I'd suggest that the ECML borders East Anglia but yes, north of Huntingdon up to Darlington is pretty flat. And taking a trip around the fens to the East of the ECML it would be difficult to disagree with you, it's probably the least appealing rural landscape in the UK, I'd call it a "natural landscape" but it's man-made. However, the rest of East Anglia is as nice as most of rural Britain. It may not have mountains and moors but those always look a bit bleak to me, whereas the mature trees and woods, hedgerows, gentle-rolling fields, thatched houses and historic villages around Suffolk, Norfolk and North Essex contain several areas of protected natural beauty, rare species and a snap-shot of what rural Southern England is all about. And only an hour from London on the train. Obviously it gets a bit field/housing estate/field/industrial estate the closer you get to the M25 but I love calling East Anglia my adopted home and really enjoy showing visitors around it.
You'd be forgiven for thinking Chappel Viaduct on the Sudbury branch is in North Yorkshire and not 45 miles north east of the Tower of London.
Except both TSW5 and TSW6 had two WCML releases each (before anyone says it, I'm fully aware Preston-Crewe isn't out yet) , compared to ECML having... one in TSW4. I'd have rather they returned to the southern region than yet another WCML route.
I don’t get why ATS are hated they have some of the best content for TSC and their TSW route is done really well for a first release.
They talked a lot of LOVE about TSW & its users back in the TSW2020/TSW2 days. They have released a few iffy products for TSC, pricing & quality being an issue. There were also allegations of developers not being paid for their work on MAC.
thanks for the quick reply not aware of any of this. Never had a problem personally with any of the TSC payware content myself actually really enjoy it
Glad you're enjoying the ATS stuff and there's plenty in the pipeline. As is also the case for TSW now (90 and beyond) It's been a steep learning curve for TSW but in the past the feedback from DTG through their QA process has been excellent. They are historically very thorough.
I must give you a big "thank you" for the many excellent routes you've given us in TSC. I must admit that I've not been keeping my TSC game up-to-date, I really need to dip into the ATS and AP sites and get some new mods and scenarios before I get too behind.
Unless they have some special arrangement, I would have thought they would be subject to the same QA as everyone else
Do you have an idea, for what routes we are going to have services etc with the incoming Class 90? Ts there at least a passenger function in the loc?
Unfortunately we can’t go into specific details yet — best to wait for the next roadmap update. What I can say is that this is a freight-focused pack. Not entirely sure what you mean by ‘passenger function’, but the gameplay is centred around freight operations
Any interesting stuff you can say about class 90 while developing it, like any stuff you didn’t already know? (Sorry dumb question but I’m always curious about stuff)
I do like 90s but their fan/motor sounds are quite muted. They don’t roar much like the 91s (or the 85s from archive footage I’ve seen).
We did a sound recording session with one in the northwest. It wasn't as comprehensive as you may imagine but a second session was undertaken to get a few more bits. It was mainline but not under its own power so that did complicate things somewhat. For stuff we didn't know there is a big list of bits we thought we would get right but they need attention (currently being worked on). We have an ex-90 driver on the project so they are very much involved as you would expect. In fact they are the same person who led MAC to release after we brought it back in house this time last year after it failed QA spectacularly. I'd love to hear any feedback of course either on here or on our own site (I'm sure people can Google the ATS site as I'm not sure what the self promotion rules are)
It's great to see the Class 90 coming in but lack of passenger operations means it'll not be a day 1 purchase for me as I'm not a huge freight enthusiast. If only a IC version could be subbed into the JT routes, I remember them running on passenger services before the DVTs came along and if JT can fudge an era to include the already-withdrawn 40, can fudge a year or so the other way for a 90 as well. It's definitely a welcome addition to TSW and I'm sure it'll be popular.
Assuming we do eventually get a 91, I hope to see a 2019 ECML TT. I seem to remember that a few 90s were brought in to run some services to Leeds. Would be a great opportunity to use the 90 on passenger runs. Not to mention you'd have the wonderful variety of HSTs and 91s (maybe a few IETs too).
Yes, there was a phase when 90s were quite common on Leeds diagrams, in place of the initially-unreliable 91s. Although they had a 110mph maximum speed - versus 125mph for the 91s - the 90s had faster acceleration at lower speeds (the 91s being geared for the 140mph maximum they would never ultimately be allowed to achieve in normal service). The Leeds services having more intermediate stops than the Anglo-Scottish expresses, the 90s were able to make up with their superior acceleration what they lost due to their 110mph maximum, and were generally able to keep time. Incidentally, there was also the period when the 91s were first introduced but the mk4 DVTs were delayed, when HST power cars were used in place of DVTs. Both the 91 and the power car were under power, and the acceleration rate of the two combined was matched by nothing seen on the East Coast before or since. These 91/HST hybrid sets were, on timings designed for a 91 and DVT, capable of recovering time at a rapid rate. The introduction of the DVTs into traffic almost came as a disappointment.
Yes I heard about that. I seem to remember reading the powercar originally didn't provide any power, only ETCS, but there were some issues with having the powercar idling for so long that the only solution was to have the powercar working alongside the 91. That has made me think. We have plenty of powercars in preservation (one planned to get a Valenta engine), and with the existence of the 225Group there is a chance a full set will survive into preservation. What are the chances this could be recreated in the 2030s for a railtour or two?
I can see this being an AP TSC Class 90 style situation. A freight pack version then also (hopefully) a passenger pack version.
It would be nice if the passenger version came with a DVT I'm not sure if they officially announced that the passenger version was to follow or if it was just strongly hinted at a few months back
Why can't we have a open access TSW like TSC? Why does everything have to be limited. The class 90 was predominantly used by Intercity in passenger services. Initially they were all to be used for passenger use, but as with all British rail things they were split into sub sectors. Why can't we have at least an Intercity 90 hauling Mk3's as they did for Intercity, Virgin Trains, GNER, Great Eastern and many more.
If that were to happen, I'd wait for that pack (along with a DVT). Always preferred driving passenger over freight.
and in the end, it will always be left up to the players to sort themselves out for branding, bug, passenger varaint patches. And if anyone have the guts to do it. Make an entire dvt model to work with the JT MK3A, which i doubt.
I think Alan alluded to a passenger version somewhere down the line. Only issue is where can they run at the moment? Could be case of just waiting for the right routes to come along. GEML, maybe a backdated WCML, 2019 or early 2000s ECML, ect.
Wouldn't be much of a push on the WCML over Shap as the class 90s started there in the late 80s 88 i think, so that's only 2yrs later than the 86 timetable that's already in place.
Yeah that's a good shout. I'm just guessing based off the fact that we are getting multiple freight liveries that they would like to do the same for the passenger version. So probably when we have 2-3 applicable routes. Hopefully someone would be willing to do London Liverpool Street to Ipswich/Norwich in either the 2000s or 2019. Early 2000s means we could have a mix of liveries such as Ex-Virgin, Ex-GNER, ONE, RfD, and RES. 2019 would limit it only to GA but also allow for lots of EMUs to come into the game.
Would also need the class 82 DVT, even tho if i remember right, the class 87 ran the push-pull services from euston to glasgow for a quite a while before the 90 came on the scene.
An 86 with a DVT was fairly rare on Preston-Carlisle, but common on the Euston-Preston services, so geographically they’d fit on the upcoming Crewe-Preston route. The DVTs didn’t enter traffic until 1989 though, so it’s a bit of a stretch on era. Personally I think the operation is more interesting without DVTs anyway. I’m hoping to be able to see 86s/87s running round their train at Preston when Crewe-Preston is released.
Pretty sure Great Eastern mainline was 86s with DBSOs straight after preservation for at least a decade
Yes they did as the DBSO's were cascaded down from Scotland thanks to the introduction of 158s to replace the loco hauled services.
I think the DVT's were built specifically for the 90's although the 87's and 86's were fitted with TDM so they could be used in push pull mode. They launched the MK3 DVT as the 91's would also have MK4 DVT. All 50 90's were originally for passenger use, so the DVT's would be exclusively used on 90 MK3 stock. In the end Intercity West Coast only got 15 examples, Intercity West Coast really got a raw deal in the end.
DVTs were to save attaching and detaching locos time, capacity, workload and cost at West Coast destinations. Not for any particular type of loco. The 90s were designed for mixed traffic use which as sectorisation took its hold became less likely for individual locos as a sector would be allocated for each. Hence the first batch being IC, middle batch was Parcels and last the Freight. The locos main aim was to eliminate the 81s/85s and allow some 86s to go East Anglia. Also in 1991 Speedlink freight was abolished so the 90s already had lost some work. If Intercity wanted rid of the 86s and 87s (both still in the heavy maintanence cycles and long term strategies of the time) then many more 90s would have been needed. BR was run on a shoestring and wouldnt have probably ordered the 90s had 81s and 85s been younger and /or East Anglia not been wired....
I still find it strange that such an Intercity outpost like the Anglia mainline become part of Intercity and thus it carried-on using locomotives on such a short mainline. I suppose when planned Norwich and Norfolk were seen as a mostly leisure destination but thanks to high property prices in the South East and "the sparks effect" there was a surge in commuter traffic from Suffolk and Norfolk through the late 80s/90s. I'll have to read Ian Cowley's excellent "Anglia East" book which chronicled the electrification from Colchester to Norwich. Maybe I'll find the reason but you really could make a case for the newly refurbished 309s covering Norwich services, they weren't that much older than the 86s and Mk2s that we had and were perhaps underutilized on the sub-100mph Clacton branch. If East Anglia had been given to Network South East we would surely have seen an AC version of the Class 442 "Flying Pigs" in Norwich. Anyway, sorry, I drifted from Class 90s there.
Don't forget that the Class 93 as part of the Intercity 250 project would have primarily replaced the 87s and some 86s (the ICXC 86 fleet would have been replaced by the 87s or 90s) but John Major's privatisation killed that off.
