[Csantucci]

For those asking for train crashes: better you watch to the ones you find on Youtube.

[Genma Saotome]

WRT the issue here: crashes.

The OR team decided some time ago that crashes will not be included in the software. End of issue.

As to the reasoning, we all know watching a PC screen to see "thousands of tons" of train flying all over the place can be pretty cool but both railfans and gamers often lose track of the fact that in reality, when crashes occur real people often get maimed or killed. Our talk is about which units were lost, not which lives were brutally ended. Employees of railroads know that talk and hate it.

Not doing crashes in the sim is simply our way of showing some respect to the very people whose jobs we enjoy simulating.

[ATW]

Thats well understood to know with or without option settings like 1: Derailments on/off 2: Derailment Scenes on/off.

The scenes in MSTS had an option not to see the scenes in the default.wag.

Derailment scenes or crashes don't need to have that damage, part bending or gore looks, just MSTS alike and that's it.

One last question and suggestion and I'm done for now: Will this none derailment scene tell us what stock or operating conditions trigered derailments such as a poor wag/eng file settings for us eng/wag and stock makers?

My suggestion related to my question above is to impliment an F5 Hud option to give us info like it does for forces like power, coupler and wheelslip % is by adding a percentage chance of derailment/Stringlining based on track and operating conditions and areas such as curves, switches, slack actions and grades where soon as %100 hits inbetween the number of cars would mean it's a derailment in that location of cars. Then we can investigate if it was train makeup or how we were operating. One example of what I mean is say I go into dynamic brake and the heavy I apply in that braking including slack action, the % goes up and if I apply air to the cars based on their brake settings some % goes down because the cars are help braking too. Would also simulate buff loading of size and power of locomotives where they jacknife of pushing too hard against cars with big tonnage and/or brake strength set in total against them.

Not trying to start something, just an idea as I was told why not give ideas to OR on Elvas Tower by one of the OR Development team members.

[James Ross]

One of the reasons (as I understand things) for not trying to model derailments is that they're complex physics and, even with a library to do that mathematics we'd still need to input all of the collision data and so on. It is a lot of work for something that, we think, won't occur too often (relative to the rest of the game). That makes it a poor use of our very limited time. It might, possibly, happen at some point, but we're not going to put effort in to it at this point.

As to the planned derailment/crash "dialog", I hope that we can include exactly what happened to trigger it in the information shown, e.g. which wagon or wheels came off, etc., even with the option to jump to that wagon perhaps. I'd like you to know why the game stopped you in your tracks. :)

[ChrisD]

Quote

The OR team decided some time ago that crashes will not be included in the software. End of issue.

I agree on this. If someone wants a crash-simulator, they can go and build their own, or watch You Tube Videos.


MSTS had some limited Crash simulation built-in, and look what that have resulted in:

Engines souped up to 100,000 HP (insane), and a 5 mile Route to go with it.

Here You can get this engine to its max speed before crashing into a mountain wall. :)

This has nothing to do with a train simulator.

So, OR team, You have definately got my vote to keep Your way of doing things. 100% :naughty:

ChrisD