Hi, I drove Class 377s on the London to Brighton line for Southern, from near their inception in 2004, until 2009 when I was medically retired as a driver, due to late onset Type 1 diabetes. Firstly let me say that I love the East Coastway route in TSW2 and the 377 especially. There is a lot to like and it feels quite immersive and reminscent of the real cab. (If you place your PC and monitor in a narrow wardrobe with your chair just outside of it, it would almost feel as claustrophobic!) I just wanted to offer some feedback and suggestions about a couple of the dynamic elements of the 377 simulation in TSW. I don't have anything scientific for you but have offered you some decimal values below, to appear scientific, and give you a feel for what I believe the true values should be (as a decimal of the current values) for traction and braking:- Braking This is the area that I feel needs the most work. I can only wish that the Electrostars were as effective when braking as your model is! The 1st notch of braking provides definitive braking but it's effect is much more gradual than in the simulation. Notch 2 is closer to reality but still too effective. Notch 3 in the sim provides an huge amount of braking force, far greater than that provided by the train in an emegency application. I'm not sure any train can deccelerate at this level. So here are the decimal values, where I am proposing a decimal to represent what I feel the braking force should be, against what it currently is in the sim (represented as 1.0):- B 1 (0.65) B 2 (0.8) B 3 (0.7) Acceleration Acceleration feels more on point overall. There are a couple of points in the acceleration profile that feel a little laboured, and some that feel overpowered. Here we are:- P1 (0.9) P2 (0.9) P3 (1.0) P4 (1.1) Acceleration / Braking force on driver (camera) This one is simply about the 'lurch' that is evident in the sim when the PBC is moved to any different position. From an entertainment point of view it's quite nice, but even then is greatly overdone. There isn't really any force felt by the driver between PBC movements, not even when, for example, moving from a power setting to notch 3 or emergency braking. However I understand why you might want to use this effect to add to immersion. I'd suggest reducing the effect to around 0.25 of what it currently is. This will still result in a nice little camera jump, but would feel more realistic Wheelslip I have noticed that short bursts of wheelslip are evident in some circumstances when the sim is set to Autumn (probably Winter too but I have not used the sim in Winter yet). It is represented in the sim by a very short rise in traction motor rpm whine. This is actually far better than the wheelslip simpulation in some simulated trains (eg. in TS) where wheelslip is greatly exagerated. However, the propensity for wheelslip is far too high in the 377 in TSW2, and more pertinently, it occurs at far too high speeds. I've seen / heard the wheelslip effect - while accelerating - in the 377 at 70mph in P4 before; which would never happen. Once traction is established enough to be propelling the train at 70mph, you are never going to experience accelerating wheelslip. You may see problems when braking too hard at such speeds, but never when accelerating. Wheelslip is occurring almost everytime I pull off from a station in the 377, when the season is set to Autumn. This is very unrealistic. Wheelslip in the dry in Autumn is actually pretty rare in my experience. It happens in localized areas, close to specific tree types. It's not something that occurs due to temperature, or other aspects of the season itself. An easy suggestion I would offer would be to code the train so that the current wheelslip simulation becomes inactive above 30mph. It would also be more realistic to code it so that it occurs around 1 in 10 (even this is too often but I appreciate you have an entertainment need to meet) of the current occurrances. You'll be pleased to hear that this is the end of my list of suggested improvements. The train is fantastic. The panel is a little too clean (they were somewhat worn and scratched by around Spring 2005!) but the rest of the depicted cab is wonderful. One thing I will not offer one 'notch' of criticism about is the sounds - they are literally perfect. From the motors to the doors. Cheers, David
Thanks David for taking the time to write about the east Coastway. My local line is the east Coastway so it's nice to hear some feedback about one of the units I frequently travel on (the other being 313s) I hope DTG will take your points into consideration as it'll help make the SIM more realistic.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge of the 377, it's nice to hear from someone who has actually driven them. The 377 is probably my favourite train in TSW, mainly due to the sounds which to me sounded great in TSW2020 which make it very immersive. The route it's on probably helps, as in my opinion East Coastway was by far the best built route in TSW2020 for scenery and smoothness, although there are some issues with it in TSW2 which could do with ironing out. I definitely agree with your braking point as I always felt that they were a bit strong, being able to slow down to a stop from 70mph in 700yards in notch 2 seemed a bit unrealistic to me.
Thanks for the feedback on the 377 David. I wonder what your thoughts were initially on the limited field of view forwards through the windscreen when you began driving them. In TSW I’ve always preferred the more open view from a full width windscreen and wondered if the relatively narrow view was a deliberate design measure to focus the drivers attention on the job at hand. This is the only thing I dislike about driving them in the sim and it’s such a pleasure to occasionally take a class 66 down the line to admire the scenery.
Hi, As far as I'm aware, the single only reason for units with 'pillar box' views as we used to call them, is to accomodate a gangway connection. From a real world driving perspective, whilst the small forward view area is noticeable, it doesn't restrict effective view as much in real life as it does in the sim. We'd sometimes lean forward a little if we needed to look slightly to the right of the forward field. Our eyes are analogue and as a marginally long-sighted person, I never had issues with visibility from the cab of the 377. I drove Networkers before the 377 and can't deny there's no comparison in terms of how much better the visibility is in non-gangway fronted units. But the Networkers were so cold in the cab in winter and the Electrostars snug as a bug.... In terms of the simulated environment, non-gangway fronted trains are far, far, better. We get to see so much more of that scenery that someone laboured over!
Excellent post. I’ve not tried the 377 with the new adhesion feature in TSW2 but it was a lovely train to drive in TSW2020. I hope DTG take your feedback on board and adjust it as necessary, as it is a new feature and therefore needs good feedback to get any future tweaks right. The more realistic the driving the better as I see it.
Great post. Even though I’m not a driver myself, I’ve always thought the physics on the 377 were a bit ‘off’. Regarding the motor sounds, I feel like these could be done better. In TSW it’s just one ‘whine’ which gradually fades as you gain speed. In real life this goes through a series of ‘changes’ as you gain speed and accelerate. Everything else sounds good though. Particularly the idling sounds.
Hey, appreciate your post! Even if nothing might change from this, I found it to be really informative for someone to compare the simulation to the real train in this way. Your explanation of going from "1" in the simulation to what you feel would be the right finetuning was very relatable. Interesting to hear that the sound is spot on, somehow there are always mods that change the sound to be "realistic", I believe I saw one for this route at some point. When according to an irl driver the sound is already realistic!
Hey David, this is a great thread and thank you for taking the time to give such detailed feedback, I've actually been playing the East Coastway myself recently so it's especially interesting to read your thoughts as a former driver. I can't promise what you've suggested will get implemented however it will be looked into, you might also have more luck with discussion for any future suggestions you have in the suggestion thread.
OP is the kind of response to the train physics in the game I would like to see more of in the future. Some kind of feedback from real-life train operators is greatly appreciated. I really hope the proposed changes to acceleration/braking values will be added to the Class 377.
I follow everyone else in thanking you for the feedback! I have a question about the brake suggestions. I read somewhere a while ago from a 377 driver that it takes 36 seconds to brake from 90mph in emergency or step 3 (I can't remember which). I could've sworn this was the exact time it took for the 377 to brake in step 3 from the same speeds in TSW2020. I haven't tried the 377 in TSW2 yet but do you have any input on these numbers (wether they are completely wrong or if they correspond to full brake or emergency). If I remember correctly the class 377 has enhanced emergency brakes so you actually get an increase in brake force compared to step 3.
Really? I always thought the sounds were a bit off. I've always found that Electrostars, at about 25mph, have a slight Mark 3-derived sound, but the TSW 377 sounds a bit too electronic after the initial acceleration period.
You’re not wrong. Watch this video from 2:00 onwards. You’ll hear that the motors have different ‘phases’ as the train accelerates. In TSW it’s just one constant (software made?) sound which slowly fades out. Also, the track joint sounds are completely wrong for an Electrostar train. They’ve just used some recycled sounds for these from something lightweight sounding.