[edwardk]

I am glad I found a badly needed feature. If I understand whats been mentioned here so far, Tonnage will be renamed to Load. As long as it is understood what it is. The other part is to make sure we know what this value is representing. OR is hardcoded to recognize WagonType: Engine, Freight, Tender, and Passenger. As it is now, the wagon weight representing freight and passenger loads is counted. The tender is not included since it is part of the steam locomotive operation. As far as I know, Engines are not included. Any Engine added further back in the consist would be in DPU mode which would mean it is active. In the area of freight, the engineer would need to know how much he is pulling and if he has enough hp to pull it. Passenger was included to show the carriage weight. Keep in mind that we still have Weight in the HUD which is showing the entire weight of the train.


Edward K.

[edwardk]

It looks as if I may have run into a bug. I indicated that one of the WagonTypes is Passenger. This could be wrong since a passenger car is using Type Carriage, not Passenger. I will have to look into this.

Edit: It looks as if Type Carriage was renamed to Type Passenger so Passenger it is. There is no bug.


Edward K.

[steamer_ctn]

Hi Edward,

Thanks for adding the train weight to the HUD.

Can we change the title from "Tonnage" to "Load"?

[Genma Saotome]

roeter, on 24 October 2016 - 04:32 AM, said:

As Eugen already mentioned, here in Europe, total weight is also used to verify the train has enough brake power.
Each vehicle on a train (engine, car, wagon) has a 'brake weight', that is the max. weight that can be handled by this brake.
The total sum of 'brake weight' on a train may not exceed the actual weight of that train. That total weight does include all engines - alive or dead.
Normally, if all engines and cars etc. have their brakes operational, there is no problem. But, if the consist includes, for instance, a dead engine with the brakes isolated, it is a different matter. Sometimes additional cars are added to the consist just to ensure enough 'brake weight' is available.
It would be interesting if, perhaps optionally, this information could be shown somewhere as well.

Just for info : below is the 'brake weight' table for a German diesel engine (former class 210), taken from a model engine.
As you can see, the brake weight for this engine when the brake selector is set to 'freight' is actually less then the engine weight itself.

LocoWeight.jpg

Regards,
Rob Roeterdink

Hmmm. Here is the US there has always been a focus on setting the force the foundation brakes will apply to the brake shoes to be a bit less than whatever it would take to cause the wheel to lock up and skid. In actual practice this force (in found pounds) can be estimated by doing MassEmpty * 0.6 to 0.7 for most freight cars. And so taking an empty car weight of 50,000 pounds as my example, times 0.7 is 35,000 then divided by brake shoes applied on all 4 axles gives a estimated foundation brake target of 8,750 foot pounds of force for each axle.

The term Max Brake Force is always used with that product -- 35,000 in this example and the mechanical drawings for the brake system would always include the value of that factor based on the type of brake shoes being specified. IOW while 0.6-0.7 would be correct for cast iron shoes on ordinary freight cars, a smaller factor might be documented for the same car if it was to be equipped with modern composite shoes. The reasoning here is the people building and maintaining the car had to get the foundation brake equipment set up correctly for whatever type of brake shoe was specified and telling them the effective brake force on the wheel rim would not do that.

Is that factored empty weight in any way related to what you are describing as "brake weight"?

[edwardk]

steamer_ctn, on 02 December 2016 - 05:02 PM, said:

Hi Edward,

Thanks for adding the train weight to the HUD.

Can we change the title from "Tonnage" to "Load"?

I asked James as to what the naming convention should be and basically it was up to me and "Tonnage" is it. I realize "Load" has the same meaning elsewhere, but I have to keep the process as simple as possible.

Edward K.

[steamer_ctn]

edwardk, on 05 December 2016 - 05:04 PM, said:

I asked James as to what the naming convention should be and basically it was up to me and "Tonnage" is it. I realize "Load" has the same meaning elsewhere, but I have to keep the process as simple as possible.

"Load" is used in most working timetables that I have seen, and IMO is a better description of what the figure actually represents.

However, thank you for your feedback.