of us who don't know or care for the signallers rulebooks?

 

No, not approach control, because it also applies to signals on plain line.

 

It's a similar concept to modern approach control signalling - where the system detects the train has slowed to a certain speed at a certain point before clearing the signal. However, in modern signalling it's used to ensure a train has slowed for a low speed junction, whereas with semaphore signalling it was also used when several danger signals, under the control of one signal box, were protected by one distant signal. The other difference, of course, was that it didn't happen automatically - the signaller had to observe the train to be slowing on approach to the signal, before manually clearing it, allowing the train to draw forward to the next signal.

 

If you have ever played Diesel Railcar Simulator it is implemented reasonably well in that.

 

That was a bit 'try hard' Graham.

 

Rather harsh - I think it’s a fair question.

Application of Rule 39a is important to being able to drive the train in a realistic manner, and it’s never been simulated in TSW before. I’m not in the camp of ‘I’m not buying unless it’s simulated’ but it is annoying having to crawl past a whole series of danger signals which are off, because of one distant.

Also it means you have to learn how many danger signals are associated with every distant on the route, otherwise theoretically you have to drive slowly until you discover the next distant, which can be miles!

 

Its a simulator, for complex things a dev can always create a 1 Page PDF and make a small Manual out of it.

 

Approach control isn't just for turn outs/ diverging routes etc.
It can be used in less common applications like bringing trains into platforms, where raised LX barriers are within a signalling overlap.

 

True, it has a number of applications, but in a modern signalling system it is not used in the context of rule 39a, as there is no equivalent circumstance of being able to receive a signal sequence which is effectively yellow-green-red (or yellow-green-green-red, and so on).

Incidentally, I wonder what was the highest number of stop signals protected by a single distant signal at any location in history? I’m not aware of there being a limit in the rule book. It takes us into a world of Homes and Outer Homes, Starters and Advance Starters, which is not an area of expertise for me.

 

Sounds like a station near me needs this, level crossing just after the station, crossing goes down a few minutes before a train arrives at the station then another couple of minutes before it heads over the crossing.

100% better to be safe than risk any kind of accident, but doubly annoying when there is a humped bridge over a river just before the crossing so unless you’re in the front half a dozen cars you don’t even get to see the train.

 

Either way, Rule 39A is not the same thing as approach control because it has different implications for the driver.

 

That IS realistic though, that is what happens.

Of course you have to learn how many signals are in each block, you also have to know exactly where they are on the foggiest, blackest night.
You also dont have to crawl to the next distant, that's not how blocks work. Once you have the starter off, the block is clear for you. The distant only tells you the state of the block it pertains to.

 

Yes, I understand a real life Driver has to learn that, but most of us don’t have time to learn TSW routes to the level of detail of real Drivers. If rule 39a is applied, if the distant is at caution but the first stop signal is off, you know that you’re OK until the next distant. If rule 39a is not applied, you have to drive slowly all the way until the final stop signal in the block, and if you don’t actually know which that is, all the way to the next distant signal - which isn’t something you would have to do in real life.

 

The one I am thinking of is specifically in East Anglia, but I wouldn't be suprised if it wasn't a one off scenario.

End of the day, the only "standard" on the railway is that "nothing is standard". If a rule exists, there's always an exception or a "work around" applied.

 

I hope though with the new editor around the corner some clever community member will recreate the Deepdale Branch and the docks branch. That would be awesome

 

I thought the editor wouldn't allow baked routed to be editied?

 

How about rule 34

 

Dirty mind?