I tried some experiments tonight on Arosa. I made a scenario in SP running from Arosa to Chur. I ran the same thing four times - basically I uncoupled cars, took a set down - restarted and took one more and so on. loco on its own - fine gets all the way down on dynamics only loco + 1 car - equally fine loco + 2 car - same loco + 3 car - same loco + 4 car - derail Now, this either means that four cars is enough to trigger the problem, or there is something wrong with the fourth car (the brake van). I can't find any place where I can put another set to join them in SP - everything is tightly signalled on Arosa so you can't really play around with shunting to make up your own adhoc train sets. So Rivet or DTG - since you've got the editor - try making up a train with four normal cars and see what happens - or loco and brakevan and see what happens. Paul
The Tourist Excursion scenario you have four coaches and a loco front and back. It was a nightmare to bring down, the train brake wasn't enough and had to use the dynamic brake, both were up in the 90% range just to try and keep control. The brake physics seem way off. I'm sure the vacuum pipe pressure should drop much lower than it does.
I haven't got as far as you seem to have, but on the Arosa Northbound trip (which, IIRC, is three or so coaches and a couple of empty log wagons), I eventually found best control on the 6% down gradients was to set the vacuum break such that 50% dynamic brake kept things roughly to a set speed, then just finessed the dynamic brake up/down as rolling resistance and/or gradient varied. But to avoid derailing in some places, I found it necessary to dial back the dynamic brake, and to go well slower than the line speed, e.g. in the first passing loop. This lost me time against timetable however.
I just had the dynamic brake on 100% and the vaccum brake at minimum and I made it the whole way down... Due to the complaints about coaches derailing and difficulties to drive the loco, I wonder if Rivet should have released the route with the Allegra EMU:s instead?
I'm not convinced that it's down to the loco being too complicated, but instead is a result of dynamic brakes suffering from issues in TSW. When you use the Dynamic Brakes, the HUD indications go mad as you cross any point work, which isn't normal...
Something odd is going on. Assuming it’s the backwards and forwards jostling that is causing the derailments, I have found that the jostling stops on the uphill services if you make sure you are accelerating through the points, and thus stretching the train out. Not much use on the downhill services of course. I would hope that Rivet are doing more extensive experimentations to resolve the issue. Are all the derailments occurring on points, I’ve not had one yet?
None of my derailments have been on points but always in curves and always when there is also a gradient change. I'm going to run the tourist trip tonight - sounds interesting with two locos. Paul
That second loco in Tourist Excursion is just for cab change on Langweis viaduct, only death weight to drive up and down the line. At first a thought it provides aditional traction forces but no... Or is there some hidden "banking com" function?
I stopped half way up the hill and I tried to switch it on and release its brake thinking that perhaps then it might provide power and I then jumped out of the cab only to have it drive away with the train in the opposite direction!
The Ge 4/4 III locos can work double headed in multiple, but not as splitted locos. There is no banking function. However, they can work together with control cars BDt 1751-1758 as shuttle trains (push/pull). But we dont have any control cars for Arosa yet. But i doubt Rivet has implemented that function...
I'm not sure of the mechanics of the track but I had a walk around one of the areas where I derailed and noticed this height difference on the inner rails at points. It may just be graphical and nothing of consequence, but in case it matters. It's worth noting the shallow angle points near Chur don't have this height difference, only the higher angle points dotted throughout the route.
Interesting ! But really annoying, I didn't manage yet to achieve one complete service whithout derailing, which is a bit disapointing for a 30$ DLC...
I've derailed on points and curves and even straight bits . Real track is much like what you see there. Ideally all railhead should be the same height but the stuff moves with age and can even wear differently. A small difference shouldn't matter in reality but it might in game. joulz75 uphill if you keep your speed under control you should be fine, down hill watch my how-to video and hopefully it will help you
I’ve had one derailment, on a set of points, and although I had messed up a little with transitioning between dynamic brake and vacuum brake, not being as smooth as I should have been, I would have stayed on the tracks in a real train I reckon. I think I’ve been close to bouncing off the track many times going from Chur when the speed set jostles the train about on a flat section. I doubt the design of the trains in real life would allow a bit of forward and backward motion between coaches to shake the cab as violently as it does in game or derail a real train, and the track has always felt a bit dubious in parts, so I was interested to see those blatant level matching issues in the pictures above. As well as battling with the real business of driving a train on a tricky track, we are also battling with the track and train physics of the route in the game being slightly wrong. I’m beginning to get the feeling that a successful run relies on luck as much as judgement and only the guys at Rivet (with help from DTG if they require it) can sway that back to being based on judgement alone. Then we can enjoy the route.
I've done plenty of successful runs using the method from my video stujoy - I agree with your thinking that both the physics of track and train are slightly wrong and they contribute together to cause the derailments.
I haven’t had a single derail yet, but I have experienced the cause. If when it starts “buffeting” or “rocking back and forth” gently increase the vac brake until it stops, then remove it you can then continue. This makes keeping time very difficult though (downhill I drive as much dynamic as needed (up to 100%) then add vac if I need more)
Could it be possible that the piece of straight track between two curves on these derail-locations are too short? Or otherside the wheel axles are too long for those short curve change?
