Train Sim World 3 York - Middlesbrough

York - Middlesbrough is a section of the East Coast Mainline, which is a line that runs from London Kings Cross - Edinburgh Waverley, it is 393 miles long. Today, I will be suggesting a branch of the Mainline, which is located in the North East of England York - Middlesbrough. Sitting at 50 miles, this is an appropriate route for Train Sim World 3, as it features 125 mph running for half of the route along with slower action on the Middlesbrough lines.

Here is a Train Sim Classic Example:


Stations:

York: The starting point of the route, York Station, would be a bustling hub with its iconic Victorian architecture. It serves as a major transportation hub, connecting various destinations across the country.

Thirsk: Continuing the journey, the train would arrive at Thirsk Station, located in the charming market town of Thirsk. This station could showcase the town's historic character and offer glimpses of the surrounding countryside.

Northallerton: The second stop along the way, Northallerton Station, is situated in the market town of Northallerton. The station provides access to the nearby North York Moors National Park and serves as an important regional transportation hub.

Yarm: The next station would be Yarm, a very picturesque town situated on the south bank of the River Tees. The station could be designed to reflect the town's quaint atmosphere, with its historic buildings and vibrant high street.

Eaglescliffe: After Yarm, the train would stop at Eaglescliffe Station, serving the town of Eaglescliffe and its surrounding areas. This station could cater to both local commuters and travelers heading to Middlesbrough.

Thornaby: The train would then arrive at Thornaby Station, an important transportation hub and a significant junction on the route. This station serves the town of Thornaby-on-Tees and provides connections to various destinations in the region.

Middlesbrough: Finally, the journey would culminate at Middlesbrough Station, located in the heart of the town. This station would be a bustling terminus, reflecting Middlesbrough's industrial heritage and offering convenient access to the town's attractions.

Rolling Stock: For an authentic experience on this route, a variety of rolling stock could be included, such as:

1. Class 800: This modern, high-speed train is commonly used on intercity routes in the UK. It is a bi-modal trains and can change between electric and diesel, and can operate on electric in-between York and Northallerton
   
   
   
   
2. Class 156: These diesel multiple units (DMUs) are often seen on regional routes in the UK. They have a distinct appearance and are known for their reliability, making them a suitable choice for stopping services along the line.
   
   
   
   
3. Class 185: These diesel-powered trains are frequently used on TransPennine Express services. With their spacious interiors and comfortable seating, they could be an excellent choice for providing a regional service on the route.
   
   
   Class 180s: They can run as far as Eaglescliff as a layer before heading up to Sunderland as an AI service
   
   

Including a mix of these rolling stock options would allow players to experience different types of trains commonly seen on the York to Middlesbrough line, catering to both intercity and regional services.

 

Great suggestion this route would love to see a class 800 in the game

 

Same

 

As much as I'd like these modern trains, hiatchis especially, I personally think an northern ECML would fit so much better in BR era.

 

I would rather keep it modern throughout, so it’s modular

 

The thing is merges likely aren't ever going to happen so you might aswell get diffrent experiences from each one like TSC. Having it be BR era would work really well for york-middlesborough (albeit preferably up to Newcastle) in BR would have such a vary amount if stock it'd easily be a best route.

 

It can come, maybe like a DLOGW, but I would rather modern, I’m more of a fan of BR electrics than diesels

 

I would rather have a modern ECML South, but for north of York it would be more desirable set in the BR Blue era. I don't think Middlesborough is the best ending place - as it wouldn't add as much interest as going to somewhere like Newcastle. We also have that stretch of track already from TVL.

If set in the mid to late 1970's then we could have Deltics and Valenta-powered HSTs running alongside each other, with practically every BR Blue loco in-game layering on for a really interesting and varied timetable.

 

I like the idea of BR blue and Newcastle much more than Azuma and Middlesbrough.

 

Great idea! I'm surprised York hasn't in some way been put in yet.

 

Yep and if this route gets added, it won’t make York empty due to the type of rolling stock

 

What you got here is modern ECML and part of TVL might as well make it 1989 so that York to Darlington merges with Tees Valley Line that way we can make TVL busy with Middlesbrough to London King's Cross runs on HST Paxman Valenta Engines.

 

In my opinion merging ECML and TVL is kind of pointless - just add the ai. TVL is already not in its full form as it is in real life so merging them is just adding more to an unfinished route. Imo add the services and ai but don't merge- plus I don't even know if merges would work in TSW.

 

Merging is not possible, we would have RRO and RSN as one route else.

 

Good point there but check this quote by Matt about mergers

That means merging ECML with TVL is feasible the old way but not dynamic

 

So Matt was essentially confirming that they could do it but don’t want ro

 

That is correct if you apply that logic to this route you would have use a common origin that might be York station or end point of the Eastern region London King's cross.
Once they are able to solve that issue you should be able to merge this route with TVL although both needs to be 1989 remember the class 91 doesn't run up to York at this time you have to wait a year 1990. The electrification of East Coast Main Line only reached Leeds City

 

Wires were at York by ‘89, in fact they were at Newcastle by then

 

Newcastle to Middlesbrough would be more interesting and a little bit scenic though. York to Northallerton is about the flattest most boring bit of railway in the country.

 

No. He says, fairly clearly, that it is technically feasible to do it the old '2 routes merge into 1' way.
He says that extension (building onto an older route) tech is still at ground zero and that there is nothing, yet, to allow these to happen dynamically.
In other words: it would all be manual, and therefore a much harder task.

In the build-up to the Midland Mainline release, Skyhook also were quite explicit in saying that adding track onto a 'Baked' (completed) route is a very difficult task - hence why they added some inaccessible areas to the track layout ahead of release - and would take a lot of work to get done.

The only example of an extension or merger is Southeastern High-speed - falling into the former - but even that doesn't really count. The route was essentially remade for TSW3's new features (such as TOD4 lighting) and that was only because it was a Core Route, and a very popular yet disappointing one on TSW2. It should not be expected going forward.

 

route extensions are possible but in no way an easy task

at least in the short term don’t expect it

but as for the long term keep it as a maybe, as you don’t know which way DTG could choose to develop more on that.

 

I’m pretty sure they are 2 lines to do that, ECML and Durham Coastline, only problem being both routes have a lot of variation of stock that run they’re, and it has changed in recent years.

 

Let's put it this way then. Merging is technically possible, but not economically. DTG's Danny has offered many TSC route mergers, made in his spare time, on the Workshop. As TSC has no timetable layers, it's of course much easier to merge.

 

This argument has a very big dependent variable, which is the type of route, say GWE or BML get an extension, it would probably make more profit compared to a less well received route. A route like GWE, being reworked and extended to say Bristol has a higher chance of actually generating profit because users are seeing that a route that is popular is being updated to modern day and 3-4 new trains are being added and more length is being added which would make a business case. You can make the argument of dev time being spent on something like that, when it could be used on bug fixing or new routes, but profitability really depends on the route.

 

So long story short yes they can do mergers but won’t because it’s long. Still proves my point

 

Your point takes a way more cynical spin, implying it's just "we can, but we won't", when it's actually, "we could, but it takes a lot of effort and some of the tech isn't even there yet."

But, you know what they say. Don't let facts get in the way of an agenda.

 

Or in simple terms, we can but we won’t

 

It’s a won’t and a good won’t, as it would currently require a re build of every route they do extend.

it’s not viable and isn’t as an attractive business opportunity as a new route and loco.

 

[EDIT - Jan - Language]

 

The point pessitheghost is trying to say is dovetail have said theirselves they can do it but they don't want to. Its not that he's being ignorant and stupid.

If anything he is making a great point. While it's a good suggestion as I said dovetail are saying no to this. They could combine routes but on their half it would be very difficult hence they said No.

 

You repeated my point twice. Yet I’m the ignorant one… yea ok

 

It's ignorant at best. Idiotic at worst. Extremely cynical either way.

DTG lack the technology to do it seamlessly and it isn't worth the enormous undertaking needed to do it. It's not a case of "we don't want to".
Let me tap into the cynical side here - Dovetail, surely, would love nothing more than to charge money for an extension to an existing product, no?

If you were at point A and you had two ways to get to point B:
1. Climb a mountain
2. Take a detour, double the length but flat
You'd take the easier (2nd option).
You might want to climb that mountain but you won't because it's too much effort for what it's worth. Maybe when you have the appropriate gear for the job you might.

That's what this is.

 

I didn't. I took a different spin on it.
Believe what you want, though.

 

You aren’t getting paid to defend DTG mate. DTG don’t want to do it and it’s fine, they’ve said it point blank.

 

Come on you can’t be this naive, you’ve quoted my post about them not wanting to do it twice, repeating my point like come on mate. They literally don’t want to do it because as the person above said it’s not profitable to them

 

Still can if I want.
I am piecing together what both Matt (in the helpfully placed quote from Driverwoods) and Skyhook (on the Midland Mainline Preview) said about extension tech.
DTG will say "we don't want to" until they will. It's business talk, just like "If it's not on the roadmap..." and so forth.

 

LOVEk me. There's a difference between "We don't want to" and "We can't. Yet."

 

At the very least they could make it a bit smaller to their capacity..

 

[EDIT - Jan - Quarrelsome]

 

[EDIT - Jan - Quarrelsome]

 

While yes that's true dtg are all up for making like 50 miles worth of extension for sehs or however god d*mn long it is.

 

TBH Gotta agree with the end part. You should've seen how ridiculous he waas being in the "Is This Real" thread made for a joke.

 

1. Calm it.
2. Let me rephrase what I said.
"We can't (feasibly). Yet".

The quote found above in this thread from Matt quite explicitly says - and I'll give you this one - that they can the "old way." However, it's a much harder, costly, time/recourse consuming, etc. Process.

You have been, for this entire, discussion, been presenting the idea that:
Dovetail can, but don't want to.

I am presenting the, more truthful, idea that:
Dovetail can, and would want to, but it's not feasible. Or, to quote Matt; "Technically Feasible."

He also commented that extension tech is still very basic and it would basically all be manual, in the current state.

To conclude:
It's not a case of "they don't want to", it's just not practical.

PS: If you have to use "Fanboy" as an insult you may as well give up.

I wasn't being ridiculous. I just said the joke didn't work and that I could see why other people feel your posts were a bit, what was the word? "Spammy"?

You just made a meal of it and got LOVEking livid. I was being perfectly reasonable.
And trust me, my "unreasonable" side would be an instant ban from this forum.

 

Lemme correct you on the spammy part. I had dms from mgbgt and matt#4801 Saying that I wasn't spammy in anyway and just trying to not make me lose my LOVE when I was on the verge of it.

Yes I did make a meal of it because I wasn't the one in the wrong when you were going livid about it and making it seem like I'm the villain.

What you have to remember is the way this negatively impacts other people. I could've very easily killed myself from depression. But I did not. Think about your actions and how they'll affect other people.

 

No chance are you trying to suggest you almost-
I was reasonable until you started throwing a tantrum. In fairness, i'm glad you recognise you did make a meal of it.
It was another member who first called it out and I simply replied (to them) that the joke didn't make any sense.
You (confusingly) replied to me saying "finally someone agrees with me" even though I never said anything to dis/agree with you.
Then I said that it does seem a bit spammy to have (however many) posts on the first page. I wasn't being aggressive or trying to cause a problem.
It was at that point it went south.

How let's consign that to the past before this thread shares it's fate, shall we?

 

It's all in the past.

 

I can agree on that.

 

Just back from seeing York station yesterday on a one day museum visit from Cardiff
Wow, what a stunning piece of architecture and the rest of the city,

Amazing