Just for that they should backdate it even more, also overhead wires would ruin the good parts of the route if they ever go pass the forth railroad bridge. not every bloody route has to be up to date
I wouldn't mind having several versions of the same route. After all, as someone said elsewhere, today's present is tomorrow's past.
Ruin the route how exactly? All I see is more options to drive more trains and create a busier route. Oh yeah I forgot it would be too modern, maybe back dating the route to the 18th century is better.
My mistake, I talked about Class 385. Saw no 350s. You could also just create a busier route by adding trains. No need for electrification Unfortunately what I found when collecting ingame data is most certainly not a real timetable, not yesterday, not today, not tomorrow. (The timetable just does not make much sense.) The route could definitely be much busier just by adding more trains / making a timetable based on a real WTT
Just my opinion of course, but I've never found OHLE to be very pleasing to the eyes. Neither in the sim nor in the real world. I much prefer either non-electrified or third rail, which makes the scenery aesthetically a lot more pleasing to look at.
It’s a coastal route so the bloody overhead wire poles with ruin the view of the coast. take your modern stuff and put in a different route
Dubbed = Fake Class 397s TransPennine Express Edinburgh - Manchester Airport (Edinburgh - Haymarket) 4 mins journey time As per Manchester Commuter.
Think I posted previously that the Skyhook timetable is very deficient, very few trains after about 1800 when in reality there is an intensive service pretty much through to midnight, even on the Leven branch.
Really hope they either fix this or when the I7C is released that we get a full timetable. Very nearly cracking route(maybe biased as local to me)
If it was a separate route then fine. If they changed the time period by adding OHEL and thus rendering the class 158/170 unsuitable then for me it's a no. We have enough electric routes it's nice to have a modern diesel route. Same argument for GWE. I see posts saying it should be rebuilt and electrified all the way to Reading. Why? I like the diesel networkers. As a separate DLC then it would be fine.
Didn't they use an emergency timetable if I recall? It's a shame as neither the original timetable or the Skyhook one seem particularly busy. Maybe it will get an update with this HST we aren't supposed to know about!
It’s an interesting conversation regarding this OLE business, especially because there is no planned OLE installation both IRL & in game. In terms of making the route more modern, or being against it - the point is mute. It’s one of (if not the) most modern iterations of a route with have in game after the Leven update. Seems weird to have a back and forth over wanting/not wanting an update that’s already happened. In terms of further modernisation it will (as discussed above) be in the form of battery operated trains, so for TSW if any such update would happen, it will be little more than a layer or new TT. IMO this subject matter of modern vs old is always too kneejerky rather than a decent conversation. In the case of Fife Circle we got an entire new branch for free & it clearly didn’t ruin the route ambiance on account of people missing the fact that it’s the most modern route in the game.
I thought the battery section would only be for the Forth bridge and the rest of the route OHL. Maybe that isn't the case. I wasn't arguing against the era, it's fine as it is. But there seemed to be an assertion that route should be "modernised" at some point with OHL.
Certainly an interesting idea for that dilemma, but I imagine it would be something that ends up in OLE rollout over the bridge anyway, or just going with a battery fleet & no OLE for most of Fife. Or of course they do what most other operators are doing & stick with diesel/electric bi-modes. As usual with these ideas though, I doubt anything will come to fruition in the next decade, at least.
That’s understandable. For me though it would be what’s true to its real life counter-part, so when the IRL route does get the OHLE upgrade I’d hope Fife gets a complete makeover. Plus that extension to Dundee. I agree, I think the GWE remaster has a lot of character being partially electrified with OHLE. As long as I can drive my green cucumber on it then I’m happy with that
It was me that originally thought they used an emergency timetable. This turned out to be wrong, as even the emergency timetable had less gaps than than the one Skyhook provided.
Ah okay. Maybe they should have used the emergency one then! It's better in parts but worse in others. Skyhook seem to have gone a little quiet so maybe things are happening in the background.
Actually that might be pretty cool tbf Maybe not the 18th century, but didn't Britain have a lot more tracks in the 1950s and 60s before the beeching cuts? I wonder how busy it could be with even greater track options compared to now
I would say there is more track/lines now. Using London as an example. In that era (50/60’s) it was probably more condensed with a cluster of lines in a particular area, then branching out on singular lines to other area’s of the country. That would be my take, but I’m not really qualified to answer that question. Not an era I’ve researched or I’m interested in.
Yes Britain had many more railways before the Beeching cuts. Not just country branch lines but many urban and secondary lines disappeared as well as the UK's newest main line.
The GB rail network is just over half the size it was 66 years ago. In 1960, there were approximately 18,000 of railway routes in Britain. In 2022, there were 9,864 miles. Also, for comparison. In 1960, there were approximately 14,000 steam, electric & diesel locos, 3,000 DMUs and 1,500 EMUs. I'd be more specific with the numbers but I've just about had it with spreadsheets for today. At the start of 2025 (I'm still putting data together for 2026) there were 1,206 locomotives, 2789 EMUs and 1,197 DMUs, though obviously multiple unit numbers don't take into account that there are a lot of units that are longer than 4 or 5 cars these days.
Regarding the OHLE installation of Fife circle, it is most definitely happening as we speak. Stanchions have been installed months ago at least from Haymarket West Jct past the airport to Dalmeny, however I’m unsure if any have been installed in Fife as yet. There was a mini exhibition last year about the Forth crossings, and it was mentioned that there was no viable solution for OHLE on “The Bridge”, due to clearance issues with structural steelwork. The fact it’s a listed structure would also complicate matters I image. Therefore the battery-electric trains is the way forward for the route. As for the aesthetics, yes the complex areas of OHLE do rather get in the way, especially on picturesque rural routes, but I grew up near the WCML, so it’s all I’ve ever known, and nobody is allowed to steal JT’s 86s and 87s from me! As an aside, this is my local route, but I’m holding out for massive sale (Xbox user - woe is me) almost to punish Rivet for the appalling state it was initially released in.
Maybe Rivet can do something like they did with the Island Line, one version with the old stock and a more modern version with new stock. To be honest, I think it's a bad idea to upgrade a route to a moderner era and you can't play the older one. When for example the Niddertalbahn gets an upgrade and only new stock is running on the line, I wouldn't be happy. However I would love to see a modern Niddertalbahn, but I also like to keep the old one.
Yup it’s going as far as Dalmeny & no further (though I will add even that project end date has come & gone). As for where it comes upto on the other side of the bridge, nothing is concrete yet other than sections they’d like to do. They’re some way off anything actually happening.
Final Boss dog will always prevail. Anyhow it’s kind of derailing in here. Let’s get back on track and keep this about Fife circle. If Rivet were to update this route again I wonder if they would add in the OHLE From Edinburgh to Dalmeny. If they were to extend even further up north this would be a good time to update the Edinburgh part. Not getting my hopes up though… Another thing that interests me is DTG were originally going to do Edinburgh - Dundee for TSW but they handed it over to Rivet. Does anyone think this route would have been better if DTG had developed it instead ????.
Knowing that now I wish DTG built the route instead. As pointed out by others, the stretch between Markinch to Dundee would’ve added an extra 19 miles. Markinch is another one of those cases of routes ending in illogical places.
That's one of the things that annoyed me a bit. Fife Circle released not too long after Gospel Oak to Barking, which is one of the most well-executed routes Dovetail has ever made, whereas on Fife Circle the included train has horrific run sounds, the timetable was completely wrong, and we had to wait what felt like a decade to drive the class 158 on it, only for that timetable to feel like it had been thrown together in ten minutes. To be honest, Fife Circle was one of my dream routes, and when it was initially announced I was more excited for it than I had been for more than any other route. If it was made to the same standard as GOBLIN then it'd no doubt be one of my favourites. However I have barely touched it due to it's current state.
It was one of my favourite routes in TSC & yeah, disappointed to say the least when it comes to TSW’s version. It’s certainly improved but the 170 on that route & the route itself still leaves a lot to be desired. The 158 TT was the cherry on top for the whole debacle.
Still one of my favourite routes, hope the mythical technically unannounced Scotrail HST turns up one day.
Yes. I’ve been wondering about that HST also. Do you think it will be included in the upcoming HST farewell pack from Grump studios ?.
So IETs are replacing every other type of train in the UK? Well, not here in East Anglia. In 10 years' time we'll still have these high speed trains and driving them is very different to driving an IET.
Cool, I’m in Scotland on one of the lines that uses the class 43, we actually had a class 37 on the Caledonian sleeper today
Nice, enjoy them because Scotrail are inviting tenders for new trains right now and having either of those trains pulling or pushing your services will soon be a distant memory. As a former railwayman I often find myself conflicted between my love of traditional traction and the need to provide a modern, reliable, safe mode of transport. In that respect I feel the desires of rail enthusiasts have to come second. I really miss the slam-door EMUs because they are what I grew up travelling on, would I feel safe commuting on them now I know how unsuitable they are in a high speed crash? No. I have vivid memories of the Clapham Disaster, Mk1 EMUs ripped apart by relatively low-speed collisions. My grandad called them "soulless modern rubbish" and his grandad may have had similar views on the streamlined BR steam locos. Whereas my nieces and nephews can't believe that you could sit on a train doing 125mph and just open a door when you wanted. We shouldn't still have busy, important railway lines operated with diesel trains in 2026. It's great that you can still ride behind 43s and 37s as an enthusiast but 60 year old locos, even 40 year old locos only really belong on railtours and preserved railways. You may not find IETs interesting but my main issue isn't their commonality (rail fans in the 1970s said the same about HSTs), it is their suitability for the services they run on. The IET is safe, available with dual power sources and has features that passengers expect, my problem with them is that on most versions, the seating and seating configuration are rubbish compared to the low-floor Stadler Flirt 3. I'd be delighted if a Deltic turned up on a London to Norwich service again, but it's a modern transport system, so Stadlers it is.
Ppppffff IET’s being safe is like me saying swimming in nuclear waste is good for the body at least when a class 43 and other older classes crash there’s a high chance of survival, IETs are ticking time bombs due to their unique engine which has the downsides of both Diesel and electric. Modern railways in England are some of the most soulless things in this country, we when from having great trains like the 86, 87, 90, 91 which were really reliable and safe but nnnnoooo you lot replace them with these cheap copy and paste future death traps Also you say no major railway in the uk should be diesel, well pay up then because that sure as hell won’t pay for themselves If you want a good train that would have be perfect for the modern day then bring back the ATP-E which could do 150 mhp
37403 was on Caledonian Sleeper. Nothing to do with Scotrail. 73s are very unreliable so they use 37s/66s as required but there is no plans to replace them atm.
Yes of course, silly me. The 73's been a surprisingly long-living locomotive but it sounds like they're not going to be allocated to Edinburgh for much longer. It's a bit like when a few went to Merseyrail, it just seemed weird seeing them away from the Southern Region.
Aren't they needed on the Fort William and Inverness portions to act as ETHELs ? Or is it a plan to use the former Nightstars generators (ERS) instead ?
Stonehaven/Carmont would like a word. Thank whatever deity you believe in that only 9 people were on that HST considering 3 were killed, giving a 33% fatality rate. Compare that to Grayrigg which was the Pendolino that crashed going 20MPH faster and only had 1 death out of 109 passengers and crew. HSTs may have been 'good enough' 20 years ago but they are pretty rusted and therefore their structure is significantly weakened by now. Heck even in both the Ufton Nervet and Southall incident one MK3 folded in half. Does the IET have reliability issues on the horizon? Probably, because of the lack of actual electrification on the GWML, Is it going to be safer in a crash than a 50 year old rust bucket, Absolutely. Edit: I just found out about the Shap derailment, a Pendolino hit a landslide at 83MPH and it stayed upright with all coaches staying inline and connected, 0 deaths, 4 injuries out of 95 occupants. I personally have a hunch if Carmont had've been a 170/IET/Anything built in the last 30 years instead of a HST everyone would've walked away
The difference is the hst was in a area where it has a hill which it fell down leading to more deaths and damages if a 158 or 170 crashed like that it would be no survivors. hell in this case the 390 probably would have been worse if it was running the standard formation 9 to 11 cars, that would probably made it fully down the hill. even a short formation would run into problems since of the tilting mechanism, which would cause it to be angle, so A it would have smashed into wall next to the line probably killing at least 50% of the passengers B it would have sent flying down the hill same as the hst but due to the more curved shape of the 390 it would have made it must farther down which would have lead to more deaths
Just a reminder that the Grayrigg 390 went down an embankment, the RAIB report specifically calls out the lack of crash-worthiness standards of the HSTs. "Would a modern train have behaved differently? A train built to modern crashworthiness standards (those applicable since the introduction of Railway Group Standard GM/RT 2100 in July 1994) would have had a number of design features that are intended to provide better protection for occupants and keep vehicles in line should they collide with an obstacle or derail. These include: a) Anti-climb features (either as serrated pads fitted to the vehicle ends or built into the couplers) and energy absorbing vehicle ends to prevent override and consequential uncontrolled structural collapse in collisions. b) More robust couplers which are better able to resist the forces which couplers are subjected to in derailments, without failure or uncoupling. c) Bogie retention features, so that in an accident, the bogies remain attached to the vehicle bodies as far as is possible. The refurbished HST that derailed at Carmont was designed and constructed before these standards came into force. While it is not possible to be certain about what would have happened in the hypothetical situation with different rolling stock in the same accident, RAIB considers it more likely than not that the outcome would have been better if the train had been compliant with modern crashworthiness standards." https://assets.publishing.service.g...14fa20014f3aa3c/R022022_240111_Carmont_v2.pdf Page 25. If you scroll down to the recommendations 12-20 are regarding the HST itself. Look I get it the HST is a neat train and was very good for the 1970s and 1980s, but the moment things like the 220/221 and 390s were being built it was obsolete and fit for withdrawal. I dread to think what would happen if one of the HSTs that is now in Mexico has a crash with some GEvo or SD70 or whatever.
I remember some of the rail press after Grayrigg, even before RAIB issued their substantive report it was reported by rail experts that the Class 390 shell performed superbly and saved multiple lives. I seem to recall that all of the serious injuries were due to the effects of being shaken around in the crash. One commentator even suggested that if trains had seat belts like all other fast passenger traction does, the death toll could have been fewer, possibly zero. However, before the DfT and rail bosses could slap each other on the back about their safety record Private Eye pointed out that another type of train used in the area the Pacers had shown in a collision at Winsford that they are at the other end of crash-worthiness. I refused to go on them at all but I'm painfully risk adverse. I love challenging people who used to say "Health & Safety has gone too far" blaming it on a litigious culture, the answer to which is "do you miss higher disaster death tolls back in the good old days?".
For ambience you can’t beat a lovely old steam heat Mark One TSO. However I remember reading a very graphic account (fortunately no pictures) of the Clapham rail crash from one of the first people on the scene. It was not pleasant, let’s just say that.
Aviation related instead of trains, but a obvious example's the contrast between the United 232 crash with the Asiana 214. They're very different accidents, but a interesting comparison is the "spin" they did when they hit the ground. It is a testament to modern design standards that the 777 pretty much held together entirely and saved almost everyone, compared the the 40 something percent fatality rate of the 232 incident. That's just one comparison, but anyone who does extensive aviation research knows you see all sorts of patterns in that regard. Even with our own modern woes like the Boeing 737 Max crisis, honestly we're still in a much better place with aircraft safety then we were even 20 years ago, much less 50 or 100. Moving back more toward railroading, I cringe when I read people on old forums going about how "Drivers need to be drivers" and that PTC is just a crutch for bad ones. When I've read so many cases of aviation accidents not only happening despite experienced crews, but ironically some have been caused from people trusting "experienced" crew members over their gut. Conversely a number of incidents have been credited as turning out as well as they did because there was a freshly trained newbie at the controls funnily enough. And that's not getting into the fact lot of drivers intentionally broke speed to show boat or try and gain back time. There's some areas where the old was better, undeniably train travel in places like the US had far better coverage. I'd definitely argue that having 100 kind of big railroads is better than having like, six giants due to the benefits competition brings. But then you read things like the NYC servicing freshly fired Niagara's with asbestos suits so that they could work on them without needing the boiler cool down... Yeah, not sure how that was ever considered reasonable practice.
Don't forget your astronaut suit when you leave home ! Nothing human is infallible. Humans will be banned from driving vehicles sooner or later.
As pointed out in an earlier post, the Forth rail bridge will not be electrified. It's why Scotrail will be ordering BEMUs so they can cross the bridge in battery mode.
