British narrow gauge (preservation project needs volunteers)

cornelius · Post by **cornelius** » 20 Feb 2004 21:28

I'm happy to go with whatever the consensus is, but personally I've always preferred the idea of having narrow gauge as its own set. Because the trains will be slow and have a much lower capacity than normal, there will be hardly any operational advantage to using them - their realistic ability to go round sharper corners and into smaller holes isn't represented by the game engine - so what's the point if there are also normal trains available? :)

As far as dates go, as people have said the interesting part of narrow gauge development is outside the allowed time-span of the game. Ideally you'd want to start around 1860. So my initial idea was to use a bit of suspension-of-disbelief, and pretend that 1920 = 1860, then work forwards from there. Obviously this would also be imcompatible with the BR set (although it does open the possibility of doing a Victorian standard gauge set... sorry, must stop thinking up more work...)

I know the game can't start any earlier than 1920 - but could something in the patch change the way the date is displayed to 'fake it' back a bit?

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 20 Feb 2004 21:34

Fake the date? Hmm, that's an interesting idea. Definitely one for the Patchteam.

ChrisCF · Post by **ChrisCF** » 20 Feb 2004 23:01

krtaylor wrote:You don't have to have 15 vehicles for LUL because I bet the performance characteristics are very much the same.

There are three different families of these: tube (the ones running in deep tubes), sub-surface (the ones running in cut-and-cover tunnels) and surface (DLR). Allow three generations for each, plus two passenger cars for "middle" units. Add on some locos from the pre-LUL companies, maybe two of these to kick the whole thing off. There's 13 already.

So, the flat-sided gondola is one car (actually two, small and large) but it has as many as 30 different appearances, for all the different cargos it carries, and different empty-appearances as well (the insides have different linings to protect some cargoes). But all occupying one slot.

I would assume they all have similar or near-identical capacities (e.g. 30 of whatever units are in use).

Yes, it would be nice to have a brake van, but I think you only need one. Its livery could change over time if needed.

Different brakes, different specs ...

In general, I see that the tube/light-rail/tram system is typically a whole lot more useful, and period-appropriate than NG.

As for the date, we've just pushed the introduction dates back 10 years for now. That way, we have 10 years less inventing to do

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 21 Feb 2004 00:27

ChrisCF wrote:There are three different families LUL: tube (the ones running in deep tubes), sub-surface (the ones running in cut-and-cover tunnels) and surface (DLR). Allow three generations for each, plus two passenger cars for "middle" units. Add on some locos from the pre-LUL companies, maybe two of these to kick the whole thing off. There's 13 already.

The point I was making is that the performance stats are all pretty much the same (I don't think the LUL speed-limit has increased much since 1920.) So, you figure how many you need available at any one time (say, three) and have them change their appearance over the years to be whatever the generations they were. That way everything will look right, the older ones stay looking old until you replace them, and the newer ones look as they should. It's like in the DBset, some of the locos are in different paint depending on when you bought them, but the ones you already own stay in their old paint.

ChrisCF wrote:
So, the flat-sided gondola is one car (actually two, small and large) but it has as many as 30 different appearances, for all the different cargos it carries, and different empty-appearances as well (the insides have different linings to protect some cargoes). But all occupying one slot.
I would assume they all have similar or near-identical capacities (e.g. 30 of whatever units are in use).

No, they have differing quantities of the different cargoes they can be fitted to hold. Play with the DBXL set sometime, you'll see how it works. It's really quite slick, and efficient.

ChrisCF wrote:
Yes, it would be nice to have a brake van, but I think you only need one. Its livery could change over time if needed.
Different brakes, different specs ....

How do you mean? Brake vans in TTD wouldn't actually do anything, they would just be "eye candy." They don't contribute to additional stopping power or anything. So you can have their livery and appearance evolve over the years as needed, while always remaining just the one slot. Kind of like tenders.

ChrisCF wrote:In general, I see that the tube/light-rail/tram system is typically a whole lot more useful, and period-appropriate than NG.

Now THAT is a very effective argument, I cannot dispute it.

ChrisCF wrote:As for the date, we've just pushed the introduction dates back 10 years for now. That way, we have 10 years less inventing to do

You mean, you are going to start the set in 1970?!!? I am really looking forward to the classic steam locos of BR, LNER, GWR, et al. The 1930s was a classic time for those, as we are replicating on the other side of the pond in the US set.

ChrisCF · Post by **ChrisCF** » 21 Feb 2004 00:38

krtaylor wrote:The point I was making is that the performance stats are all pretty much the same

Again, capacities increase over time. I'm trying to allocate generously, since I'd rather overestimate the space I need, and end up with some to spare (to put more stock from various types, maybe some extra heritage DMUs, or a steam loco, or some futuristic invention), than underestimate it and run out, having to decide between key vehicles in the set.

How do you mean? Brake vans in TTD wouldn't actually do anything, they would just be "eye candy."

They could hold a little mail (IRL, this tended to be a few parcels, 4 bags of mail seems an appropriate enough compromise), or possibly valuables.

You mean, you are going to start the set in 1970?!!?

What the ... !?
I said the introduction dates have been pushed back by 10 years. As an example, last year's Class 390 Pendelinos are actually introduced in game year 2013. Where does that leave people starting the game in 1921?

cornelius · Post by **cornelius** » 21 Feb 2004 00:40

Okay here's my first attempt at drawing graphics from scratch. We have (left to right): Ffestiniog England tank, four wheel carriages, modern tourist carriages (based on Born Acorn's but a bit smaller), generic four wheel mineral trucks. I've put a DB set train below it for scale comparisons. Criticise away!

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 21 Feb 2004 00:53

ChrisCF wrote:
krtaylor wrote:The point I was making is that the performance stats are all pretty much the same
Again, capacities increase over time. I'm trying to allocate generously, since I'd rather overestimate the space I need, and end up with some to spare (to put more stock from various types, maybe some extra heritage DMUs, or a steam loco, or some futuristic invention), than underestimate it and run out, having to decide between key vehicles in the set.

I THINK you can change the capacity through a livery override. We're looking into it still though.

ChrisCF wrote:
How do you mean? Brake vans in TTD wouldn't actually do anything, they would just be "eye candy."
They could hold a little mail (IRL, this tended to be a few parcels, 4 bags of mail seems an appropriate enough compromise), or possibly valuables.

So make them refittable.

ChrisCF wrote: What the ... !?
I said the introduction dates have been pushed back by 10 years. As an example, last year's Class 390 Pendelinos are actually introduced in game year 2013. Where does that leave people starting the game in 1921?

Oh, you pushed it THAT way. That will be confusing as heck but OK. I think there have already been requests to Josef to allow some sort of calendar-diddling to take place, where the displayed year is X amount less than it "really" is according to the game.

ChrisCF · Post by **ChrisCF** » 21 Feb 2004 00:54

Nice work. Definitely not bad for a first attempt

I'm off to reorganise the BR set graphics, and see where we stand right now.

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 21 Feb 2004 01:08

I just looked at the NG graphics, and while they look great, another problem occurred to me - the game counts "slots" per car regardless of how short they are. So from the game's point of view, the NG train is twice as long as the DB train beneath it, and would require twice as long of a station, regardless of the fact that visually it would only take up half of it.

cornelius · Post by **cornelius** » 21 Feb 2004 11:36

krtaylor wrote:I just looked at the NG graphics, and while they look great, another problem occurred to me - the game counts "slots" per car regardless of how short they are. So from the game's point of view, the NG train is twice as long as the DB train beneath it, and would require twice as long of a station, regardless of the fact that visually it would only take up half of it.

This is so that the train can load in one go, right? If the loading speeds were set so that each wagon loaded to it's (low) maximum in one 'chunk' rather than 5 units at a time, would that help negate the problem?

Oracle · Post by **Oracle** » 21 Feb 2004 11:43

If you had wagons that were no less than 50% long and you doubled the loading rate from the default then you'd end up with the original loading speed, i.e. that would negate the problem.

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 21 Feb 2004 18:07

True. OK then, that would be the proper solution.

Born Acorn · Post by **Born Acorn** » 04 Mar 2004 18:44

Cornelius, is your obsessions with DBXL set over yet?

cornelius · Post by **cornelius** » 04 Mar 2004 22:59

Maybe... I'm up to 1997 and running out of things to connect to other things. I've also had a load of work on lately, but I did have a go at a WD Baldwin (1917) that I'm not totally happy with. This will be the slowest set ever made ;)

Born Acorn · Post by **Born Acorn** » 04 Mar 2004 23:03

I'd recommend this ( lots and lots of pics)

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASI ... 95-7618264

(the book looks different really)

I recommend it

BTW That baldwin is the one imported by Col Stephens cheaply for the WHR, right?

cornelius · Post by **cornelius** » 04 Mar 2004 23:13

Born Acorn wrote:BTW That baldwin is the one imported by Col Stephens cheaply for the WHR, right?

There and various other places, yeah. I think they've found another one somewhere to restore now?

I've got a fair amount of books and drawings already - the designs of a lot of the Ffestiniog type engines are pretty well engrained into my brain.

Born Acorn · Post by **Born Acorn** » 04 Mar 2004 23:15

I can't wait for K1's entry into service later this year, can you?

That book also has lots of station diagrams and maps and original NWNGR plans for a Beddgelert>Porthmadog extension

cornelius · Post by **cornelius** » 04 Mar 2004 23:34

Born Acorn wrote:That book also has lots of station diagrams and maps and original NWNGR plans for a Beddgelert>Porthmadog extension :shock:

I'll see your Beddgelert - Porthmadog extension and raise you the Beddgelert - Bettws-y-Coed electric line.

Born Acorn · Post by **Born Acorn** » 05 Mar 2004 15:55

wasn't that going to Corwen too?

cornelius · Post by **cornelius** » 06 Mar 2004 14:10

Born Acorn wrote:wasn't that going to Corwen too?

Yeah. If the NWNGR had been fully realised, it would have been immense. Old Charles Spooner was a rum lad.

With a good north Wales map it would be possible to make it happen in the game

Transport Tycoon Forums

British narrow gauge (preservation project needs volunteers)

Who is online