Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Mr T, Nov 1, 2019.
Ah been waiting for this. Cheers for posting
I wonder what they paid him to drive one of the most booooorrrrrrring locomotives in tsw.It looks boooorrrrring and pathic and is snail slow and criminal underpowered.This loco so bad it needs to be scraped and replaced in tsw by a real locomotive.
How can he be track side without a hi-visibility vest on?.
they should upgrade the 47 in TSW to a class 57 seeing the 47 is crap in tsw.
You really get the full sense of speed and weightiness of the locomotives in real life. So hard to replicate in-game. I really enjoyed this!
Yes. That's also what I would say if someone asked if I wanted to drive a REAL train for a change. "REALLY?! YES OF CO.... oh... it's just a class 47... nevermind."
Count your blessings ffs. Your're getting to drive an actual locomotive!
and, @all: Happy 20's.
I guessing because this locos on the bottom end of the loco scale it's no loss to lets non engineers drive it,Plus if they derail or crash it or blowup the motor(good luck doing this)with how slow it is.This would be a quick painless death for this loco 47 type headed for the loco scrapyard anyway.
Seriously? He was driving with an instructor. Also what was the the car you drove at driving school? Chances are, it wasn't exactly a Maybach, Bentley or a Lamborghini. For very similar reasons.
Also, "bottom end" of locos would be more something like a CL08.
The CL08/09 are yard locos there not ment to be fast but just move cars around yards mostly,so there fine for what they are and do,also i like the looks of them,the class 47 not a yard loco it's a mainline engine ment to pull long heavy train and it can bearly do that.
"I have chosen my words carefully, persian. Perhaps you should have done the same."
You said bottom end of locomotives. Not of mainline locomotives or anything of that sort. Also, please explain how the 2700 hp, 120 ton class 47 wasn't capable of hauling heavy trains. You may have noticed he's driving a real 47, not the bugged TSW one.
Look as far as i'm concerned theres no difference between the real class 47 and the tsw 47,they both don't look good and don't look worth exsisting,you want a box on wheels just get a class 66 locomotive at least it's alway up for any job.
So you think the propulsion issues about the NTP 47 are the same on the real thing? If they were, they wouldn't be issues. Jeez, how old are you? Ten? Historical context is becoming more and more something like UFOs or Bigfoot: Some people insist it is real. When the class 47 came out, do you know how the trains it replaced looked like? Hint: They were mostly just as black as the plumes of smoke they released. Also, trains are utility vehicles, they are designed to perform well in a very specific task. And apart from that, for an early sixties loco, the 47 actually looks fairly modern, it could easily be 10 years younger.
Also, no railway on earth, heritage or else, has a mindset of "yeah, just give him the old loco in case he crashes it." They won't let you crash it, period. In fact, on some open days at railway depots where they offered the public the opportunity to drive a loco back and forth slowly on a fenced-off piece of track, they did the very opposite: Give them the latest and greatest they had in their fleet - out of two reasons: For once, modern engines are much easier do drive to prfessionals, let alone newbies and amateurs. And second, as this was also meant as a recruiting event for new drivers, this way they had a way closer look into what their potential future job would be like.
Also, good look finding a class 66 or something even newer on a heritage railway like the one this guy drove on, and even better luck finding a TOC letting outsiders drive their locos on an active mainline or even around their yard. Not going to happen. Illegal to begin with.
To put this discussion to an end, I have rarely seen such a stupid, uninformed, insightless, and (since you're primarily judging the loco by its looks almost exclusively), superficial argument being made.
So your saying that theres not any locomotive class or type that you don't care for in anyway?Now i do like the class 31/40/45/&37/5 locomotives there all great looking british rail types,but the 47's just are plain an sad to me.btw how sad you must be to judge someone stupid because they happen to not be a fan of one locomotive type...
That's my point. Whatever an engine looks and runs like, both good and bad, there's always a reason, a story behind it how it came to be. Same with any engineering. That's the fascination of railways to me. As for pure visual design choices, you can't blame the designers and whoever approved the design to have a taste of their own. But visuals are secondary anyway, trains are utility vehicles.
I said your argument is stupid, not you in general, that's a difference.
Did you just say there's no difference between a real life engine and a bigger one? Secondly, I hated the way ac6000 locomotives look. Yet there one of the most reliable and powerful engines of it's time. The same goes for the class 47.
The wise man once said " Don't judge a book by its cover." Obviously by your language and attitude, you don't listen to wise men.
Yes, it can barely do that in TSW. You think 47s are really like that? I'm guessing you've not had many mainline miles behind 47s?
Yep. Or just talk about lots of locos from, say, India. Not particularly nice to begin with (that's a REAL box on wheels, leave the poor 47 in peace), often highly questionable choices of colors to western eyes, and add to that the poor condition they tend to be in - these things just make me want to vomit.
But then, what do you expect, it's an impoverished country for the most part, they must make due with what they have. Easily built, easily maintained, not requiring any high-tech equipment. An old Volkswagen on rails pretty much. And yet these engines are the lifeline and only connection to the outside world for lots of tiny remote settlements, I'm very sure.
Early contender for dumbest thread of the year?
It was okay for the first couple of messages, then it got bukkake'd with stupid.
During my train spotting days in my teens I used to think the Class 47 was quite boring. But this was mainly because being very numerous I used to see more of them than anything else. Looking at them now I now consider them to be of quite an elegant design, clean and simple. Less fussy than some modern locos. And lets not forget they were the mainstay of the BR fleet and have done so much so well for so long.
Don't base your opinions of them on the console recreation. (They're ok on PC I believe)
TrainSim-Matt - the seemingly incorrect Simugraph transfer onto consoles (low amps/power) is giving people the wrong impression of the great "Duff". Any chance of looking into it and restoring its dignity?
Here everyone have some Sulzer thrash.
Separate names with a comma.