With the welcome release of preservation updates for Tees Valley, the change from 3-car formations to 2-car for the 101 DMU caught my eye. It does say they did it for "authenticity", but IF they are planning on releasing the Pacer for this route someday, the change would make it easier to substitute the Pacer, instead of having to create a different timetable like they did for East Coasway for the 313, yes? I'm probably reading too much into it, but something to think about.
Good spot! I really hope it does. The tees valley line is my local route. My profile pic is the 156 at Darlington on the tvl
A 142* or 143 would certainly be welcome here, as would a 141 on NTP. I hope this doesn't mean they're completely removing the centre coach from the pack - could be a useful layer in future. *142s were introduced to the route at the end of 1989, and were still in their WR chocolate & cream livery. For this reason, i think a 142 would be best suited to its own route, maybe the Durham Coast Line (hint hint ). There were already 2-car services on TVL, so the pacer could substitute onto the existing timetable - this change just means that it'd be able to sub onto all services. It did seem a little odd, to me, that the Bishop Auckland services are 3-car (mind, the services that terminate at Darlington are supposed to go all the way to Saltburn, not terminate at Middlesbrough).
Seems not, going on this post in Announcements The change from 3 car to 2 car was made to be more authentic. Because of British Rail downsizing and cutting back in the 1980s. (TVL is set in 1989) The majority of 101s in the area had all but lost their centre cars by this point. I like the idea but seems like false hope.
I saw it, and I did mention it in my OP. But, it's fun to speculate, especially when there's been nothing "new" announced in a while.
Just got to wait until the next roadmap, I have a strong feeling that something British is hiding in development
DTG please note my wallet is open for a Pacer DLC as a day1 purchase (assuming its not a bug ridden half baked effort).
A 142 would offer the most flexibility in terms of area. 143's started off on Tyneside then ended up transferred to Canton for Cardiff Valleys and some main line work followed by a split allocation between Canton and Exeter, the latter sharing duties with the 142's on Exeter area local services and the Bristol area.
Unfortunately, according to their new policy, it seems new content won't be announced via the roadmap anymore. I know they can't port it straight into TSW, but Dovetail have made the 142 for Train Simulator as well. So, there is a "precedent".
Yeah, but it was a bit pup really. I wasn't convinced by the model, and it sounds nothing like a 142. The Waggonz version which is pushing 10 years old still looks really good in comparison (think that says a lot tbh).
Well, I don't have it so I won't argue, just saying that it is something they've made in the past for Train Simulator. And the precedent of many routes/locos having made the jump from TS to TSW in the past.
Oh absolutely, but I just don't want them going anywhere near that TS1 model (since they do sometimes import and modify the 3D model, like the BR155) - I wasn't convinced at all by it.
If you buy on Day One then you're not going to know it's a bug-ridden half-baked effort until it's too late, though!
Excellent idea and you might need to consider Pacer BSI Couplers ability to form longer trains with BSI Couplers equipped DMU. That will come handy in TVL for some services that require a Pacer Sprinter combination.
Yea i know, why though? If 2 cars made it more realistic, there was seriously nothing wrong with 2 cars, im so confused
Can they technically make some services 2 or others 3, or do they all have to be same? That's been the problem with substitutions hasn't it, like the 313.
The issue was this: with the introduction of Livery Designer compatibility to the TVL 101, they found themselves in a bind, because heretofore DTG had used "alternate liveries" as a way to include multiple consist lengths (you can see this for example with the HST on GWE, and both trains on LIRR). But now, they needed the livery selection screen for the 101 for actual, you know, liveries. So Adam made the decision to abandon multiple consists and stick to just 2-car (which were the majority on TVL, and the original version had 3-cars running where they never did in real life). Ensue outrage. So Adam has somehow figured out how to have both alternate lengths and alternate liveries, which is what today's patch is supposed to accomplish
Well, that part is good to hear. I don't really like the 101, so haven't done much services with it TBH.
This isn't true on all routes and it wasn't true on TVL (not launched it since this update). It's only necessary if there are two incompatible types of train (why it's used for the HST I don't know, as I'm pretty sure it wasn't like that in TSW2020 - makes me wonder if it's future proofing for an IET DLC) - to ensure the substitution system doesn't, say, try to spawn a 150 and a 101 in the same consist.
