[copperpen]

As I said earlier, the power on this train agrees with the power suggested by the Al Krug calculator. It is sufficient to do the job, not maintain line speed. Without taking curve resistance into account the train should be able to climb a 2.4% grade at just over 28 mph. Throw in a few curves and you get what I actually achieved, 24 mph in run 8, a bit less in run 7. The grade displayed on the HUD is 2.39 maximum.

[markus_GE]

 ajs, on 01 July 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

Brake Horsepower; see here:

http://en.wikipedia....rake_horsepower

Cheers

Alan

:oldstry:, Allan, that explains a lot :p

Cheers, Markus

[beresford]

When I edited my FP45 ENG file to fix the size bug, I changed a few other lines to match the file of the other poster. I restored the original 3DTS ENG file EXCEPT for the single line that fixes the size bug, and tried again. I got further than before but stalled out on grade 2.36 about 3 miles from the 50mph limit sign near the top of the hill. I had to use continuous sand to prevent immediate wheelslip and N8 (N7 would just decay down to zero speed), which gave 10mph max. I suspect that copperpen has modified ENG files.

[copperpen]

Sorry, my eng files are SLI defaults. What size bug are you referring to and which post contains the suggested eng file mods please?.

[beresford]

 copperpen, on 02 July 2014 - 02:12 AM, said:

Sorry, my eng files are SLI defaults. What size bug are you referring to and which post contains the suggested eng file mods please?.

The 'size bug' is the one where large gaps appeared in the consist next to FP45s, and was attributed to the engine size being in Imperial units.

http://www.elvastowe...ry/page__st__20

My current ENG files are (hopefully) attached.

Attached File(s)

•  3DTS_FP45_ATSF90.eng (22.06K)
  Number of downloads: 150
•  3DTS_SD75M_BNSF_8255.eng (56.54K)
  Number of downloads: 143

[copperpen]

OK, I now see where your problem is. The SLI SD75M as delivered is slightly over powered which is why I can climb the hill and you cannot. Yours being modified to the true HP figure means you are actually 796.5 hp shy of the total requirement to lift the train up the hill. Place the extra engine at the rear of the train.

Edit at 18:50:- I have removed the extra horsepower from my player consist and still went up the hill in run 7, albeit a shade slower than before, and no sanding used. My eng files carry a date of 2003 so are definitely not modified until today.

The FP45 has the same size figures as your modified file so I really don't know where that gap came from.

[beresford]

Replying to your previous message, I was a bit concerned that the coal wagons might not be fitted to allow remote control IRL. Is it a better plan to replace one of the FP45s with an SD75, which gains me 700HP (I think)? The only option I seem to have checked is 'Advanced Adhesion Model', no curve resistance, so it is a bit of a mystery as to why my installation is more steep and slippery than yours.

[markus_GE]

RC pusher engines are, AFAIK, not only remotely controlled, but radio controlled in American practice, so no need for anything to be fitted on the wagons in-between.

Pls correct me, however, if I´m wrong.

Cheers, Markus

[copperpen]

 beresford, on 03 July 2014 - 06:25 AM, said:

Replying to your previous message, I was a bit concerned that the coal wagons might not be fitted to allow remote control IRL. Is it a better plan to replace one of the FP45s with an SD75, which gains me 700HP (I think)? The only option I seem to have checked is 'Advanced Adhesion Model', no curve resistance, so it is a bit of a mystery as to why my installation is more steep and slippery than yours.

I think that most US trains of the era depicted were able to use rear end remote helpers, If not then a crewed engine would be OK. swapping the FP45 with an SD75 should get you up the hill. I have advanced Adhesion and curve resistance checked so the difference is even more of a mystery specially as I did not use sanding in either of my last two runs.