Class 465 Discussion

Discussion in 'PC Discussion' started by helderbrincolas, Jan 27, 2021.

  1. helderbrincolas

    helderbrincolas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2019
    Messages:
    408
    Likes Received:
    718
    Because the 422 makes a dense commuter services like the 375,377, 423, M7 and M3 , but on SEHS doesn't make any sense to wait 1min for loading the passengers on a 375 service.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Northerner

    Northerner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2020
    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    664
    Personally, I think it'd be better to have 30 seconds boarding time for all services, including the 395; it'd make it make the timetable much easier to stick to and make up time if you're late.
     
    • Like Like x 6
  3. helderbrincolas

    helderbrincolas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2019
    Messages:
    408
    Likes Received:
    718
    Agree
     
  4. heyitspopcorn

    heyitspopcorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2017
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    706
    Hi, Matt,

    If a user purchases the 465, will all of those services switch to the 465? Or will it just be a 'random chance' of the 465 being substituted in for the 375? A similar system was used on Peninsula Corridor, where all of the Baby Bullet services were included in the base route, but it seems like Baby Bullet services can still occur with the F40PH and Nippon-Sharyo gallery cars, even if the user has the Baby Bullet loco add-on purchased and installed.

    I personally would rather have the 465 used on all of the correct services, but I'm not sure if that is possible within the confines of the current TSW2 technology.

    Thanks!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Vaffelen

    Vaffelen Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2018
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    36
    I believe some midday Dover bound service are run by the 465, so that would be Rochester to Faversham I'm guessing in this case.
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  6. Higgybaby90

    Higgybaby90 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2016
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    215
    The question of making the full timetable for the base route DLC (with the base rolling stock, even if being "Wrong") has to be asked for every new DLC, I guess.
    On one side, more trains and services are always a good thing. But on the other side it should not make it impossible to later add the correct trains.
    On SEHS it seems to be possible to add these services with the 375 and with loco DLC we get the more correct 465 (and that way more variety/realism), so I think it is a good decision.
    Other very good example was the Caltrain route with the later added trainset.

    On other routes it could be a bad decision. For example the choice to add all ICE services on HMA with the ICE 3 from the base DLC did probably make it (nearly) impossible to bring any other ICE trainset on the route later, since these trains have very different train characteristics (length,...).
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. ARuscoe

    ARuscoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    7,680
    Likes Received:
    7,126
    Personally I disagree with the addition of incorrect services to the route, given DTGs normal practice of being as appropriate as possible, then again the 465 should be a 700 anyway so I guess it's "wrong either way". Without creating the 700 you're sort of lost on that bit of the route given the 465 don't run much on GRV-GLM any more (since Thameslink)

    Would I prefer you didn't introduce those services and waited for the DLC? I guess there's two points on this
    If you had left those services out but actually said officially that the 465s would add in those 2Lxx (9Pxx) services to the route it would have made people sit up and say "Actually I might buy that and get some more to the route" so to my mind that trick has been missed
    Also people would understand that the limit of services would be what we have now and that any "additional stock DLC" would not be increasing services, something which has been spoken of on here in relation to the 465 DLC

    So I guess the only way to extend the service list on the route using the 465 (or 466) would be an expansion either to Paddock Wood or Sheerness (nudge nudge)
     
  8. ARuscoe

    ARuscoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    7,680
    Likes Received:
    7,126
    I would imagine the loading time is part of the core config for the route, and this means that if one train loads for 60 seconds they all do. Haven't tested that theory but it makes sense.
    IRL 375 services don't load very quickly as the doors aren't high capacity (like on the 376) so about a minute dwell time would be accurate enough. Don't forget these are regional trains rather than out and out commuter ones. Those are generally operated by the 700s, 465s and 376s further into London than Medway (ie Orpington & Dartford)
     
  9. FD1003

    FD1003 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    2,514
    Likes Received:
    3,694
    As I said on various german routes there are different boarding times even for base layers:

    In HRR and RRO the 422 S-Bahn services load in 30/45s and the 425/DoStos RE/RB load in 1m

    Same for the S-Bahn layer in SKA
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Shaun123

    Shaun123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2018
    Messages:
    353
    Likes Received:
    904
    If you play the Gravesend-Rainham services, there is just a 30 second loading/dwell time, which is much more accurate.

    For the High Speed service, 1 minute is accurate and in reality is a 1 and a half minutes at some stations, such as Ebbsfleet and Gravesend.

    This is a question for Matt TrainSim-Matt - is it possible to have different load times at different stations? For example: 1 minute at Strood, Rochester etc, but 30 seconds at smaller stations, like Newington & Teynham? Is 1 and a half minutes possible to simulate even, as mentioned above for some HS1 locations?
     
    • Like Like x 3
  11. bkgsim

    bkgsim New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2021
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Its a bit of hindsight, but along with many other people I think, I would've preferred the *actual* timetable from the beginning, not a covid timetable nor a semi fictional one. For the base, this would've been 2tph London St Pancras - Faversham, 2tph London Victoria to Faversham (1xxx continuing to Dover Priory and Ramsgate usually alternating), and 1tp2h London Victoria to Dover Priory (2xxx Class 465 + 466 6-car service). This would partially bridge the dull area from Rochester Bridge Junction and Springhead Junction with a frequency of 2tph without needing to add fictional services, its only 3tph in game currently so the difference would be minimal for me personally.

    However, the problem here would then be the 465 runs a service every 2 hours, from London Victoria to Dover Priory via Denmark Hill which makes no logical case for the 465 addon. If you did want to go semi-fictional to make the 465 add-on more worthwhile the more realistic service here would be London Charing Cross to Gillingham (as SE never had any regular services terminating at Rainham) in replacement of the 9xxx TL services which would be operated by Networkers when the addon arrives, which would set the route back a few years.

    As for the future addition of the 465 on the current timetable, your additions seem reasonable although an accurate timetable would be preferred, I'm not optimistic in seeing that now. Only one thing that concerns me now about the 465s paths in game, is the formations. Generally the London Victoria workings are 6 cars, formed of a 465 and a 466, and the Charing X runs could often be 10 car, so if you've not got plans for the 466 to be included with the 465, we'll be seeing fictional formations to match the fictional services. I don't know how long there is until release, but given its soon I'd be incredibly impressed if a 466 could be made from scratch now, but I can hope xD

    I'm looking forward to a high quality representation of the Networker, and with the 465 add-on comes a chance to make up for some of the shortcomings of SEHS. It'd be a real shame to see that opportunity wasted.
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  12. hightower

    hightower Guest

    I’m the total opposite (not just disagreeing with you for the sake of it). I far prefer the route to have life off the starting line and if that’s it for some people (the more ‘casual’ player) then fine. For everyone else who buys it the new loco adds further variety and realism. A win win.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 10, 2021
    • Like Like x 5
  13. ARuscoe

    ARuscoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    7,680
    Likes Received:
    7,126
    Maybe it's in the layer then (or station as someone further down said)
     
  14. ARuscoe

    ARuscoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    7,680
    Likes Received:
    7,126
    A win win for the customer... For me there's little incentive to buy it if its only a different train running the same lines/services/timetable, then again I'm the sort who hated (in fact avoided) F2 cancel in TSx as I want the scenarios to be as authored.
     
  15. hightower

    hightower Guest

    Totally agree. I think it has to depend on the route. For example, you wouldn’t want all the available services on HMA represented by just the couple of trains that came with the route. On the flip side SEHS would have been dead without these added services and they are a welcome addition.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. ARuscoe

    ARuscoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    7,680
    Likes Received:
    7,126
    The GRV-SOO section would have been I guess, but that would then drive people to say "Well when the 465 comes out we get 100 extra services", something we cant' say now
    Either way I'll be getting the 465 as I live 100m from the route, but would have hoped it would bring something to the route/services, but from what Matt says it's not going to
     
  17. WVUadam

    WVUadam Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    457
    Likes Received:
    431
    Well can confirm 465 will arrive Before 313
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Reventloff

    Reventloff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2020
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    868
    While getting more dense timetable from the start may sound lucrative, I personally prefer more accurate approach, right services with right trains. And would like getting more content (specific timetable services and some new scenarios) together with the Loco DLC to run that loco properly.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  19. seancrabtree2003

    seancrabtree2003 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2020
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    94
    Hey TrainSim-Matt found some interesting services not just for 465 but for 395

    Class 465

    5K56 0552 Faversham Up Sidings to Gillingham (Kent) ECS

    5K46 1952 Gillingham (Kent) to Faversham Up Sidings ECS

    5U76 2340 Sittingbourne to Faversham Bk Road

    Class 395
    5F90 1542 Faversham to St Pancras International limited stop

    5F94 1646 Faversham to St Pancras International non stop

    5F56 1742 Faversham to St Pancras International non stop


    More the same on 9th April 2021 seen on rtt
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Helpful Helpful x 2
  20. pendolino18

    pendolino18 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2019
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    115
    I also (assume) that this discussion would also relate to the 313 when it comes out.
    I (assume) that we won't get any extra services with it's release because we already have the full timetable being ran by 377's. I believe the 313 will just sub onto the Lewes/Seaford diagrams when it is released.
    Whether the 313's do any peak time services to Eastbourne I don't know as I'm not from the area.
    Whilst I'm on the subject though, it would be a great idea to add Hove into the route (I'm positive its represented on the map) as 313's do shuttles to there and would add much opportunity for more services.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  21. They may have started with the plan to go to Shereness, but they had to give it up due to the route being extremely delayed (baseless speculation alert)
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  22. Agree, let's make this a thread
     
    • Like Like x 1
  23. JonnE

    JonnE Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2020
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    726
    I couldn't agree with you more.
    I don't know SEHS in real life but am very impressed by the variety of gameplay offered. I definetely am more likely to buy the 465 this way because it offers the opportunity to add even more variety in gameplay. :)
    For me this works better than coupling these additional services to the 465. Mainly because I as a non-local can imagine these services being run by a 375. This surely wouldn't work with a 146 + Dosto as an IC substitution ;)

    (Only speaking for myself of course)
     
    • Like Like x 3
  24. TrainSim-Matt

    TrainSim-Matt Executive Producer Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    1,070
    Likes Received:
    5,872
    Someone asked earlier if it's possible to adjust timings at stations - yes, every stop can have a unique timing and there's no limits to what it can be either, 1 second to 24 hours. It's something we need to do better at utilising for sure, making full service mode timetables is a time consuming and complex process but I totally agree things can be better :)

    Sean - 5U76 nearly made it in and in fact you'll see at the start of the day that service is sitting there and does its first move ECS to Rainham but the timing of it meant it didn't fit in the midnight to midnight window so it was dropped unfortunately.

    Matt.
     
    • Like Like x 10
    • Helpful Helpful x 2
  25. seancrabtree2003

    seancrabtree2003 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2020
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    94
    Thanks matt for the reply just notice the timing on that.
     
  26. Clumsy Pacer

    Clumsy Pacer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2016
    Messages:
    2,870
    Likes Received:
    3,793
    Does that mean you can't, say, have a service start at 23.45 and finish at 00.15?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  27. space_ace96

    space_ace96 Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2019
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    151
    On Peninsula Corridor, that is because both locomotives are used on Baby Bullet services in real life. Caltrain does not make the MP36 exclusive to Baby Bullet services; they were simply purchased as more modern locomotives since F40PHs are not built anymore when Caltrain addes Baby Bullet express services since they did not have enough F40PHs to be sufficient for the expanded schedule. In real life just like the DLC, both locomotives can be found on local, limited-stop, and express trains. Naming the loco DLC the baby bullet is a bit of a misnomer. Also, they aren't random or interchangeable in game. There are 26 unique services done with the MP36PH-3C and 79 done with the F40PH-2CAT. That's how I expect it to be with the 465.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  28. TrainSim-Matt

    TrainSim-Matt Executive Producer Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    1,070
    Likes Received:
    5,872
    Technically the game can support timetables running over midnight - GWE does it.
    In practice I have found it can lead to some problems because the game doesn't know that 00:15 is *after* 23:45 and that then starts to become problematic.

    In theory, a timetable can be as many days as you want it to be but as I say, in practice there are some issues that need to be resolved first so for the time being I stick to midnight to midnight in order to ensure that all stays well.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Helpful Helpful x 3
  29. tubefan1973

    tubefan1973 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    261
    Likes Received:
    277
    So it possible to make loading times dynamic, so lets say you are 30s late upon door release, you only load for 30s instead of a minute to put you back on-time, this would be good for immersion, realism and timekeeping, especially on DC 3rd Rail in the 395, and lets say you are a minute late, you could only stop for 25s, load and leave, or even airbrush the stop altogether if delayed by more than 5 minutes, maybe set it to CRTL + SHIFT + \, or as an option in the TAB screen, and it would then contact the signaller. I suppose features like this would be clumped together with things like SDO and in-cab monitors for the external load cameras.

    Ahh! so is that why the 22:55 STP-FAV gets to FAV 23:58 whereas IRL it gets there 00:05, and is that also why the 23:55 STP-FAV was omitted?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  30. TrainSim-Matt

    TrainSim-Matt Executive Producer Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    1,070
    Likes Received:
    5,872
    The way stops work in the game, we can specify the expected arrival time, the expected departure time, and the minimum stopping time - or any combination. So for example if you set a departure time of 10:00.00, and a minimum wait of 30 seconds, if you arrive at 09:58 you've got a 2 minute wait. if you arrive at 10:01.00 then you've got a 30 second wait.

    I need to do some work to establish a better way of using the system, I don't think we're getting the most out of it currently but the capability is certainly there I think.
     
    • Like Like x 6
    • Helpful Helpful x 5
  31. tubefan1973

    tubefan1973 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    261
    Likes Received:
    277
    SO... In that case, in future can you utilise that by just setting it to 30s minimum stop (or lower for metro routes), and would your method work if arriving at 5:59:30 and then a 30s wait, or would that be longer at 1m?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  32. Cramnor

    Cramnor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2020
    Messages:
    1,007
    Likes Received:
    2,006
    Thanks again for the time and detailed explanations :)
    I prefer if all timetable services are included, even if maybe the rolling stock is not the right one at that point. And if the correct stock is added later, it can be forced on those specific services. That way, the base DLC has a bit more value, since there are more services included. However, some people might not buy the loco DLC then, since they feel they don't get the same value (so some of the value/dev time is shifted from the loco DLC towards the route).
     
  33. Cramnor

    Cramnor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2020
    Messages:
    1,007
    Likes Received:
    2,006
    It would actually be amazing if an arrival time and wait time (rather on the short side, e.g. 30s for local trains and a minute for long distance trains) are set. I think the departure time is important for the AI services, and we players can often "ignore" them if we chose to, but the forced waiting time should be cut shorter, to make it more realistic and let us as the driver decide when to depart. Maybe if there are new passengers at some point, that could be combined in a way that you need to properly wait for people to get on and off.
     
    • Like Like x 3

Share This Page