Actually, ETDs don't take up the same amount of space as a caboose; a caboose is a full-length sprite, while an ETD is I think 1/8 size. This doesn't make any difference to train length unless you have some fractional combination elsewhere in the train.
Note that passenger trains don't need ETDs. Also, along about the time you get ETDs, you'd be replacing steamers (and thus their tenders) as well as cabooses. So you have a net gain.
The ETD issue was fought and researched long and hard. I admit it's not ideal. Someday there may be a more advanced sprite-sorter which allows some sort of overlay, so the ETD doesn't have to be an actual vehicle. For now, it is what it is. You don't have to use them if you don't like them.
Concerning their effect on realism, I can't help but ask, how often do you see any train, especially a freight train, that fits EXACTLY the station platform length? Not often, for sure. So in that way, the ETD's deficiencies make things more realistic, not less.
Development Projects Site: http://www.as-st.com/ttd
Japan, American Transition, Planeset, and Project Generic Stations available there
Well, I have a real bug to report this time.
The Big Boy is 'incompatible' with the mountain handling value set to 3 but only when it doesn't have any wagons attached (see screenshot). The only switches I have on are:
win2k
newtrains
electrifiedrailway
showspeed
mountains=3000 (only the first number matters anyway)
newstations
newhouses
I have no new graphics loaded apart from electrified railways and of course the US Set.
Attachments
The other train is a Challenger, which has already doubled back once because it waited at the red signal for too long.
The Big Boy's speed is limited to 1 km/h under the conditions I gave in my previous post. I know I need track foundations and I already said I only loaded two GRFs but the graphics have nothing to do with the speed.
Good! The shape of the passenger coaches will changed with Loco! How wonderful!
-----------------------------------------------------
I think the most useful train sets for me are this US set and default series.
About the Big Boy speed bug...it is no more. It was probably a TTDPatch bug since I was using Beta 1 of the Patch at the time and, at some point in the later betas, the bug was fixed and the Big Boy got its speed back.
Also, I've found that the livery overrides of the Patch now supports different tenders, so the readme, which claims this is not possible, will need updating.
After playing more with the modern engines and wagons of the set, I've discovered that there are balance problems with the tanker and between the Acela Express and the JetTrain.
SCR1 shows an engine with 10 old tankers, enough to fit into a 5-tile station. The tankers can carry a total of 300 tonnes of food, 300,000 litres of oil/rubber/water or 500 crates of goods. The screenshot also shows the same engine with 9 modern tankers. 9, because the modern tankers are too long and the train had to be shortened to fit into its station. The train can now carry only 270 tonnes of food, 270,000 litres of oil/rubber/water, yet 540 crates of goods. Why not increase the capacity of the other cargo types too?
SCR2 second screenshot shows the two water tanker liveries. One is clearly physically shorter than the other so that you can carry more water with train 2 than with train 3, yet the type of tanker you buy is identical.
SCR3 shows different food tanker liveries. Again, there is one tanker that is phyiscally shorter than the other, so more tankers can be fit into a 5-tile train, as shown.
I don't know how many GRF IDs there are left for wagons, but I think the modern tanker should be a wagon of its own, rather than an automatic upgrade, with a higher speed limit, capacity and purchase cost. The grey/blue water tanker should also be a wagon of its own, with a higher speed limit/purchase cost, just like the rubber transporter.
Finally, there are the disadvantages the JetTrain has: it costs more than the Acela Express, it has less TE, it costs more to run, and it has less HP. Its advantages are fewer and less significant: it can run on normal rail, and its rate of reliability decay is lower. Why not give the JetTrain a higher top speed, since it can run at over 300km/h, or the Acela Express a lower top speed, since it doesn't really go much above 240km/h on its real life routes? I'm also kind of surprised, from TurboTrain's achievements, that a turbine powered engine is more reliable than an electric engine.
Attachments
SCR3.png (23.76 KiB) Viewed 6525 times
SCR2.png (17.84 KiB) Viewed 6527 times
SCR1.png (50.06 KiB) Viewed 6529 times
Last edited by White Rabbit on 27 Jun 2006 09:07, edited 1 time in total.
The tankers have always seemed a bit weak, in my opinion. I would have liked to see more variety drawn, and then maybe we could break them out a bit more.
Concerning the TurboTrain, I've always found them to perform excellently, but be notoriously unreliable - as indeed they were in real life. AFAIK, they still hold the North American train speed record.
The Acela really can go 165; it doesn't because of track restrictions, but it's perfectly capable of it.
I'm far from convinced that the JetTrain's performance is better than the Acela. I guess we'll never know now as nobody even tried them.
Development Projects Site: http://www.as-st.com/ttd
Japan, American Transition, Planeset, and Project Generic Stations available there
krtaylor wrote:
Concerning the TurboTrain, I've always found them to perform excellently, but be notoriously unreliable - as indeed they were in real life. AFAIK, they still hold the North American train speed record.
The Acela really can go 165; it doesn't because of track restrictions, but it's perfectly capable of it.
I'm far from convinced that the JetTrain's performance is better than the Acela. I guess we'll never know now as nobody even tried them.
No one has tried them in actual commercial service, but test runs have been made. I have no sources, and Wikipedia does not give any either, but it claims that in...
...terms of records, in its three car configuration, the TurboTrain was achieved a speed of 275 km/h (170.8 mph) on the U.S. Department's high speed test track...on December 20, 1967. This is still the North American speed record for the fastest production train, despite the attempts of Acela to unseat it.
It also claims that the JetTrain...
...has recently set a world record by running a sustained speed of 330 km/h (205 mph) showing its ability for real high-speed performances.
(The JetTrain is of course not a production train like the TurboTrain was).
I am generally very suspicious of the Wikipedia. I think it's correct about the TurboTrain, because it is much more specific, and also because I've seen that stat in other sources. Concerning the JetTrain, I'm far from convinced.
Development Projects Site: http://www.as-st.com/ttd
Japan, American Transition, Planeset, and Project Generic Stations available there
Ive noticed that the us stations are on GRFCrawler but not the industrial stations which are on the us sets site shouldnt they be aded to GRFCrawler aswell.
