LMS Beyer-Garratt 2-6-0+0-6-2 No.'s 4997/8/9 as built-in 1927 Plenty more to come over the next few months as we build the second batch of 30 (4967-96 from 1930) including 3 more tenders (2 coal and 1 water) These are going to be a lot of fun to drive
That'll be quite cool, I'm trying to think if we've got any good routes for them but it's entirely possible they'll spur developers to make some
I'm surprised at the choice of loco. While they are definitely noteworthy and maybe cool to look at, they weren't a particularly successful class IRL and none made it close to preservation. The latter severely restricts their 'realistic' use in the sim. I appreciate that what-ifing is a part of simulation, but I sense that most players like to keep things reasonably prototypical.
Looks very interesting, and seems that the LMS made some design compromises that might make driving them in TSC quite a challenge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Garratt. They lasted from the late 20s to mid 50s so doesn't seem like they were a total failure. As far as routes go, Jetgriff's Bromsgrove-Manchester-Sheffield (https://www.wotawallysbits.net/jetgriff-routes.html) covers a lot of the track that they operated on. Wotawally also hosts the backdated versions of WCML(N) and Shap (Steaming Over Beattock and Steaming Over Shap), and whilst using them on Woodhead wouldn't be strictly prototypical, it's not a huge leap of imagination. So we're not completely bereft of appropriate period routes. It's something a little different and I'm sure VW will make them look, sound and feel authentic enough - Garratts were used all over the world so I'm sure there's plenty of data to base the simulation on.
I think you're thinking of the LNER Class U1, which was an even bigger Garratt. This was a one-off for the Woodhead Line and was briefly trialled on the Lickey Incline in 1949-50 and a brief spell in 1955.
The Nottingham Netherfield route by our old friend HertsBob was set around Nottingham, which is where most of them ran, there was a Toton Yard route on Steam Workshop, but, it's more modern than the 1930s/40s timeframe that the Garretts were about, but, it's local. Jetgriffs route to Manchester and Sheffield from Bromsgrove may also be another freeware route to try the loco out on, they were once based near Chinley, so, another prototypical area for use. My only issue is what coal wagons would be useful with this engine, I suspect 5 and 7 plank for the timeframe, unless anyone else has some ideas. Cheerz.
The Garratts were based at Toton, Westhouses and Hasland hauling coal trains of 100 wagons (5&7 planks) to Cricklewood. All became BR locos and all were withdrawn by 1955 replaced by 9Fs. They suffered from Mr Fowler having specified bearings with inadequate surface area for the duty. They were the same bearings as in the 4F 0-6-0 but were required to transmit much more power than the 4F. Standardisation is not always the best modus operandi.
Upcoming? It was done long ago, but is set in the 1980s. Unless you know something I don't know . . . John
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We can use Train Simulator in different ways. I prefer to pretend to be a train driver, not a combined driver and fireman, so I use auto-fireman settings. I spend most of my time in "head-out" view, observing signals and acting accordingly. For me, the Victory Works 9F is the best yet - and I have had four different ones along the way! My only observation is that it is a little over-powered, it pulls well (although not as ridiculously over-powerful as the Railsimulator.com version) but then rolls along with minimal regulator or sound having reached its permitted speed. That feels odd to me, and not as I remember them. They were powerful locos but only one grade above an 8F. I remember seeing a heavy oil train at Stockport double-headed by two 9Fs, and it had something on the back too (I can't remember what) and they were still grunting with the effort. It must have been quite a gradient. I have never understood why the RSC one was so unrealistically configured, for it was made from the former Iron Horse House model which in its original form had, in my opinion, the most realistic power levels of them all. I enjoy all of the Victory Works locos I have, and find the developer is always friendly and willing to discuss any issues - which is more than can be said about most of the one-man bands. I won't be buying the Garrett just yet as I don't have schedules or workings for the right era (realism is important to me) but it certainly sounds interesting. Maybe one day . . . John
In my opinion we need more oddball designs in the game; both ones that worked well and ones that didn’t. It’ll add further diversity to what you can drive in the game and I hope to see more of this sort of thing. Some of my favourite locomotives to drive in the game are oddballs that mostly ended up being failures because of how unique they are. The Baldwin Centipede and Aerotrain come to mind as interesting driving experiences; the Aerotrain can be a moderate challenge since it can barely climb hills! And the Baldwin Centipede enjoys climbing to high engine temperatures which makes for something interesting to manage. I especially love the small ‘Alan Meaden’ loco you get with the Corris Expansion pack; it’s probably one of the most unique things I’ve driven in the game having to crank start the engine and work a clutch pedal.
The Aerotrain is incorrectly set up. First thing is, the brakes on the cars won't release fully because of the Aerotrain only charging the brakepipe to 90 psi, the cars need 110 psi to fully release the brakes, which you can see when checking the blueprints.
Yeah I’m not surprised it has issues like this considering it is a DTM product. Either way; it’s quite unique and something different.
Sorry to nit pick but the Garratts never went to Crewe as they were maintained at Derby Works (based at Toton, Westhouses (between Derby and Chesterfield) and Hasland (South of Chesterfield at the Erewash Valley junction)) their entire lives hauling 100 wagon coal trains to Cricklewood (London). A backdated MML would be ideal but....the world ain't perfect.
I am probably some sort of Neanderthal however I drove this set around quite a lot and never noticed it at all. Did you?
If you don't notice that, you probably don't notice anything. Can't you just try mocking people on your very own forums? Or have you already driven everyone away there? People are talking about game content, you small-mindedly talk about people constantly. Ignored from now on, nothing to be missed here.
As a kid in the fifties, used to train-spot a lot at Tamworth Low Level and remember seeing Garratts (once seen, never forgotten) passing over the Tamworth High Level from time to time - must have had some kind of schedule in the Bham-Litchfield area. That would be different - bringing a coal consist up the Lickey!
A definite NO! We don't need white elephants, dead on arrival and other useless stuff only good for the failed design collections. Do you really think there is a market for this? Since TSW is clearly a game, the design flaws won't make it into the model. Developers time is better spend on stuff that is actually needed in the game to complete a roster, a timeframe, a route's native rolling stock and such. We already have so many locomotives without a train, trains without their native routes etc esp on the USA side..
About the subject of this thread, I'll gladly buy it for VW delivers good DLC. Caledonia Works and Precision Loco Development are hard at work to complete the British steam locomotive collection too.
So that's a no to the Deltic prototype, DP2, Kestrel, Falcon, Metrovick class 28, GT3 ? Don't forget that a failed design collection would include the majority of early BR diesels.
Probably a no, at least if you wanted to make a living as a DLC creator. All these locos are very niche and I'm guessing only a small subsection of UK TSC players would want to buy them. VW did the GT3 experimental turbine nine years ago and they haven't followed up with any other one-off loco since.
Niche they may be, but they've all been made. Yes the market wouldn't be the size of that for models of todays trains but there's surely room for odd-balls.
I would suggest that developers' time is best spent on things that they want to create. If that is a so-called white elephant, then so be it. And if these niche products are not to your taste, move along and allow others to enjoy it. That there is still such a sense of entitlement given the wealth of different content available is disheartening.
Take PRR steam locomotives, Pennsylvania Railroad, the self proclaimed 'standard' of the world. We have the K4 4-6-2 from RSC, E6 4-4-2, H10 2-8-0 and I1 2-10-0 by DSGDDR from their standard fleet with the square shouldered Belpaire firebox and a common look. But then DSGDDR decided he'd want to build the S1 6-4-4-6, a true white elephant, in the model almost equally unsuitable as in the prototype due to its long rigid wheelbase and slipperyness, instead of trying to complete the fleet with the other 'standard' designs: Why not the more common and successful T1 4-4-4-4 and the even more successful Q2 4-6-4-4, if modeling a Duplex was the challenge? The TSC fleet would have been better served by a L1 2-8-2, based on the K4, a sleek M1 4-8-2 or even the 'copied from C&O' J1 2-10-4?
We see the same trend with the locomotives commissioned from Machine Rail, but some of these at least can be pretended to run today owned by a preservation society over tracks they've never run on for real. Unfortunately, some of these societies are very strict with their licenses, so a few other preserved and popular locomotives like Reading T or N&W J 4-8-4 will never make it into the game. While I think a few developers are willing and capable of creating a model that will sell.
The S1 is just pure and simple good fun. It’s an incredibly lovely and unique locomotive I’ve always wanted to see in TSC and DSGSDR simply delivered a great example of it. I would love to see a T1 some day. If you don’t like unique locomotives being developed for the game then that’s fine; we just are suited to different preferences of what we want in the game I suppose. Like Steve mentioned it’s up to what the developer wants to do anyway. If I had developing skills of any kind; I would love to base my skills onto making some of the really niche locomotives that would make for varied driving experiences / looks not or rarely seen elsewhere in the game. Whether they were successful or not. At the end of the day yes more conventional locomotives would almost always sell better. But that’s where it comes down to whether a developer wants to develop something for passion or for money.
Develop what you want, but if you pick obscure subjects don't expect much income or thanks. Gold Star is an example with their track maintenance DLC. It might satisfy the developer, but he'll make more money and get thanked by more people if he put his time and skills into making a good Class 47.
It might just be that something unusual (like the Garratt) will sell better than the unpteenth version of an A4 class Pacific, for example, or that Class 47 you mention. It seem that some developers are going out of their way to duplicate a model already in production - which can't exactly be ideal for income. Anyway, their income is their business - I doubt many (if any) are getting full-time income from this work. John
Almost all of AP's catalogue is duplication of stuff that was already in TSC, and none of it is niche. I think there's a reason for that. The LMS Beyer-Garratt might just make it over the line in the market, as quite a few were made and they stayed in operation for some time. The one-off locos mentioned by others above are just new ways to stay poor.
AP's Catalogue is split in to two sections - Stand alone products and Enhancements The Enhancements need a DLC to work. Some stand alone pack are better than the original product Class 37 - the only other was the Kuju version Class 50 - the only other is the Mesh Tools version from 2013 Class 87 - the other RSC version is sort of ok Class 90 + DVT Class 142 - made before the DTG version Class 150/2 - no other version Class 156 - better than the Oovee version Class 205 - no other version Class 313/314/315 Class 317/318 Class 321 Class 411/412 Mark 1 coaches have more versions that any other version Mark 2 A-C - Mk2a were around from Kuju days - Mk2b were by Voldermort - Mk2c did not exist Mark 2 D-F - There are some Mk2 Air con coaches in the game but are poor by comparison Mark 3 A/B - this stock gives us proper hauled coaches - the previous RSC/DTG versions are all HST vehicles with buffers Not to mention a number of wagons that were not available before Not sure IronBladder how you think they are all duplications of what already exists?
The 205 and 412 seem pretty niche. Heck, even the class 50 represents a type of locomotive of which only 50 examples were ever built, albeit an extremely popular one.
Class 37 with centre headcode was an RSC package, Kuju version is split box. Class 87 is also included in WCMLoS in BR Blue livery DTG 142 is the basis for AP's current model 150/2 was done by Oovee-Thomson, and is the base for AP's model, likewise the 156. (from Railworks Wiki "On September 29th 2017 it was announced by popular third-party developerArmstrong Powerhouse (AP) that they had successfully negotiated the purchase of the rights to the Class 150/2 and that it would shortly be removed from Steam while AP worked on updating and improving the train. On November 9th 2017 Armstrong Powerhouse released their "Class 150/2 Diesel Multiple Unit Pack" featuring 21 liveries, an updated cab, improved audio, GMS-R functionality ,improved exhaust effects and "much more!". Many praised Armstrong Powerhouse through social media commenting on how the Class 150/2 had gained vast improvements though some criticized AP for the price tag mentioning that they had already purchased the original unit with its Armstrong Powerhouse sound pack and did not believe in paying a lot more for the addon.")
..another niche product would be the APT; class 04, 02, 07 and 14 could also be considered pretty niche and the class 13 is a definite for that title...all in all there's a lot of *niche, white elephants" already in the game catalogue to suggest that there is a market for this area of interest.
I'm under the impression that Jordi did the work using the Oovee model as the base. Whichever, the whole point of the list was to expand on Peter's post.
The DTG Class 87 is poor compared with the AP version AP/Waggonz had a 142 before DTG released theirs - the repaints for that are on Vulcan Productions.
