Discussion in 'Guides' started by cwf.green, Aug 27, 2021.
Top, thanks tygerways#2596.
Just re-read your post and saw that you basically said more or less exactly what I found in that other thread:
It seems we have our answer then - from more than one source even. Thank you for your patience and insight
No need to be patient, we are all in the same boat (…or train) I am learning a lot and very much appreciate this thread myself!
Funny enough, in the forum thread you quoted, the instructor (Ausbildungslokführer) ends the **/***-debate with posting a German translation (in Ril 936, Modul 0301A01) of the GCU quote that I initially posted to ask under what conditions **/***-cars are allowed to go 120 km/h:
So everything seems to have been clear from the start..
But it is clear enough for me now. They can run 120 km/h, unless another restriction from any other source (Zugbildungsvorschrift, Fahrplan, Streckenklasse, BrH-requirements for the train not met...) kicks is.
There are a ”few” more freight services being added soon. I’ll have to update the list of trains in the thread. You can however find them in the google spreadsheet linked to in my avatar
Absolutely loved what was shown on the stream today, regarding the fright stuff (the rest as well…)
However, I am really interested to hear some background on the 143 2700t service. Is this really a real service? Does anyone know?
Probably, the 143 was a loong time the "girl for everything" @ Cargo
And with a length of up to 715 meter's there can be even heavier or longer trains, so, everything's normal until now
I am very happy about more freight being added to the game, too. Great job!
Wouldn't you get a slightly better BrH rating (about 66 instead of 49) for the "Special Monster Train" if you ran it under a Fahrplan set out in "G" instead of "P/R"? You'd still be running in PZB "U", but might get less penalty from the gradients.
The 2700t "monster train" was actually based on this train:
with some slight modifications (partly because the actual wagons used in the real train don't exist in TSW at the moment). When I designed the formation the intended traction was the MRCE BR185.5. The BR143 is (as was shown in the stream) available as a sort of layer to drive freight trains. So technically it's not that the BR143 was the intended locomotive, but I've been told that this weight is about the maximum that BR143 would have been able to handle when it was more common in freight service, although most likely this was quite rare. I'm very happy that Matt implemented this layer though because driving the heavy freight trains with the BR143 is something I think people will find very entertaining .
The spreadsheet was made quite a while ago (before I got most of the feedback in this thread). Like Matt said in the stream I'm planning on making a thread (and probably a separate pdf-document) that describes each train in the freight time table so that it is easier for people to pick the type of train they want to drive (rather than "Freight train from Dresden to Riesa" etc). I'm hoping to be able to include accurate Vmax depending on the BrH for the different formations (potentially differing Vmax depending on if they take the avoiding line or the main line), although this might be tricky because getting actual freight Fahrplan is not that easy.
I'm a bit confused though. The train weighs ~ 2700t which surely makes it require bremsstellung "G" on all vehicles (since they don't have UIC AK couplers) so no matter what Fahrplan I use the BrH will always be ~ 49, or did I miss something? Also, if the train has all vehicles in "G", am I not forced to use Fahrplan G anyway?
By the way, I made a small plot based on OpenMinded Bremstafel for 0.7% gradient. I added an extrapolation up to 90 km/h. Based on this extrapolation the Mbr for 85 km/h in Fahrplan "G" is 57 and for 90 km/h it is 63.
No question Bremsstellung "G" will be required on every vehicle because of the weight.
The first table in your OP (taken from Ril 915) shows, though, that you can run an all vehicles set in "G" setup under a Fahrplan that is set out in "G" as well as a Fahrplan that is set out in "P/R":
If the train is running under a Fahrplan set out in "P/R", you will suffer higher reductions on the brakeed weight of each vehicle, though:
The train will always be forced to PZU "U" because of Bremsart "G", but with the braked weight reduced less, the brake percentage (BrH) will be higher, allowing a higher Vmax at the same gradient:
In my view, it is up to the railway undertaking (RU) to set out the Fahrplan, so they can set it up in "G" if it allows for running your trains faster.
Imo, the limits that derive from the gradient should only apply on the part of the track (Streckenabschnitt) they are taken from anyway, not neccessarily for the whole service (Zugfahrt).
(At least this is how I understand things from the data I could get after first reading your OP. Unfortunately I do not have access to a currect version of the Ril 915.0101Z01, nor of the UIC-leaflet 544-1 that is supposed to be the source of the reductions in braked weight, so I can refer to the table only).
Really enjoy the cargo stuff on DRA now. I believe we have to thank you for that cwf.green ! And, of course, also DTG for actually making it happen!
Also gave the monster train a go... with BR143... in rain Somehow I made it. Was curious, though, and plugged this very config into "trassenfinder.de". It came back with loads of error messages regarding weight limitations. IRL you would not see this train on this route, but I absolutely love the fact it is actually possible to give it a try in the game!
EDIT: I belive the max weight for this train on the avoiding line was around 2000t (dont remember the exact number), which I still find quite amazing for the BR143!
I completely agree, thanks cfw.green and thanks DTG. It's great seeing the community being more involved in the game development.
I did that, too, but without rain. The poor 143 was really chuffing on the gradients (thank god for the auxiliary control!) - I felt really bad for her
Maybe I should paint a 143 blue and call her the little engine that could
Like I said, the BR143 was not the intended traction for that train, but it's nice that the possibility is there
Regarding the train in the video, the stated weight is 3000t (but of course with a much more capable BR193), do you mean that the weight limitation for the BR143 is 2000t? If so that seems reasonable.
I have been in contact with two very knowledgeable people in the German railway industry, regarding both driving freight trains and also the general railroad regulations in Germany. Firstly I was told (in agreement with what OpenMinded stated) that the Bremstafel earlier posted are outdated. I was also told that you cannot mix the old bremstafel with the new RIL 915, or you may get paradoxical results like a train being able to travel faster in Fahrplan G vs Fahrplan R/P etc. Hopefully I will get more detailed information soon, like the Vmax for the included trains on DRA.
EDIT: It does seem like the lowest Vmax for the included trains on the route is 90 km/h though.
Yes, that’s what I meant to say…
That is quite interesting. I was told that exactly this is happening in real life, that a G timetable may have speed advantages and, hence, the driver may opt to run the train in G, rather then P. Looking forward to the final info you will get on this.
Also, even though I have also been told that those Brenstafeln are outdated, they are still more or less comparable to today's standards. I was made aware of this by discussing an old question of yours:
It is true, the Timetable calls for a BrH of 187 for trains up to 160km/h, but it also gives local restrictions. I looked at the specific part of the avoiding line, running from Dresden to Riesa. If you look at the Timetable, it actually restricts the speed to 150km/h at the stretch where you are driving down hill (column 2d):
Comparing this to the original Bremstafel, an BrH of 187 would allow you to drive 150 at a stretch with a slope of approx 1,0, which is pretty close to what is there on the track.
I, hopefully, will also get some more info on this soon, but as it is nice to have some discussion around it, I just put it up to debate
Very interesting regarding the local speed restrictions! Unfortunately for us, it get's trickier when the Vmax of the train is far lower than the line speed..
I worded my earlier post a bit poorly. You can run a G-braked train in either R/P or G timetables and you can also run a P-braked train in the G-timetable, *however* you would have to change the brakes to G on all but 3 (12 axles) of the wagons. I was told that with the new Bremstafel and the RIL 915 posted above you won't get large speed differences and the switching between different Fahrplan are mostly done for other reasons.
Since the Bremstafel you posted above cuts off at 80 km/h we do not know if the BrH = 66 train (for example) could be run at 90 km/h in the new timetable because the trend might deviate etc (or they might even have adjusted the Mbr for all of the speeds).
I think it is likely that most of the trains will be able to be run at 90 km/h (or more) on the route though, because the train in the video I linked had Vmax 90 km/h with probably a similar BrH.
I know we discussed this before, and you told me otherwise, but imo the system makes much more sense if you always
use the "P/R" brake table if the Fahrplan is set out in "P/R" and accordingly
use the "G" brake table if the Fahrplan is set out in "G",
regardless of what your actual brake settings are.
(See the two brake tables for "P/R" and "G" actually being integrated in the one table OpenMinded provided earlier. I understand that this table is most probably outdated, especially for velocities up to 85 and 90 under "G", but the principle stays the same.):
This would account for the substantial reduction in braked weight for vehicles with brake setting "G" running under a Fahrplan that is set out in "P/R"
and at the same time reduce the gap in Vmax between running the train under a "G" or a "P/R" Fahrplan:
I agree! This is exactly what would happen. Going to be interesting to find out if this system has now actually changed. Obviously this also shows the limits of this system, as ideally it should be the same BrH in both cases.
Another interesting one One thing we did not consider when discussing this was, that the limiting factor for defining the max speed can not have anything to do with the distance between those signals. It will always be defined by the ability to follow the PZB braking curves, which, of course, are independent of the the main signal being 1500m or just 1000m away.
Exactly. Longer brake distances can only be taken into account under LZB (when PZB is turned off).
That's a good point. I was thinking that safety wise you would have a longer distance to stop, but you may of course still get a penalty brake application due to not reaching 70/55 in time.
I don't think the "critical gradient" is 1.1 or even 1.0 % on either route though since both the 3000t train was allowed 90 km/h with probably a BrH < 70 (fully loaded grain wagons) and the Fahrplan R/P for the avoiding line I attached earlier had Mbr that matched 0.7% or less (and the mainline even less). Even if the Mbr only takes into account 1000m (which I think sounds reasonable and your argument is convincing) it only matters what the gradient is between the distant signal and main signal, so maybe the 1.1% gradient is not in such a spot.
Interesting stuff! What gradient is your algorithm based on? I'm also curious how you got those wagon weights for the Zacns and Habbiins wagons? I presume you checked both a Habbiins train and a Zacns train? Either way they are pretty much spot on to what DTG gave me.
Regarding your first paragraph, I'm not sure I follow you but you should definitely always use the Mbr for the chosen Fahrplan. What I meant was that a fully G-braked train can use the R/P fahrplan (with deductions in BrH) for example and a P-braked train could (technically) use the G-fahrplan (although this would mean changing the Bremsstellung).
What you can't do is to for example take a G-braked train and calclulate the BrH based on Fahrplan G (i.e. no deductions in BrH unless train length is above 700m) and then base the Vmax on Fahrplan R/P.
Yes, I was assuming the same. The exact location of the 1000hz magnets are probably taken into account.
My algorithm is using the numbers from OpenMinded's brake table. I just split it in two (for P/R and G) and swapped the order (grades decending) for easier readout in the spreadsheet. The values for velocities of 85 and 90 in the G table are interpolated using a graph (shown below):
The numbers for weight, length and braked weight are either read from the markings on the vehicle skins (black) or calculated from the numbers shown on the pause screen (red, substracting the numbers shown for a "light engine" loco, divided by the number of cars):
So the values can always be adjusted if I get better and more intel.
And generally the algorithm works like this:
1) calculate weight and length of the train, based on the loco and cars selected
2) determine the correct brake setting (G/G, LL, G/P or P)
3) calculate braked mass (based on Fahrplan, brake setting, car load and number of cars)
4) calculate BrH and determine PZB class
5) check the BrH against the applicable brake table (R/P or G) for a selected gradient (max desc) to determine V max gradient
6) calculate V max cars based on car type, car load and track class
7) compare V max loco, V max cars, V max PZB, V max gradient (and the ultimate speed limit of 120 km/h stated in federal law, § 40 EBO) to determine the lowest value, what is the V max for your train in a given gradient
Absolute love your file. It’s accurate to the tolerances we have available to us, right now. Have used it several times now and have not found a flaw with it. It always seems to give me reasonable values
Re: Finding the relevant gardient:
The rules for finding the relevant gradient for a track section are (as much as I could find out) set out in Richtlinie 457, Modul 0401 (see Richtlinie 408, Modul 5801, Abschnitt 31). Unfortunately, I cannot get hold of the text of Ril 457.0401.
Where I was able to find rules for determining the relevant gradient was in Appendix 22 to the Richtlinie 438. Richtlinie 438 is the Fahrdienstvorschrift für Nichtbundeseigenen Eisenbahnen (FV-NE), and as such NOT applicable to the routes and services in the game. It seems, though, that the rules in Ril 457.0401 are quite similar (see http://www.support.irfp.de/faq/id-20558.html), although the distances specified might be different.
Those rules set out a three-step process as follows:
You start looking at the track section in question and find those two points in the track that
- have a distance of 2,000 meters between them
- have the highest difference in elevation above sea level.
Then you determine the gradient between those two points.
If the gradient found in step 1 is higher than 1,0 %, you repeat the process with the distance between the two points reduced to 1,000 meters.
Then you look at all the main signals (or other trackside signs that require a stop) in the track section and determine the gradient between a point 1,000 meters in front of the main signal and the main signal (regular braking distance).
The highest gradient found in those three steps is the relevant gradient for this track section.
The example below shows a fictional track section:
As you can see, the gradient per 200 meters (column 3) between km 1.4 and km 1.8 as well as km 4.2 and km 4.4 are as high as -11 or even -16 °/°° (red markers).
Nevertheless, the "Step 1" procedure (gradient per 2,000 meters, column 4) results in a gardient of -4 °/°° max (yellow marker).
Thus no "Step 2" procedure is called for.
In the "Step 3" procedure though, we find a gradient of -6 °/°° in front of the main signal at km 1,8 (column 5, purple marker, main signal locations are written in blue and with a greyish background). This is the relevant gradient.
So if the game shows gradients per 200 meters or something similar in the HUD, they might not be relevant at all for the V max of our trains (as you have already pointed out).
Fascinating. Thanks for digging that up! I wonder if there‘s any way we could do something like these calculations for TSW routes ourselves? Would probably be a lot of work though.
This post is amazing.
Got some questions:
1. A stream has been mentioned (here and other thread), it would be great if someone shares the link.
2. Where can I see the weight of the cars (unloaded, loaded).
Always had the feeling it must be done something like that, never got access to 457 myself, so, amazing you found this! Thanks for sharing...
BTW, as we are seeing mixed trains now on DRA, any chance to enable this on your file as well? Obviously some manual work, then, also for the one using it, however, I would do it
BTW: does anyone know, is it possible to get the load of individual Waggons within the game? Without this knowledge my request would obviously not make sense…
Mixed trains with more than one type of car? Just use the "Mixedcar"-version downloadable from my discord server. You can select up to 6 different types of cars. Or was this not what you had in mind?
I believe you mean this stream:
Yes, sounds like it. Never seen this function, yet. Thanks!
And these are the weights of individual "loaded" cars (in the Dresden DLC) as I figuered them out:
The ones with "no data" I don't own
Very nice! Those numbers will prove useful next time I‘m doing the calculations
But, as far as I have seen, we can now get trains with loaded and unloaded cars within the same train. Is there a way to find out the weight of individual cars in a train in game?
The weight of the unloaded cars in the game is pretty much equal to the weight specified on the markings on the skin.
So far I have only been able to calculate the weight of single cars by subtracting the weight of the loco and dividing the gross weight shown on the pause screen by the number of cars in the train. I don't know of any other way.
In the Multicar version of my sheet you can already mix empty and loaded cars of the same type, though.
The freight consists included on the route are found in my signature (Spreadsheet). Hopefully there are no mistakes, since I created them, but please point out any error if you find them. The speeds may be incorrect since (as we've all discussed) the information is not complete.
When I calculated the stopping distances and brake forces for the freight wagons I based these calculations on the in-game weights (which should be quite realistic compared to reality. These are given below:
Wagon----------Empty Weight-----------Loaded Weight----------Empty Braked Weight----------Loaded Braked Weight
All the wagons are simulated with K-type composite block brakes.
There is unfortunately one bug currently on some of the trains that make releasing the airbrakes take up to 6 minutes. Hopefully this can be fixed in the future.
The in-game "Empty Brake Weight" for a Zacns car is 28t. The marking on the changeover device (Lastwechsel) says it is only 26 tons (see screenshot below). Is there a reason for that?
Typo! Thanks for catching it.
I can add some data.
Wagon----------Length----empty weight----loaded weight----vmax empty----vmax loaded
Yes, Shimmns-ttu and Uacns empty and loaded weight are the same in game. I tested this in scenario planner.
Hey cwf.green, really great work. As someone who lives in Germany and close to one of the biggest yards here, I see those trains daily. To have this in game, is absolutely lovely. Do you have a plan, which train in the timetable is which consist? That'd help out soooo much, thank you in advance, if you have it
Thank you! I'm currently making a document with all the freight services on the route described (i.e. at time xx:xx there is an intermodal train from Dresden to Riesa via the avoiding line etc). I hope to have it done within a couple of days, I'll post a new thread at that point and also update this thread.
1 Sggmrss car in game counts as 2 cars in the formation.
1 Laaers car in game counts as 2 cars in the formation.
For example, in the pause menu the game says I have 40 Sggmrss (or Laaers) cars, but there are only 20. The weight is OK.
I got some more detailed info on this. In the RIL915.0101Z01 it states that when the individual waggons have bogies or more then 3 single axles, it is considered as a single wagon.
So, each unit of a Sggmrss has to be counted as one, as it has bogies.
If it has less, like the Laaers, which has only 2 single axles on each unit, the whole unit is considered as one waggon.
Here`s the quote from the associated passage in the RIL for LL (freely translated by me):
"On the working locomotives running at the top and on the first five vehicles of the train, braking position G must be set. Are wagon units or articulated wagons affected, that cannot be separated during operation and they have bogies or more than three single wheel sets, the vehicles count individually. All brake positions of these wagon units are to be set in braking position G. Can, or may the brake position on a vehicle not be set to G, the brakes of this vehicle must be switched off."
Did I just get this right on the stream, they are releasing the BR 187 without a working G/P/R-brake setting switch?
It’s really a shame, it could have been such a great addition to the frights loco fleet
Thank you for this piece of information, btw. I will include it in my sheet asap.
Even if it is a bit disappointing wrecking our brains here if you are expected to run a freight train in brake setting R or whatever. :/
Separate names with a comma.