I have recently read an article about wartime steam engines - german class 52 (kreigslokomotive). These were built in high numbers and many (>100) of them continued to serve at czechoslovak railways as class 555.0. In early 60s they rebuilt many of them to burn heavy fuel oil (mazut) instead of coal (class 555.3) Oil was cheap at that time, and the rebuilt machines had slightly higher power, and the fireman had easier work. But the rising prices of oil, improvements in diesel-electric engines, and a few fatal accidents (explosions) took them out of service. Some of the oil burning engines server only 4 years (after upgrade). Both coal (555.0) and oil (555.3) burning classes were taken out of service in early 70's. Partly also due to low durability. Wartime engines were built form cheap materials and were not expected to serve nearly 30 years. However other coal steam engines were in service until 1980.
So there are a few questions
- how to simulate in simutrans the fact that oil burning steam engines were a viable option in 1960's, but not in 1970's. The main difference IMHO was that the running costs were lower than coal in 1960's but higher than coal in 1970's
- how to simulate the lower durability of cheaper wartime class 52 in comparison with pre-war class 50 which was very similar in design and power, but more expensive but also more durable. (increase_maintenance_after_years?)
- should oil burning steam engines be marked as engine_type=steam, or should they be a separate type? I think they should be steam, as they are sufficiently similar, and were housed in the same depots as steam engines.
Quote- how to simulate in simutrans the fact that oil burning steam engines were a viable option in 1960's, but not in 1970's. The main difference IMHO was that the running costs were lower than coal in 1960's but higher than coal in 1970's
Requires fuel economics feature, not yet added.
Quote- how to simulate the lower durability of cheaper wartime class 52 in comparison with pre-war class 50 which was very similar in design and power, but more expensive but also more durable. (increase_maintenance_after_years?)
Lower durability. Again a feature not yet implemented.
Quote- should oil burning steam engines be marked as engine_type=steam, or should they be a separate type? I think they should be steam, as they are sufficiently similar, and were housed in the same depots as steam engines.
Would likely be a retrofit/upgrade that changes the type. The fuel economics would then cover it with a different fuel source.
Quote from: Vladki on June 07, 2018, 09:12:35 PM
- how to simulate in simutrans the fact that oil burning steam engines were a viable option in 1960's, but not in 1970's. The main difference IMHO was that the running costs were lower than coal in 1960's but higher than coal in 1970's
Every locomotive already has a running cost/km feature. So could you have four different versions of the locomotive in the .dat file (both using the same graphics)?
- Pre-1973 steam version: medium cost/km, upgradable to...
- Pre-1973 oil version: low cost/km, higher power, only available by upgrade, upgradable to...
- Post-1973 oil version: high cost/km, higher power, only available by cheap upgrade, upgradable to...
- Post-1973 steam version: medium cost/km, cheap price, only available by cheap upgrade
The obsolescence feature should mean that the running costs of the pre-1973 oil version gradually rise until it's efficient to upgrade to the post-1973 versions, right?
Quote- how to simulate the lower durability of cheaper wartime class 52 in comparison with pre-war class 50 which was very similar in design and power, but more expensive but also more durable. (increase_maintenance_after_years?)
That sounds like a sensible plan.
Quote- should oil burning steam engines be marked as engine_type=steam, or should they be a separate type? I think they should be steam, as they are sufficiently similar, and were housed in the same depots as steam engines.
I think that's necessary for the upgrade path I've suggested.
I have only just spotted this: my apologies for not having spotted this earlier.
As Dr. Supergood notes, proper implementation of some of the economic dynamics of oil burning locomotives will need to await the vehicle maintenance/economics changes, which are pending, but have been delayed by a large amount of bug fixing work.