1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Thoughts On Csx Physics

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Anthony Pecoraro, May 23, 2019.

  1. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    No, youre wrong. There's a huge physical difference between how fast gravity can PUSH a train when it's a runaway, and how fast the motors can propel the train under its own power.
     
  2. Shukal

    Shukal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    298
    Likes Received:
    456
    I'm guessing the locos would break if they reached such high speeds in real life?
     
  3. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    The traction motors/gearing would be destroyed along with possibly some of the electrical system. Yes. They'd be severely damaged above their normal governed speed of around 70mph.
     
  4. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    You're completely right in that respect, but what concerns me is that for all the work they put into the systems, either they failed to implement a governor system entirely, or the way they've implemented the power (traction motors, electrical grids, etc) is not correct allowing for this problem to occur. Regardless, to put all that work into it, get 95% of the way to complete, and then leave something simple out seems odd.
     
  5. ARuscoe

    ARuscoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    1,863
    Likes Received:
    1,070
    If you listen to the dev streams Matt P has said several times that they focus more on what the most people will do most of the time rather than what some people will do a small amount of the time.
    So in this case maybe he didn't think it was too much of an issue, whereas you obviously think otherwise.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  6. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    Well, fair enough then. The TS20xx franchise has had this upper limit modeled since the beginning so maybe that's part of why it feels like a major bug to me not to include it in the next gen "more realistic" sim. But, if things are changing, that's DTG's prerogative.
     
  7. John Murphy

    John Murphy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2018
    Messages:
    487
    Likes Received:
    555
    I mean, the update made it more of a pain to drive these trains over Sand Patch, but at the same time it makes it more interesting and challenging. I guess I'm kinda neutral about it. I don't like the update, but I don't hate it either, if that makes any sense.
     
  8. LeadCatcher

    LeadCatcher Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    456
    Likes Received:
    745
    Interesting discussion on Gear Ratios: Here is some information I found with some historical views on Gear;Ratio max speeds:

    “Ok here are the EMD gear ratios and top speed for each based on pre D77 traction motors and 40" wheels.



    65:12 gearing 55 mph. used on a lot of early switch engines and some early road engines.

    62:15 gearing 65 mph by far the most common EMD gear ratio for road locomotives

    61:16 gearing 71 mph used by roads wanting a little faster speed and on some dual service engines

    60:17 gearing 77 mph. used by BN and others for fast freight

    59:18 gearing 85 mph used by UP on the DDA40X and "Fast Forty" SD40-2s used by newer pass.

    58:19 gearing 92 mph fairly rare but some use made of this ratio

    57:20 gearing 98 mph. fairly common passenger gearing for E-units with 36" wheels giving 91 mph

    56:21 gearing 105 mph but most common on E-units giving 100 mph top speed

    55:22 gearing 115 mph common E-unit gearing giving 110 mph speed with 36" wheels

    When the physically stronger D77 and D87 motors appeared top speeds were bumped up about 5 or 6 mph.

    Most Amtrak EMD locomotives (SDP40F and F40PH) had 57:20 gearing and were set up for 100 mph maximum. A small pool of F40PH locomotives received 56:21 gearing and a 110 mph max. speed for eastern service.

    Common GE gear ratios were 74:18 for freight service, and its "Fine Mesh" replacement 83:20. IIRC a common dual service GE ratio was 65:24 giving an 85 mph top speed. This would have been found on RS3 and RS11 locomotives set up for secondary passenger service
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. hightower

    hightower Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    976
    I’m still not sure about it. Clearly I’ve got absolutely no real life experience to compare it to but on the snow & ice scenario, would 4 locos be able to haul 60 wagons up a 1.6% gradient and hold their speed in notch 3?

    The update is an improvement for sure but it’s maybe not quite the magic bullet I’d hoped for. The graphical improvements though make a huge difference...I can bare to play the route again!
     
  10. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    Remember that part of the issue is that none of the freight or passenger cars in TSW can be in a loaded state. The game may say they're loaded, they may look loaded (containers in well cars, or coal in a coal car) but the game doesnt see them as loaded. So, every car is simulated to be empty. So...four locos and 60 empty cars up a 1.6percent grade in notch 3? Yeah, that doesnt sound too far off.
     
  11. raildan

    raildan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,029
    Likes Received:
    1,548
    60 wagons (cars, by the way) with 4 engines? I mean, it depends on the engine, but yeah, totally. Especially since the cars are all calculated as empty.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  12. TrainSim-Matt

    TrainSim-Matt Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    1,101
    Also make sure one or more of those locos are not the not-fixed GP38-2 (the one from NEC) or the GP40 as they'll massively skew your results.

    Matt.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  13. hightower

    hightower Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    976
    I’m a bit dopey with the American stuff to be honest. Just so I’m clear, the patch notes say ‘CSX GP38-2; CSX SD40-2; CSX AC4400CW’ so I assume that’s the locos that are available to use in CSX. The GP40 was the add on loco was it not...so that one isn’t fixed. The NEC GP38-2 is separate and can’t be used on Sand Patch. Is that right?

    I’d love to do the Powering America Part 2 (different discussion I know) but I can’t get over the fact that the rain doesn’t affect the windscreen, as it does with the 156 in TS1. It completely kills the immersion for me to have it throwing it down but not need the wipers.
     
    Last edited: May 29, 2019
  14. Shukal

    Shukal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    298
    Likes Received:
    456
    Nope the NEC GP38-2 can be used on SPG.
     
  15. hightower

    hightower Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    976
    Really? I had no idea. That wouldn’t be used in the CSX scenarios though would it?
     
  16. pschlik

    pschlik Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    1,555
    RE going fast in an SD40-2:

    Series wound motors can go really fast. Like, unlimited speed in theory. The fact that the SD40-2 can reach 150 mph is theoretically possible, so it’s not like some horrific betrayal of motor physics that you can get these moving fast. It’s just a betrayal of the physical limits of real non-indestructible motors. Yet that’s what DTG has modeled; invincible motors.

    And they aren’t going to model motors that can be broken. Sounds like the devious Ed Fisk wanted to have a motor failure on the 08 (which is much more at danger of a motor failure than some road switcher; it’ll fail around 23 mph!) but DTG wouldn’t allow that. So stuff that can go faster than it could in real life is going to be a normal thing in DTG’s content.

    Seriously, all the UK diesel electrics are in the same situation. Every darn time there’s something new complaints about it going too fast come up. Not sure why anyone is surprised the SD40-2 still works at 150 mph when the Class 66 also works at 150 mph.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Helpful Helpful x 2
  17. raildan

    raildan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,029
    Likes Received:
    1,548
    Very informative, thanks!

    I was surprised nobody mentioned that earlier- this isn't exactly new, people.
     
  18. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    Well....not really. Motors can go that fast, yes, but there are physical and electrical governors on the SD40-2 that literally prevent the motors from ever allowing the locomotive from exceeding pre-defined speeds. If you take a real world SD40-2, and put it in notch 8 on level track, it will accelerate to it's pre-defined max speed (lets say 65mph) and then it will stop accelerating. The electronics in the modularized electrical control cabinet (the "-2" denotes this electrical system) limit the current going to the traction motors as the speed reaches the max pre-defined speed. Now, if the loco is steady at 65mph, and it experiences a downgrade, it will accelerate. The locomotive has no system to prevent overspeed due to outside factors - it can only limit overspeeding from it's own power.
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  19. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    Yes, that's 100% true. But, the Class 66 is geared completely differently (and has different electronic control systems) that allow a different speed range and torque/tractive effort output. An SD40-2 will out-pull a Class 66 any day of the week - the Class 66 is not designed for high tractive effort - it's designed for speed. So....... not exactly apples and apples comparison.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Juxen

    Juxen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2017
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    250
    I know of at least one instance where six SD40's got up to over 100 mph.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Bernardino_train_disaster

    Not under their own power, of course, but as far as I know, they didn't bird-nest either.

    As a general response to the rest of this thread:

    Since the only way you can find the top speed (150+) is only achievable by trying to hit that speed, it's a rather self-inflicted problem. Smokebox's FEF-3 is able to hit a reported top speed of near 150 mph, yet the real thing never exceeded 110, and certainly would never get that close without some serious reciprocating issues. Yet his model is basically the poster child of realism in TS20xx.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  21. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    • Like Like x 1
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  22. TrainSim-Matt

    TrainSim-Matt Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    1,101
    The manual for the SD40-2 interestingly notes that such speed limiting equipment is actually optional, and it's up to the engineer to operate the locomotive within specifications if it isn't fitted. In fact, even if it is, because it might not work and you still dont want to bust your loco.

    We don't simulate faults of any kind at the moment and hence you can't "break" the loco.

    At some point we will probably look at getting limiters implemented, i'll find out from the Engineering team what their thoughts in this area have been, I know it's been discussed.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Helpful Helpful x 3
  23. TrainSim-Matt

    TrainSim-Matt Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    1,101
    sounds like a bug, it's certainly supposed to.

    It can, and may well even swap in on scenarios too if substitution is enabled (I can't remember how we set them up). The SPG upgraded GP38-2 can also be used on NEC too.

    Simplest way to ensure that you don't have any rogue entries is to uninstall NEC and the GP40 pack and then conduct your tests, you'll only have the updated locos at your disposal then.

    Matt.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  24. nne4229

    nne4229 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2018
    Messages:
    404
    Likes Received:
    484
    Eta on physics update to complete?
     
  25. TrainSim-Matt

    TrainSim-Matt Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    1,101
    No point me quoting a time that might not be met. ASAP is about as accurate as I can be :) The work is done, it needs to go through QA and make sure all the scenarios, services etc still work and then there might be any bug fallout from that.
     
  26. Gascan

    Gascan Active Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2018
    Messages:
    158
    Likes Received:
    233
    Sounds like it's time to start paying attention to this again...
     
  27. Reeon1999

    Reeon1999 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2018
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    106
    So since you're going back to the original game and also went back to GWE for example what routes/locomotives have correct and incorrect physics? I'd hope after this update and then the update for NEC most will be up to date and I'm assuming new locomotives have these improved physics enabled during their initial development - for example the Tees Valley Line just released and I'm guessing the physics are based off the improvements you've been making?
     
  28. dave.miller33892sd402

    dave.miller33892sd402 New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2019
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Uh,....why when I advance the dynamic brakes, do I hear the prime mover ramp up and loads of smoke comes out of the exhaust? LOL.

    I dont think this is right. We should hear the dynamic brake fans come on. The prime mover has NOTHING to do with dynamic braking.

    TrainSim-Matt ......what gives?
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2019
  29. StratPlayer62

    StratPlayer62 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    324
    Actually it does, I don't understand all of the details but it has something to do with setting up the proper field for the dynamic brakes to work, I'm sure if you do some searching you can find more info.

    As far as the smoke, I always thought it was excessive under any operation.
     
  30. dave.miller33892sd402

    dave.miller33892sd402 New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2019
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Really? I've seen many a train descending steep grades under dynamics, and I've never seen/heard this. Weird...anyone have any more info? And even if that's right, we should hear the dynamic cooling fans, right? I dont hear them in the sim.
     
  31. TrainSim-Matt

    TrainSim-Matt Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    1,101
    Yes new locos are built to the new standards, have been since West Somerset, which was the initial place that we built the new Diesel Electric physics ready to begin back porting on to GWE and SPG. Not aware of any others with problems at the moment, feel free to enlighten me if you believe otherwise :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  32. Juxen

    Juxen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2017
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    250
    When a locomotive starts using dynamic brakes, the prime mover notches up. In the case with GE's, it's to provide the mechanical velocity needed to power the grid cooling (the current from the TM's will provide the power for the DB fans). The GE's will use N1, N4, or N8 engine speed, whereas the EMD's typically use up to N4.

    You are correct in that you should also be hearing the cooling fans kicking on, which puts out the whine typically associated with dynamic brakes.
     
  33. raildan

    raildan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,029
    Likes Received:
    1,548
    You... you do realize they never redid the sounds nor gave any indication of ever doing so, right?
     
  34. Anthony Pecoraro

    Anthony Pecoraro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    1,893
    Likes Received:
    2,127
    I know it’s not a diesel, but the ACS-64 isn’t strong enough, and the Amfleet brakes seem too strong.
     
  35. StratPlayer62

    StratPlayer62 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    324
    I can't find the article that I read a few years back but it explained it, and it also gave fuel consumption figures during dynamic braking which were greater than at idle, so the prime mover is certainly doing some amount of work during dynamic braking.

    One thing I've noticed in the sim is the prime mover seems to increase speed as you increase the amount of dynamic braking, I don't know if this is accurate or not, I think as Juxen posted, the prime mover RPM is constant during dynamic braking.
     
  36. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    Maybe dave.miller33892sd402 was thinking of something else, but I believe part of his concern is that the dynamic whine sound WAS there before, and now it's gone. It is very loud in real life, so I agree it does sound wrong how it's currently implemented under the fixed physics. TrainSim-Matt, yes, there's a problem with the sounds. Also, it seems the engine SD40-2 notches up to fully notch 8 when under max dynamics. Which is also wrong (Should be only notch 4 as stated by Juxen).

    Also, there is indeed way too much smoke present. Theres a very big difference between a locomotive under load and the smoke it puts out, and a locomotive in dynamics and the smoke output. When the loco is in neutral or dynamics, there's very little smoke. When under a load, it's much heavier and the prime mover actually sounds very different too.
     
  37. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    Yes, you're correct. The EMD prime mover does not dynamically change RPM during dynamic braking. It's either idle or notch 4. That's it.
     
  38. Juxen

    Juxen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2017
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    250
    upload_2019-5-30_8-13-21.png

    Top row is notches (1-8), data is Gallons of Diesel per Hour.

    Here ya go. Also should mention, "Low Idle" is when an EMD is in Idle and in Neutral. The prime mover drops from (I think) 315 to about 275.
     
  39. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    I've also noticed that the GP38-2 accelerates much more slowly than the SD40-2, and is indeed limited by a PCS/overspeed system when exceeding max locomotive speed. The SD40-2 as stated yesterday does not have these restrictions and for some reason appears to accelerate at a constant rate throughout it's speed range. Looking at the published EMD documents, this is not correct behavior. Even a light SD40-2 on level track should have difficulty reaching 90-100 miles per hour because of amperage drop off, wind drag, etc. This one as modelled blows right through that.
     
  40. raildan

    raildan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,029
    Likes Received:
    1,548
    Are you sure about this? That would be odd...

    I remember them saying that they changed the ACS-64 on purpose so you couldn't use TSW to train yourself to hijack a real one... a bit of a paranoid concern, maybe, but regardless, that may be at least part of the reason why. I'd imagine the differences are more in the actual systems, though, their placement in the cab etc.
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2019
  41. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    I'm pretty sure...but I may be thinking of something in TS2019. You might be right.

    Regardless, we really need dynamic brake fan sounds. Just another example of something we've had in TS20xx for over a decade. And is missing from the new "flagship" sim.
     
  42. Anthony Pecoraro

    Anthony Pecoraro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    1,893
    Likes Received:
    2,127
    That’s more on how to start it, not physics. ;)
     
  43. SaMa1

    SaMa1 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    43
    I found out tractive effort chart for SD40-2 and made comparison to values obtained in game with a single SD40-2.

    To calculate the traction effort in the game I used simple assumption that traction force equals mass multiplied by acceleration.

    The test was done by setting a notch and then accurately taking time stamp of reaching each velocity in a video capture. Engine mass was set as 368,000 lb as indicated in wikipedia article of SD40-2. The test was conducted once with each notch in in Clear Cut scenario on level 0.0% gradient in northern approach to Cumberland. Resulting force was calculated in Excel.

    The gap in the results in middle is due a total power loss for few seconds at 28 mph. This happened with each notch and I don't know any realistic reason for this behaviour. There should be no gear transmission going on and surely the possible field weakening cannot slam the power totally off.

    As the test was conducted with only one engine and probably there are all kind of governors preventing the engine from using full traction force in the 0-30 mph, this range looks plausible. However, after the mysterious loss of power at 28 mph the engine skyrockets and generates over 2 times more tractive effort in perspective of acceleration which is not realistic.

    I will do the same test with few wagons to get more accurate presentation of the 0-30 mph range. Does anyone know any long 0.0% gradients in playable area of CSX:HH? The one I found in north of cumberland is only a mile long and makes testing difficult.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  44. hightower

    hightower Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    976
    Thanks for the heads up re the GP38-2. I’ll take a look at it at some point, although I’m having too much fun with TVL at the minute :)

    I must apologise also regarding that scenario. I removed every ‘mod’ relating to CSX and hey presto, rain on the windscreen again. One of those must have broken it so it was a bug, just not a DTG one!!

    Thanks again anyway.
     
  45. nne4229

    nne4229 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2018
    Messages:
    404
    Likes Received:
    484
    Which mods?
     
  46. hightower

    hightower Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    976
    There’s a whole heap of them I had (almost all reskins) although I don’t know which one caused the problem annoyingly.
     
  47. pschlik

    pschlik Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    1,555
    That is totally intended. The SD40-2 (along with the SD45-2) was the last thing EMD made with such a strange transition. At low speeds the motors are wired in mixed series and parallel (I think it’s 3 sets of motors wired in parallel, where each set contains 2 motors in series) which massively reduces alternator amperage requirements (the AR10 can’t actually handle giving full current to 6 motors in parallel). However, this would dramatically reduce the maximum speed so you get that transition to all motors in parallel after the motors aren’t running so hard, which allows the locomotive to drive on like normal.

    Because that involves an entire rewiring of the system, power is cut to prevent nasty arcing as the wiring physically moved. Other transitions (field weakening, generator transition) don’t have quite the same risk.

    Only thing wrong here is the speed. The transition should be at 24 mph for all I know...
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2019
    • Helpful Helpful x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  48. dan.marcusior73

    dan.marcusior73 Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2019
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    16
    Very interesting findings. Yes, as pschlik stated, the power interruption is the traction motor "transition" the loco goes through. Purely electrical cutout as it goes from pairs in series, to all in parallel. It's correct behavior. What isnt correct is what you noted - the extreme acceleration that follows transition. I also did some rough acceleration calculations and I also concluded that the locomotive is generating about two times the correct tractive effort at lower speeds, but up to 10 times the correct effort at higher speeds. The GP38-2 seems far more accurate in this respect.

    For the locomotive to accelerate as fast as it does past transition in the sim, it would be producing about 330,000 pounds of tractive effort when it should be about 40,000 pounds at notch 8 and 25mph. We're talking like 10 times too much power. Take any service with SD40-2's, on level track, and accelerate as normal to the point of transition. After transition, smoothly open the throttle to notch 8. Note the rate of acceleration! This is crazy behavior! That kind of force in acceleration alone would break couplers, cause string-lining, rip freight cars apart, etc. Proper train handling in real life avoids breaking knuckles and derailments, but in general it's only a problem in the 0 to 15 mph range. Starting and stopping trains. The forces and performance seen in this sim are simply unrealistic and totally unattainable in real life.

    Even though the physics are better, this sim is still BY FAR the least accurate train simulator on the market. Lots and lots of work is needed to even approach the others. Sad, but very true. TrainSim-Matt
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2019
  49. SaMa1

    SaMa1 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    43
    Hmmm. Good to learn something new. That transition is sensible and crazy at the same time :o I thought they did something similar with first diesel electrics in 1930's until electronic control was matured in 1950s. Never thought it was still used in engines manufactured in 1989. I guess only the skill of the engine driver keeps the train going smoothly over the transition then. :) As a fan of prototypical simulators I am glad that it is implemented in TSW in its full nuisance.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2019
  50. TrainSim-Matt

    TrainSim-Matt Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    1,101
    Interesting stuff.

    This is the Simugraph debug output for the SD40-2 showing TE vs Speed in Run 8 from stationary.

    If you overlay it on to the spec graph you should find it fits just about perfectly.

    Not sure how you're getting your numbers SaMa1 but they don't match with what we're seeing - can you share your source data and excel calculations as well?

    upload_2019-5-31_21-42-18.png
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 3

Share This Page