I remember being cramped on a 2-car 142 from Leeds to Wakey during rush hour because an HST service from Scotland had been cancelled at Leeds due to no onward train crew. Also, I had to ride these things regularly in service between Donny and sunny Scunny if I missed the TP 158 express services. They were definitely notorious for doors not opening or closing properly. Wensleydale Railway runs 90% of services using Pacers. This isn't because they don't have locos and stock, but it is a cost measure. People are welcome to go there and check out the quality of the Pacers and how bouncy etc they were. Yep, seen this happen many times in the last 3 months. We often have to give at least one door a shove once the guard has closed the doors because one didn't close correctly and won't release the interlock.
Very much looking forward to the 142. That video of the one he has modelled in original condition was excellent.
I watched a video on AP Facebook page and they have it wrong. They have left out the bit between the Guard closing the Passenger Doors and then closing his door. In the video the Doors all closed and the brakes released and the train departed. But the trains were not DOO so after the Guard closed the Passenger Doors his Local Door was still open - Only after closing that would the Traction Interlock make and the driver could release the Brakes.
Considering no other train in TS has implemented this sequence, it's no surprise really this doesn't have it either. It just seems as though you've decided to ignore 99.9% of everything that is right to get some points for finding something wrong that has no precedence in TS.
AP has a reputation for excellence and prices its products to match. It's fair to apply more exacting standards to their products.
and on the typical train there are only two doors each side plus the "Guard's" door (whichever he chooses to use and could be dedicated easily enough), it is not too much to ask ....... or is it?
On the pacers, the guard usually uses the rear most passenger door to open locally, check the platform and then proceed to unlock all other doors. When station duties are complete, the guard then closes all other doors except the one they are at, checks the platform and doors and then closes the local door. Once this is completed, they will sound the 2 note buzzer code to the driver. The above is how I've been taught anyway. There isn't a dedicated guard door as the pacers don't have doors into the cab from the platform.
AP have introduced a lot of features in their train that others don't have - so why not this? I have not ignored other features of the train but does that mean we should ignore what is wrong? I spent 28 years of my 44 year railway career as a Driver and a Guard in the Northwest working on 142s since they were introduced. So something that is wrong is going to stand out to me.
I didn't mean that there was a dedicated Guard door in the real world but it could be so in the virtual one. I have been on Pacers where the Guard doing his fare collecting has operated doors from other than the rear one although that was unusual - the back becomes the front on reversal anyway. Usually he did the described operating from the Front door if there were a large number of standing passengers (a rush hour norm in West Yorks) preventing a "dignified dash" to the rear door. It's not as if anyone is asking for a catering trolley to appear although a Steward does appear in a dining Car in a US Dining Car (creepyyyyyyyy).
Yes, each door has a panel above which can be used by the guard or other staff to open the doors. All trains these days have this feature so any door in the consist can be used. We are trained to use the rear most door so we can look down the entire train. Tbh most of the time, the guard spends their time in the rear cab. They usually only walk through the train after departing each station for a passenger count.
The guard buzzer thing is interesting. I finally managed to add guard whistle to my coaches but only after I realised that the whistle seems to only work if the coach to which it is attached as a sound file is next to the engine ( it may have been upto one coach away -its been a while) . The way to fix this is to make all coaches have a guard whistle and not just the guards van / brake coach. Its a very odd thing.
Here's a link to the liveries that will be apart of the pack: https://www.facebook.com/media/set?vanity=armstrongpowerhouse&set=a.814830307313795
And here is the manual. https://www.armstrongpowerhouse.com/free_download/manuals/APC142V2_Manual.pdf
This new class 142 pack is looking like a must have purchase for me. The TL11 engine sounds like the class 121 bubble car they have at the railway where I volunteer (although that's a manual gear change unit). I wonder if it is an original engine that has been refurbished in the bubble car (it still has Leyland badges on it). The Cummins LTA10-R engine sounds I'm very familiar with as the railway has one in regular service (ex-Northern Rail). I hope that this pack will lead to a class 143 and 144 being developed also as we are missing those in the sim (except the one that came with the Riviera line).
Its a rolling stock pack in its own right. No Prerequisites required, DTG Sold AP the Model to use. Part of a trade for DTG to include the 158EP in the Huddersfield Line
Thanks for the explanation. Does anyone know what time the 142 will be released today? Do AP usually do releases in the mornings or afternoons?
Why did they think it was appropriate to put bench seats in the Northern Spirit/Arriva Northern one?!
I'm not convinced by the animation of the doors either - they seem a bit too smooth and too perfect for air-operated collapsing doors (which I watch open and shut hundreds of times a day working on buses)
Well that's how I remember them and I used them a lot in the early 2000s between Leeds, Doncaster and Scunthorpe.
It's a fair point. How much not having those seats will genuinely affect anyone's enjoyment of this pack though, I'd say extremely minimal. Unless of course your interest is very specifically the passenger view of Northern Spirit refurbed 142s.
As built 142s have bench seats similar to a Leyland National Bus from which they were designed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_142#/media/File:Blackpool_train_inside.JPG The Merseyrail liveried units that have the awful seats - one has been preserved https://www.flickr.com/photos/rpmarks/48537757856 The ex Northern Spirit units have 2+2 seats https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_142#/media/File:142082_Interior.jpg
I'm sure 37418 will have a go at me for mentioning this. From the video the interior is wrong as it has a large Luggage/Bike rack at each end that only came in later years They did not have them as built
Didn't DTG build the model? So far every complaint of this AP product has been regarding the actual modelling, which AP doesn't do and never has. Edit Re: the door animations, if they were as notoriously well known for being clunky as Clumsy Pacer above says, then yes AP could have represented that better, may be worth dropping Richard a supprt ticket about that one if so.
anyone complaning about the price: rolling stock from other devs usually only includes one livery, one interior etc... I would rather pay more and have it all in one pack. I wish there was german payware dev doing this for german rolling stock. Go and try to buying all variants of the "Einheitsloks" on virtual railroads and see how much you end up with. If you include all variants of cab cars and n-wagen, you will end up somewhere around 500 Euros. I call that expensive!
Not at all, it's a valid point. How much it actually matters to the enjoyment of the pack by most people though; barely. This is my issue with a lot of comments, they seem to lack any sense of proportion and strike me more as a , "HA, SPOTTED SOMETHING WRONG", than something actually meaningfully detrimental.
Looking at this video: I'd say the movement of the door is pretty consistent and not very clunky. The obvious thing the AP pack doesn't have though is each door leaf closing at a different time.
Agreed. I can't point to any other developer who consisently offers this level of comprehensive pack for whole classes on a long-term basis. That doesn't nullify errors that still exist but a sense of proportion is probably in order.
With AP's approach you have to pay for variants you have no interest in. With VR's approach you just pick the one(s) that interests you. That's not to say either approach is better, but £30 is a high entry price. VR's entry price is about half that.
I honestly can't imagine the furore if AP had divided this pack into three and charged say £11.99 for each volume...! Would be dreadfully messy when it comes to scenario requirements too. Sometimes simpler is better.
