Atomic Systems

I cant see imho that cab movement is that essential, msts has not got it,and thats done pretty well ."true" i know the 142,143s, are nicknamed nodding donkeys
but i have ridden forty miles on the footplate of a great western prarrie, and an ews class 37,and was very impressed with the locos stability,and lack of sway.
RS has a great feature, not seen it mentioned on here, and that is in cab mode the movement between loco and tender, beneath the fallplate nice touch.

I know a driver who was off work for weeks with a back problem caused by the class 90.

I accept the Kuju have had an attempt to produce cab sway and the 'hunting' anyone who rode in a mark 1 coach at speed would know all about.

Reckon it looks good from the rear view on trains where you might expect it.

RSDL will never discuss what they intended and got right or wrong or kept or decided not to include but I'd give them the benefit of the doubt with this issue.

Below 20mph it stops which made me think this is what they were aiming at as if it's a bug then the stock would continue to move from side to side but more slowly which it doesn't.

It is a pity that the amount of sway / rocking motion cannot be defined for each individual piece of stock. It would be a nice surprise though if the development tools showed that it could ...

Regards,

Dan

Speaking of freeware, I liked the cabview movement in SpoorSim (random swaying directions and speed-related amplitude). BVE was OK too, but IIRC no external view had been made available (what makes it a lot easier to code certain features such as cant).

growler37 wrote:RS has a great feature, not seen it mentioned on here, and that is in cab mode the movement between loco and tender, beneath the fallplate nice touch.

I think it's terrible. For me, all that does is highlight how badly KRS handles changes in gradient.

I'd like to see some sort of sway, even if it only appeared in an in-cab mode. Just remember that you're not supposed to notice that suspension is there... For the most part, its job is to make the ride smoother.... However the fact that you don't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. You don't overtly notices the suspension in most modern european cars, but that doesn't mean it isn't there.

Just for interests sake guys, have a look at the videos on my youtube page, if you look at the one with the king hauling the train, and watch as it passes under the footbridge and along the straight you'll see some of the bouncing that people are talking about, also on the Cambrian video, you can't see it so well, but take it from me the loco and tender were bouncing all over the place in relation to eachother.

http://youtube.com/user/danzwook

maybe its just a case of being an older stock, 'thing',
as with cars, suspension systems improve, i can imagine modern units dont move abaout so much.

You are right wookey - leaf spring suspension does give more 'bounce' than modern suspension systems on multiple units and the HSTs. The main reason for this is the amount of damping involved.

I could give chapter and verse on suspension set-up but I think you would all find it a wee bit boring

Anyway, simply put, the modern air suspension on multiple units, HSTs, Mk 3's, Mk 4's and more modern diesel and electric locomotives do reduce the amount of vertical motion as well as lateral motion. Poor track alignment and dipped rail joints however will always push any suspension system to the absolute limit.

Regards,

Dan

People comment on BVE which has brilliant cab sway and the AM10 ride from Watford to Milton Keynes brought back memories.

However, that's a cab only sim. I'd guess that as soon as you add an exterior view, matters get more difficult.

Trainmaster was a cab only sim and it was many months after TMTS was announced that we saw a train on a curve or even curved track.

What I know about computer progamming could be written on the back of a postage stamp but I'd bet turning 2D into 3D isn't easy and literally adds a new dimension

Possibly more features are the same such as cab sway?

Signalling was said to be easy but someone else said it wasn't. I havn't a clue but attempt to use knolege of what's involved rather than how it can be recreated to judge whether all the things people want are achievable as simply as it might first look.

Picking all the good points of previous sims, omitting the bad and then applying them to KRS appears unfair.

How unfair will be seen if another new sim appears.