News:

SimuTranslator
Make Simutrans speak your language.

LNER Tyneside EMU inconsistencies

Started by Vladki, December 03, 2017, 08:47:25 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Vladki

Hello James,

this was forgotten from the thread about demo game - the mail version of LNER tyneside EMU looks to be smaller than passenger version. Perhaps due to being freshly rendered with new semitransparent edges, while the passenger verison was rendered without transparency.

Also I noticed that, while pax and mail versions have the same price and tractive force, the mail version has 2x more power than the pax version.

jamespetts

Thank you for noting this: I may need to re-render the older carriages to make them more consistent.

As to the power, this is correct, as the motor luggage vans had 4 motors, whereas the other power units had only 2: see here.
Download Simutrans-Extended.

Want to help with development? See here for things to do for coding, and here for information on how to make graphics/objects.

Follow Simutrans-Extended on Facebook.

Vladki

Ok, if it has 2x more engines, shouldn't it have also 2x more tractive force? And somewhat higher purchase and running costs?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk


jamespetts

Good point - I have now amended it to take account of that. Thank you for your feedback.
Download Simutrans-Extended.

Want to help with development? See here for things to do for coding, and here for information on how to make graphics/objects.

Follow Simutrans-Extended on Facebook.

Vladki

I have studied the pages about lner tyneside stock, and found out that there was also a twin unit with motor parcel and passenger trailer. (and only 2 engines).

Also units without rear cab, that were used to form longer trains.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk


jamespetts

Yes, I have a whole set of diagrams of this stock in a book somewhere. These were originally drawn by Junna, I believe, who may not have thought it necessary to represent every unit and/or may not have had access to all of the details.

How important is it to have the full range of different units of this stock, do you think?
Download Simutrans-Extended.

Want to help with development? See here for things to do for coding, and here for information on how to make graphics/objects.

Follow Simutrans-Extended on Facebook.

Vladki

#6
I think that adding baggage + passenger twin (with rear cab) would be nice.

Twins without rear cab, are not too important, unless you make them noticeably cheaper. In that case a reversed twin would be necessary to allow   4 part unit with motors on both ends.

EDIT: I'm wondering what was the difference between luggage and parcel vans .... Would it be sensible to have them as two types - mail and boxed (or even cooled) goods?

I have looked further here: https://www.lner.info/locos/Electric/ner_tyneside.php and here https://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3317
And found info about fish being transported on tyneside railway. Maybe it applied only to older NER stock. But they write that the fish service was running in 50-60's

So if I may suggest these changes
Two twin units - with luggage motor and with passenger motor, and common passenger driving trailer (can_lead_from_rear). These should be constrained to connect only to each other, and perhaps to single unit luggage vans.

Single unit luggage van, with doubled power, bidirectional, can_lead_from_rear, should be able to connect with everything - it had normal buffers in addition to special tyneside coupling. Some info is based on NER units, but LNER was a replacement for those, so similar usage might be expected.