Log In
Register Now!
Help
In MSTS if you want to have a driving car that itself is not powered life gets very complex in relation to power settings to make it perform as it should do.
For instance, a push pull trainset would not be able to have something as simple as having a full power loco at the back and a non powered coach with a cab at the front. You would need to split the power 50:50 between the loco and the coach. Except MSTS did not even do this properly and helper locos, which is what the trailing loco then became only provided about 50% of its normal power leading to needing to build hybrid consists using custom engine files with very odd power settings to make it perform about the same as it would with a simple loco at the front.
Presumably OR will not make things as complex as this and not require a driving car to be powered as well, and not downrate other loco's in the consist.
Page 1 of 1
Non Powered Driving Cars
Rate Topic:
#2
- Conductor
-
- Group: Status: Active Member
- Posts: 331
- Joined: 21-April 08
- Gender:Male
- Location:N'Hampsha
-
Country:
Posted 12 June 2011 - 09:46 PM
Whoa, wait. Am I missing something here? B) Trailing locomotives not powering correctly in MSTS? I've been creating prototypical consists for years, based off of manifest lists and videos and I've never noticed anything of that nature. Is that a problem that was cured with BIN? Even just earlier, I was running a 117 car unit grain train up the Feather River with three SD70Ms; two on the head end and one 56 cars back (made according to a video) and had an overall cruising speed of 21mph. If those two trailing locomotives were only producing 2000hp each, I don't think I would have even been able get as far as the town of James, not too far from the foot of the grade, let alone make it all the way to the top of the pass. Mind you, the line is on a "mere" 1% grade, but with curves as sharp as 14º. I admit, I don't believe a DPU in MSTS acts like it does in the real world; some of the cars in front of it should have their slack compressed, but then again, it's kind of hard to tell in the sim.
#3 Inactive_DAve Babb_*
Posted 13 June 2011 - 09:43 AM
My understanding has always been that other locos in a consist do not perform as they would if they were the lead loco.
A trainset that would manage 80mph with the loco leading will only manage maybe 50mph with the loco trailing without fudging the power settings.
We've always had to spend some time experimenting with varying amounts of power to get it to perform the same in both directions.
MSTSBin might have resolved this.
You certainly cannot put a driving cab in an unpowered vehicle (for what are presumably logical reasons based on what Kuju intended).
But you also can't put a driving cab into a Zero/low powered vehicle and power it from other power sources further back in the train, it just 'crawls'.
A trainset that would manage 80mph with the loco leading will only manage maybe 50mph with the loco trailing without fudging the power settings.
We've always had to spend some time experimenting with varying amounts of power to get it to perform the same in both directions.
MSTSBin might have resolved this.
You certainly cannot put a driving cab in an unpowered vehicle (for what are presumably logical reasons based on what Kuju intended).
But you also can't put a driving cab into a Zero/low powered vehicle and power it from other power sources further back in the train, it just 'crawls'.
#4
- Open Rails Developer
-
- Group: Status: Elite Member
- Posts: 3,179
- Joined: 25-July 08
- Gender:Male
- Location:Manasquan, NJ
- Simulator:Open Rails, MSTS editors
-
Country:
Posted 13 June 2011 - 10:21 AM
According to my experience and research, MSTS uses a set of reduced physics for non-player AI ENGs. From what I've heard, with BIN cab switching, by jumping to each ENG, you can effectively initiate the full MSTS physics for all ENGs in a consist. This appears to be confirmed by the fact that steam exhaust changes color on AI engines the same as the player engine.
At the present time, OR uses the same physics for both the player and AI engines. As we introduce more complex physics models, the dev team will have to look at the computing cost of calculating complex physics for every locomotive. At a minimum, all locomotives in the player consist will use the complex physics model.
At the present time, OR uses the same physics for both the player and AI engines. As we introduce more complex physics models, the dev team will have to look at the computing cost of calculating complex physics for every locomotive. At a minimum, all locomotives in the player consist will use the complex physics model.
#5 Inactive_DAve Babb_*
Posted 19 June 2011 - 12:08 PM
longiron, on 13 June 2011 - 10:21 AM, said:
At the present time, OR uses the same physics for both the player and AI engines. As we introduce more complex physics models, the dev team will have to look at the computing cost of calculating complex physics for every locomotive. At a minimum, all locomotives in the player consist will use the complex physics model.
That is good to know, what about having a 'non powered' driving vehicle, something common in the UK and I don't think unheard of in the US ?
Page 1 of 1