The International Simutrans Forum

 

Author Topic: Boats, barges and ships  (Read 94598 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #245 on: January 05, 2013, 12:55:54 AM »
Sdog: yes, I see the point. Is this any better? (Edit: Sadly, exporting from Blender to get player colour is too difficult, but hopefully the blue colour from the colourised photograph will suffice - I am not sure whether they actually had this, I should note, as the model does not bear this, and the colourised photograph might just be interpreted with artistic licence, but I do not know how accurate that the model is either, so it is rather much of a muchness. Also, I have made the shape of it a little straighter which might make it clearer in any event).



Greenling,

I don't know quite when I shall have time to process the images and add the .dat files, but it won't be until I return from my holiday in just under a week at least.

Kieron,

I tend to find it easier to compare scales of different things in Blender by importing/exporting objects that have a known size/length then re-scaling things in proportion to that object. That worked well, I found, when producing railway vehicles, helping to scale a goodly number of locomotives and carriages against one another to produce a consistent and visually pleasing effect.

Edit:

Looking on his blog here: http://simutrans-creations.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/ships there is a blender model. Zeno, if you're reading this, can we have it please? The two liners QE2 and Baltic could also be good additions.

EDIT: I should add that any of the pak128.Britain blends are of course free to adapt for pak128 style too. The blends aren't so detailed (except kierongreen's!), but I've not found that necessary at the scale they get rendered...

Hmm, looking at that page, there are a couple of British freight ships that it might be worthwhile having, too, if Zeno is willing.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2013, 01:06:49 AM by jamespetts »

Offline The Hood

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2889
  • pak128.Britain developer
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #246 on: January 05, 2013, 09:52:45 AM »
Looking at the size of this boat in real life I must say the render output looks a little large. I'm beginning to think a formal scale such as the one kierongreen suggests might be the best way forward, certainly for the larger ships.

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #247 on: January 05, 2013, 10:55:27 AM »
Do you mean the LCC paddle steamer or some other boat? I based them on the size of the steam tugs slightly enlarged (for the earlier boats), and then made the later boats progressively slightly larger again. Were these boats not larger than the tugs...?

Edit: The scale being half that of trains seems to fit what I have done: the passengers I always had to divide by two in size to make them fit realistically with the boat models that I produced of a passenger type.

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #248 on: January 05, 2013, 12:49:42 PM »
May I ask - what is the basis for some of the data on some of these ships, especially the passenger capacity and weight? The iron paddle steamer seems to have a capacity of 80, which seems too low compared to ships only a few years later, and also has the same tonnage as the wooden paddle steamer, which does not seem right. The cross-channel ferries of the inter-war years have a capacity of around 1,000, yet in pictures, they look decidedly larger than much earlier coastal steamers, such as the famous PS Columba (see here), which carried over two thousand passengers. Also, is the "Clyde steamer" of 1860 in scale with the iron paddle steamer of 1844? It seems a little on the large side given its relatively low passenger capacity.

Further, do we perhaps need to give some consideration to the issue of the consistency of naming? A number of ships have generic names (such as "iron paddle steamer" or "clyde steamer") whereas others have the names of specific ships (such as "SS Invicta"). It seems to be a matter of chance whether the ships have generic or specific names. There seems to me some benefit in using generic names throughout, as the names refer to a type of ship rather than a specific ship. Indeed, players might wish to give their specific individual ships of the same class unique names, and it would be confusing if the generic name of the class of ship is actually the name of a specific ship.

Offline The Hood

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2889
  • pak128.Britain developer
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #249 on: January 05, 2013, 01:38:27 PM »
Do you mean the LCC paddle steamer or some other boat? I based them on the size of the steam tugs slightly enlarged (for the earlier boats), and then made the later boats progressively slightly larger again. Were these boats not larger than the tugs...?

Yes - just comparing it e.g. to the existing Clyde paddle steamer which is (I think) larger.

May I ask - what is the basis for some of the data on some of these ships, especially the passenger capacity and weight? The iron paddle steamer seems to have a capacity of 80, which seems too low compared to ships only a few years later, and also has the same tonnage as the wooden paddle steamer, which does not seem right. The cross-channel ferries of the inter-war years have a capacity of around 1,000, yet in pictures, they look decidedly larger than much earlier coastal steamers, such as the famous PS Columba (see here), which carried over two thousand passengers. Also, is the "Clyde steamer" of 1860 in scale with the iron paddle steamer of 1844? It seems a little on the large side given its relatively low passenger capacity.
I must admit much of the data is a guess, and some of it probably needs revisiting. For the more recent boats I have a spreadsheet with data I have managed to get hold of. I will upload a copy to the blends git repository when I get chance. One important thing to note is the weight of ships should be the "displacement" rather than any measure of "tonnage" (which refers to capacity in a loose sense).

Further, do we perhaps need to give some consideration to the issue of the consistency of naming? A number of ships have generic names (such as "iron paddle steamer" or "clyde steamer") whereas others have the names of specific ships (such as "SS Invicta"). It seems to be a matter of chance whether the ships have generic or specific names. There seems to me some benefit in using generic names throughout, as the names refer to a type of ship rather than a specific ship. Indeed, players might wish to give their specific individual ships of the same class unique names, and it would be confusing if the generic name of the class of ship is actually the name of a specific ship.

This reflects one inherent problem with ships - many are unique and do not belong to a class, or had one or two sister ships but still did not have a class. For example, how would you classify the SS Great Western? It is a relatively famous, but unique, ship, so a class name would lose some of that...

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #250 on: January 05, 2013, 04:57:41 PM »
Hmm - there is an element of complexity with the capacities of these passenger ships that I had not initially envisaged. According to Wikipedia, TS Invicta of 1939 had a capacity of 1,304 passengers, 1,982 deadweight tons, was 102.54m long and 15.27m wide. (By comparison, the famous liner, the RMS Queen Mary carried 2,139 passengers, was 310.7m long and 36m wide).

According to Wikipedia, RMS Columba was 91.9m long and 8.3m wide and yet carried nearly as many passengers as the Queen Mary and considerably more than SS Invicta.  Clearly, passengers were accommodated more densely - the difference, therefore, in Simutrans terms between the vessels is not so much capacity as comfort, which is only relevant in Experimental.

The S. S. Great Britain, it will be remembered, carried only 730 passengers even when rebuilt, and even the Titanic could accommodate only 2,435; T. S. S. King Edward could accommodate 1,936.

The question arises therefore as to how important that it is to have this number of vessels distinguished only by comfort. Now that we know that comfort was indeed the principal distinguishing feature of these vessels over larger vessels, the question becomes how many different levels of comfort that we need, given that the liners represent another degree of comfort yet again. One thing that is not presently clear, and on which some enlightenment may assist, is how different in journey time were the cross channel runs of ships such as the SS Invicta to the trips of the Scottish vessels on the Clyde such as RMS Columba. If they lasted a similar length of time to each other, it is somewhat mysterious why the channel ships were larger, unless the Clyde ships were able to negotiate shallower waters or somesuch, which dynamic we do not represent even in Experimental. If there were real and significant differences in trip times (say one or two hours versus four or five hours), then it might well be worthwhile adding extra types of ships, especially for Experimental. If the differences are one or two hours as against two or three hours, however, this is probably not worthwhile.

Thoughts on the topic would be much appreciated.

As to names, this is a not entirely easy topic. The question is where to draw the line. The "S. S. Great Western" is a very famous and singular ship indeed, as is the "S. S. Great Eastern", but how many people have heard of the "S. S. Isle of Thanet" or the "M. V. Lord Warden"? The L. C. C. steamers on the Thames represented above were part of a class of 30; the earlier boat of the 1880s was based on a specific ship, P. S. Celia, but it is not clear whether there were other similar or near identical boats. Koch-I-Noor was somewhat singular, but had a near identical sister ship (with some differences of detail). I had planned to give all of my Thames river steamers generic names. Any thoughts on the naming issue would be welcome.

Edit: A brief comparison between the included TSS The Queen and the TSS King Edward:

King Edward
Gross tons: 562
Length: 74.6m
Beam: 9.2m

The Queen
Gross tons: 1,676
Length: 96.9m
Beam: 12.19m
« Last Edit: January 05, 2013, 05:11:55 PM by jamespetts »

Offline kierongreen

  • Dev Team, Coder/patcher
  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2346
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #251 on: January 05, 2013, 05:16:35 PM »
Cross channel was maybe 3 hours Dover to Calais historically. This came down to little over an hour by the early 90s, before increasing back to nearly 2 hours since then. In general the Channel Tunnel and low cost airlines have made the high speed ferry crossings uneconomic. As to the Clyde you are talking about crossings of an hour or so to islands in the firth - but there were often cruises along its length that would be 8 hours or more in the early and mid 20th century. If you go back to the mid to late 19th century mail boats, which carried passengers and supplies would have taken the best part of a week to get to the most remote parts of Scotland, stopping at dozens of ports on the way.

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #252 on: January 05, 2013, 05:21:28 PM »
Very useful, thank you! So, hmm, there is not a great deal of difference here between the functions of the lager and more well appointed channel ferries and the smaller, and presumably more cramped, Scottish boats, at least in so far as we represent things in Simutrans (either Standard or Experimental).

The cruises on the Scottish ships - would they be leisure trips rather than transport per se?

We need to think a little more on what we need in the light of this. The MV Balmoral looks to be a useful small vessel - but do we really need the TSS King Edward on top of the existing TSS The Queen, for example?

Offline The Hood

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2889
  • pak128.Britain developer
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #253 on: January 05, 2013, 05:24:25 PM »
Re comfort, capacity and complexity I think it would be helpful to rationalise the vast range of boats into certain "series" - that was certainly helpful in deciding what to draw so far. Essentially we need to distinguish between different capacities and ranges, and possibly comforts. So you have a timeline set of boats which are for short distances on rivers (low-moderate capacity low comfort); short-middle distance on rivers and coastal, e.g. clyde, IoW (high capacity low comfort), cross-channel sort of distances (medium capacity, moderate comfort), and longer distance passenger ships (moderate-high capacity high comfort). In my research the TSS King Edward (clyde) was smaller and more cramped than the TSS Queen (cross channel).

As for naming, one way of doing it would be generic names based on year and function e.g. "1860s Thames Paddle Steamer", "1950s Cross Channel Ferry" unless a class name was appropriate?

Again, note the difference between tonnage and displacement for ships. Tonnage (e.g. "deadweight tonnage") is not weight.


Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #254 on: January 05, 2013, 05:33:39 PM »
Hmm - ship weights are complicated, and the annoying thing is that sources invariably quote only one or two types of weight, which are almost never the deadweight.

As to the various series, this is a sensible approach indeed. The real question is what the differentiation is in principle between the channel series and the Clyde series. Certainly, the overall passenger numbers do not seem to be distinct. Perhaps the difference is just calibration of comfort for three hours on the channel boats as opposed to one hour on the Clyde boats?

On names - I'm not a big fan of using dates as part of names, at least in the final names as they appear in the game (translation texts), although this can be a useful shortcut in terms of the basic object text name. My preference is to find some or other distinguishing feature if possible, although this is not easy on ships. For the Thames steamers, I was thinking of something in the order of (in ascending date order)

  • Wooden river steamer
  • Iron river steamer
  • Steel river steamer
  • Steel river steamer (twin deck)

Or perhaps something that emphasises function such as: "River steamer (iron hull)", "Twin deck river steamer", etc..

Offline ӔO

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 2345
  • Hopefully helpful
  • Languages: en, jp
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #255 on: January 05, 2013, 05:40:38 PM »
RMS Queen Mary, which was an intercontinental ship, would have had to have logistics to match, so that would be food, clean water and fuel for the 5 to 6 day journey. She was one of the fastest ships of her time.

By comparison, RMS Titanic was slower, scheduled for 8 days to cross, so the owners designed it to be super luxurious to compete against her faster rivals. Actually, that's all she had going for her, because she was a dinosaur by the time she was completed. In those times, building big ships was more about ego and prestige, rather than practicality or sensibility.

Crossing Firth of Clyde or The Channel or even going to one of the Nordic countries only takes several hours in comparison, so there doesn't need to be as much logistic cargo aboard, which helps keep the ship smaller.

Offline The Hood

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2889
  • pak128.Britain developer
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #256 on: January 05, 2013, 05:41:35 PM »
That sounds good. I'm not sure how to distinguish several of the cross channel ferries however, as the main progression over time seems to be slightly larger, slightly more modern, but not any faster. I suppose in experimental there would be an increase in comfort.

Offline kierongreen

  • Dev Team, Coder/patcher
  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2346
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #257 on: January 05, 2013, 06:13:10 PM »
Where speed and capacity remain constant costs should fall. Cruises on the Clyde were mainly leisure orientated in later years but originally were transport links. The shorter distance crossings could only start operating once land transport reached ports nearer the coast. Some ports particularly in the highlands (Mallaig, Kyle of Lochalsh) were not connected to the rail network until the turm of the 20th century. Channel ferries and Scottish ferries may have had similar journey times, however the Channel ones were generally much larger.

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #258 on: January 05, 2013, 07:15:35 PM »
Reducing cost and increasing comfort with the later otherwise similar boats seems sensible in principle. AEO makes a good point about the logistics of a multi-day crossing: this can be reflected in comfort, I think.

On the question of scale, according to this source, PS Celia (the small Thames river steamer of the 1880s) was 100ft long and 14ft wide. There is not an exact precedent for the current "Clyde Steamer", but this small 1866 vessel from the Clyde is given as being 177ft long. A Blender comparison shows that the LCC steamer is a little longer than the existing "Clyde steamer", suggesting that they are not in scale relative to each other. But which to change?

Using Kieron's scale, taking the Mk. 1 underframe (known to be 63.5ft) and halving it, the existing Clyde steamer is the more or less on correct scale, and the Thames river steamers appear to be too large. I shall have to re-export them. Hmm.

Offline kierongreen

  • Dev Team, Coder/patcher
  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2346
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #259 on: January 05, 2013, 07:41:36 PM »
Halving the railway scale doesn't work for larger boats as it makes the largest boat using 224x224 100m or so. Hence why I suggested a scale proportional to the square root. This would mean ships 15m long would be equal to railways. 60m would be half railway, 240m a quarter.

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #260 on: January 05, 2013, 07:44:54 PM »
Ohh, I misread what you had originally wrote. Hmm - a logarithmic scale? An interesting idea, although some of the boats might end up looking rather odd compared with one another.

Another possibility is to have two or three different fixed scales, I suppose...?

Edit: On a topic other than scale, one relevant question is: how far back do/can we make the distinction between long distance and short distance ferries? We have a paddle steamer of the 1850s that The Hood drew as something of a guess as to what a steam boat would have been like at the time as part of the cross channel series, and we have information about the PS Mountaineer from 1852, which was one of the earlier Clyde steamers. I wonder how The Hood's 1850s steamer fits in with that...?
« Last Edit: January 05, 2013, 07:50:32 PM by jamespetts »

Offline The Hood

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2889
  • pak128.Britain developer
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #261 on: January 05, 2013, 10:09:46 PM »
The cross channel steamship I drew was based on the PS Stag

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #262 on: January 06, 2013, 01:24:52 AM »
I have now added in this commit unprocessed images for the PS Premier, an 1846 Clyde steamer:



This vessel is intended to be the immediate predecessor of the existing 1860 Clyde steamer (I cannot find its exact prototype, but I imagine that it must have had one, as it is quite detailed and seems similar in appearance to many contemporary ships), and the first in the line of coastal passenger/mail steamships.

We shall probably have to rename the existing "Clyde steamer", as it is now too generic a name when compared to its earlier and later cousins. If I am right in my guess about hull construction, we can call the one that I have just produced the "Iron coastal steamer", the existing one the "Steel coastal steamer", and the PS Columba that I am hoping to do next the "Luxury coastal steamer". There should probably be some overlap in dates - smaller coastal steamers should be available simultaneously with the larger ones. Alternatively, if the 1860 vessel is considered too out of date to continue into the 20th century as a smaller vessel, we could add something like the PS Madge Wildfire, built in 1886 and capable of carrying 923 passengers. We might call it a "Small coastal steamer" to compare it to the luxury coastal steamer.

There might also be something to be said for having larger boats earlier. The PS Chevalier was built in 1866, and was obviously considerably larger than the PS Argyll of that year (292 gross tons as opposed to 140). We might call it a "Large coastal steamer". I wonder whether it might need replacement in the 1890s with the similar PS Duchess of Hamilton, an even larger vessel with more modern technology. We might distinguish them as "Iron" and "Steel" large coastal steamers, if I am correct about the timeline of the materials used in these boats.

TSS King Edward might be "Turbine coastal steamer"; I shall have to consider further what to call later coastal turbine ships. The MV Balmoral might simply be "Small ferry" or "Small diesel ferry", although the latter would end up being displayed in the depot window as "Small diesel ferry (Diesel)", which would not be ideal.

Offline The Hood

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2889
  • pak128.Britain developer
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #263 on: January 06, 2013, 12:15:18 PM »
Is that not rather similar to the existing "Iron Paddle Steamer" - intro 1844 - based on this: http://www.clydesite.co.uk/clydebuilt/viewship.asp?id=9229 - or is this filling some other gap?

Given your proliferation of many steamers, it would be good to construct a spreadsheet with the various different ships in and what group/series/function they belong to. I'll upload my spreadsheet as a starting point ASAP.

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #264 on: January 06, 2013, 12:32:32 PM »
Ahh, I didn't realise that the iron paddle steamer was part of the coastal steamers series, rather than the channel steamers series. Perhaps there ought to be an indication in the .dat file of the prototype for each vehicle where the same is not clear from the name, together with a link to information about it used in research? Perhaps also the name(s) ought to reflect their roles...? Out of interest, on what vessel(s) was the wooden paddle steamer based?

Now that I have drawn the PS Premier, we probably need some means of distinguishing it from the slightly earlier PS Edinburgh. The Edinburgh, looking at the pictures, seems to have rather more in the way of covered cabins than the Premier - perhaps the Edinburgh was intended for longer haul routes, and would therefore have had a lower capacity but a higher comfort? We could therefore have the PS Edinburgh as the "Iron coastal steamer" and the PS Premier as the "Iron island steamer" or "Iron coastal steamer (short haul)", perhaps.

I am currently working on the larger 1866 vessel, the PS Chevalier, which does not seem to have an immediate parallel already in the pakset.

Offline The Hood

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2889
  • pak128.Britain developer
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #265 on: January 06, 2013, 12:38:31 PM »
OK I've just added the spreadsheet with all the info to github. You should find all the info you need in there. If you could add entries for your additions that would be great.

Offline ӔO

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 2345
  • Hopefully helpful
  • Languages: en, jp
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #266 on: January 06, 2013, 12:41:40 PM »
If they are prototypes, they could have higher purchase costs or other quirks, compared to their mass production counterparts. After all, prototypes are meant to experiment with new technology or features while ignoring costs or quality to work out kinks for the production model.

As such, prototypes tend to be inferior, compared to production types, in many ways and may be upgraded to a production model later on in life.

Offline The Hood

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2889
  • pak128.Britain developer
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #267 on: January 06, 2013, 12:44:57 PM »
Isn't the PS Chevalier rather like the existing "Clyde Paddle Steamer" of 1860?

PS I missed off a few in the spreadsheet - now fixed.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2013, 12:52:38 PM by The Hood »

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #268 on: January 06, 2013, 12:58:30 PM »
AEO - by "prototype" here I mean the real version on which we base our computer models, not an experimental version.

The Hood - I imagine the existing "Clyde steamer" in the pakset to be a smaller vessel, more similar to PS Argyle in overall size. PS Chevalier has a covered prominade deck at the rear, and is significantly larger than PS Premier, whereas the existing "Clyde Steamer" is not.

I have downloaded the spreadsheet and will be adding to it presently. I am interested, however, in what you imagined for the 1935 motor riverboat, as it would seem the natural successor to my Thames river paddle steamers - there is no link involved in that one.

Offline ӔO

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 2345
  • Hopefully helpful
  • Languages: en, jp
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #269 on: January 06, 2013, 01:13:31 PM »
ah, okay, I understand now.

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #270 on: January 06, 2013, 03:35:14 PM »
I have now added the boats on which I am working to the spreadsheet, as well as made a few other adjustments (including adding two boats that were already in the pakset that seem to have been missed from the original list) to here.

I have specified in addition a ship based on the PS Waverly III of 1899 to simulate the fact that large paddle steamers for coastal traffic continued to be built for some time, to a later and better design than the earlier larger boats of the 1870s. Indeed, it was this boat that the current PS Waverly replaced when it was sunk in duty during the War, the current PS Waverly being the last sea going paddle steamer ever built.

Offline greenling

  • Lounger
  • *
  • Posts: 1728
  • Simutransarchology it my hobby!
  • Languages: DE,EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #271 on: January 06, 2013, 05:32:43 PM »
OT
When come you back Jamespetts from your Christmas holiday?

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #272 on: January 06, 2013, 05:45:42 PM »
Wednesday evening.

Offline greenling

  • Lounger
  • *
  • Posts: 1728
  • Simutransarchology it my hobby!
  • Languages: DE,EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #273 on: January 06, 2013, 07:40:41 PM »
Ok. Jamespetts then comes the new ships on the next weekend in the SVN and Github.

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #274 on: January 06, 2013, 07:46:02 PM »
That does not necessarily follow: firstly, I don't control the SVN, and secondly, that will depend on how much time that I have when I get home to dedicate to this as opposed, for example, to fixing bugs or having a haircut...

Offline The Hood

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2889
  • pak128.Britain developer
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #275 on: January 06, 2013, 07:52:54 PM »
@greenling: things will be in SVN/github when we are ready - we all have other things to do other than simutrans...

@jamespetts: I can't find the site I got some ideas for diesel ferries from, but I've just found these Tyne ferries of 1940 which fit the bill - http://www.simplonpc.co.uk/TyneFerries.html
« Last Edit: January 06, 2013, 08:00:31 PM by The Hood »

Offline greenling

  • Lounger
  • *
  • Posts: 1728
  • Simutransarchology it my hobby!
  • Languages: DE,EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #276 on: January 06, 2013, 08:27:42 PM »
The Hood & Jamespetts
Please Send my a Pm then the Ship in The Github it.
Thank You.

Offline kierongreen

  • Dev Team, Coder/patcher
  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2346
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #277 on: January 06, 2013, 09:36:08 PM »
Regarding Island, Loch and "Super Loch" Classes.

Island Class entered service between July 1972 and April 1976, however the first two were slightly smaller than subsequent vessels - the first of the type drawn entered service in May 1973. The Loch Class is even more complex - the same basic design has been adopted on boats entering service from August 1970 through to the present, however these differ widely in details and size (see my post above for more information). The first two were quite different in looks from those following, with a one off ship entering service in April 1977 that starts to look similar to the more recent vessels. My "Loch Class" was based on 4 that entered service from July 1986- to April 1987, while the "Super Loch" class was based on the Loch Shira that entered service in June 2007.

Here is my best effort at data for these classes. I've added an "early" island class, a "proto", "early", "passenger", "vehicle" and "large" loch class and an "early" super loch class as well for comparison. Estimated displacement is based on 90% of vessel area multiplied by its draught:
ClassPrototypeCostIntroRetirePassengersCarsTonnageEstimated DisplacementPower
Proto-LochKyleakin110k(August 1970)n/a20028225901 tonnes?
Early-IslandKilbrannan-(July 1972)n/a50565181 tonnes?
IslandBruernish-May 1973June 1986164*669194 tonnes?
Early-LochIsle of Cumbrae-(April 1977)n/a16018201403 tonnes?
LochLoch Striven-July 1986May 200720312206408 tonnes?
Early-Super LochLoch Dunvegan-(May 1991)n/a250365491046 tonnes?
Passenger-LochLoch Buie-(July 1992)n/a25010295408 tonnes?
Vehicle-LochLoch Tarbet-(July 1992)n/a15018211435 tonnes?
Large LochLoch Alainn-(July 1997)n/a15024396855 tonnes
Super LochLoch Shira5.8mJune 2007-250362301222 tonnes1118
*While the Island Class officially has 164 passenger capacity this would be very uncomfortable. There's only room for 30-40 passengers inside, seats can be laid outside either side of the car deck for another 40 maybe but the rest would have to stand for sure. I'd say 50 is a reasonable capacity, matching that of the slightly smaller early Island class vessels.

Now, it would be overkill to add all of these... I think, well, until there's some point having extra vehicle capacity anyway! Now, I'd made the ships on the basis of the timeline going Island->Loch->Super Loch, however purely from a passenger capacity you could equally have Island->Loch->Passenger Loch. This would fill in a gap in the timeline in the 1990s, but as Passenger Loch has the same passenger capacity as a Super Loch it would leave the Super Loch a bit redundant (except if you make that cheaper to run - which doesn't make much sense given how big it is). I've not thought of including Early Island, Proto Loch and Early Loch, Vehicle Loch and Large Loch because in my opinion these wouldn't make sense on passenger capacity alone.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2013, 10:09:27 PM by kierongreen »

Offline jamespetts

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 20720
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #278 on: January 06, 2013, 09:49:53 PM »
Interesting - the standing passengers on the Island class can be represented by an overcrowded capacity in Experimental, and the facility to bring cars can likewise be represented by a higher comfort rating in Experimental.

Offline kierongreen

  • Dev Team, Coder/patcher
  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2346
Re: Boats, barges and ships
« Reply #279 on: January 06, 2013, 10:09:09 PM »
Well, there's usually a few cars on island class vessels, so probably normally isn't room for 160 passengers even standing. I've not been on the various loch class vessels much so can't comment on seating capacity vs passenger capacity for those.

The standing capacity is reasonable for the 5 or 10 minute crossings but you certainly wouldn't want to be standing out on deck on an island class vessel the whole hour of the longer crossings - especially in bad weather where waves come right across it!

Personally if you were wanting to code in overcrowding I'd say 30 seated, 60 capacity for Early Island/Island, 50 seated, 150 capacity for Early Loch/Vehicle Loch/Large Loch, 50 seated, 200 capacity for Proto-Loch, 100 seated, 200 capacity for Loch and 125 seated, 250 capacity for Early Super Loch/Super-Loch/Passenger-Loch.

I want to simulate cars being brought on by other means, when I get the time... ;)