Field weakening will be available on KRS

The Rail Simulator forum was very busy leading up to the UK release on October 12th 2007, this is a read-only copy of those discussions for historic and review purposes.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
AndiS
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 6207
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:43 pm
Location: Jester's cell in ivory tower
Contact:

Post by AndiS »

CaptainBazza wrote:
I've seen nothing released after 18 months development to lead me to think KRS is any better than a newer version of MSTS.
Oh contrare, JohnB, I've seen nothing in the last 18 months to make me think that pessimistically. :P
I think Jon's point was in the succeeding sentence:
Which for me and others, was always a bit too game like.
However, there is a ray of light into the dark "I am so happy vs. I am so disappointed" debate in that statement: What is the difference between a brand new simulator and an improved version of MSTS? Not that I want to start a debate about that here, but I think if everyone answers the questions for himself, then everyone has a list of feature which are important for himself. And this list of features is different for each person, which is the important finding in the analysis.

In the end you will always be able to call KRS an improved version of MSTS (or/and Trainz) and I do not even see a disadvantage in that, if the improvements are significant (enough, for me).
User avatar
jbilton
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 19267
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:08 pm
Location: At home ..waiting to go to Work.
Contact:

Post by jbilton »

Hi
Well there will always be two schools....simulator and game.
The simulator people were hoping that KRS would follow that path...ie design a loco to drive properly, then put a box around it.
Whereas it would appear that the game (MSTS) school has been followed ie...design a box, and then animate it.
The only problem is that the latter can be easily changed by better artists, as shown over the years in MSTS....but the former, once hard coded (often incorrectly) is very difficult to alter.
I sometimes think that alot of grief would have been saved if the word simulator was dropped, and everyone just called it a game.
I'm personally not into flight simms, but I'm told by friends that are, that the advances over the years are fantastic, and that they now have fairly accurate flying physics.
I think there was just the hope, rail simulators would get the same treatment.
Cheers
Jon
------------------------Supporting whats good in the British community------------------------
Image
User avatar
SavV1
Been on the forums for a while
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:44 pm
Location: Somewhere in New Zealand
Contact:

Post by SavV1 »

jbilton wrote:.... but I'm told by friends that are, that the advances over the years are fantastic, and that they now have fairly accurate flying physics.
And they are at Flight Sim version... what is it now?
Cheers
Stefan van Vliet

TSNZ Webmaster
http://www.tsnz.co.nz
User avatar
CaptainBazza
Has a sign reading.. Its NOT the end of the world!
Posts: 18852
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 10:21 am
Location: Land of the Long White Cloud.

Post by CaptainBazza »

X actually. :lol:
paulhydey2
Getting the hang of things now
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 12:51 pm

Post by paulhydey2 »

CaptainBazza wrote: The terms "steam locomotive" and "steam engine" are interchangeable descriptions depending where you live. However, to complicate matters, "steam engine" can also be applied to all 'stationary' steam engines. "Steam motor" is never used, or at least I've never seen, or heard, the term used.

Here endth the lesson. :P
While it is generaly correct that the terms "steam locomotive" and "steam engine" are used as interchangeable, I have always been taught (by the same poeple that also use the terms as interchangeable) that, in the context of railways, technicaly a "steam locomotive" is the whole power unit (including boiler etc.) and a "steam engine" are the parts that convert the steam into tractive effort, i.e. frames, cylinders valves, coupling/conecting rods, valve gear, bearings, wheels and axles (not an comprehensive list).
User avatar
bigvern
Chief Track Welder
Posts: 7705
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Swindon, England

Post by bigvern »

From what I've read the physics of the default planes in FSX are fairly mundane, the Airbus in particular has come in for a large amount of derision on the forums.

That said, some of the third party add-ons for FS2004 are excellent but these are almost a complete seperate simulation within the game engine.
User avatar
johndibben
Bletchley Park:home of first programmable computer
Posts: 14007
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Bletchley

Post by johndibben »

jbilton wrote:Hi
Well there will always be two schools....simulator and game.
Agree there is but need not be. Calling it a simulator simply makes some feel better about playing a computer game. BVE is nearer to being a simulator as you don't usually drive trains from the outside :) As an aside, BVE sounds are the best I've heard.
jbilton wrote:I sometimes think that alot of grief would have been saved if the word simulator was dropped, and everyone just called it a game.
Hear, hear. Problem is that it would force people to admit they're 'playing' and it's 'fun'. Some require far more than that. They treat it very seriously and almost like a job. That throws up all sorts of irreconcilable logic and their frustration boils over, hence the personal stuff.

Any criticism is not simply of a game but of themselves. Add that to the above and you've got trouble, deep down and dirty, personal abuse born out of the conflicts created in the mind.

If we all said 'it's only a hobby' and relaxed knowing any good was a bonus and no one dies if anything bad appears, I'm convinced trainsimming would not only be more peaceful but more appealing.

That said, with model railways clubs it's accepted that 'it's only a hobby'. They still bicker and argue like old women as, I have to say and include myself in the description, it's a hobby which attracts .... how can I desribe us .... well .... let's say we're not brick-chewing hod carriers and not a little temperamental :) Those with an artistic temperament or imagination are .... like actors and comedians. Spent an afternoon in a model railway shop with people arguing exactly which shade red a buffer beam should be! That said it all to me.

There are those that simply like making models, routes and activities and never play the game. Equally as temperamental :) but it matters little to them whether it's a simulator or a game as they enjoy the creation side of it and if trainsiming didn't exist they'd probably be building planes or designing golf courses.

I honestly believe we'd save ourselves a great deal of trouble by actually taking an in depth look at the psychology behind the game and that which people want from it as opposed to having 20 mods with their fingers in a dyke.

A little psychological cement could do the job more permanantly.

This probably sounds like rubbish but I said years ago that there should be a wide-ranging debate about that which we want from trainsimming.

Cheers

John
User avatar
jamespetts
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 857
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 1:07 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by jamespetts »

AndiS wrote:However, there is a ray of light into the dark "I am so happy vs. I am so disappointed" debate in that statement: What is the difference between a brand new simulator and an improved version of MSTS? Not that I want to start a debate about that here, but I think if everyone answers the questions for himself, then everyone has a list of feature which are important for himself. And this list of features is different for each person, which is the important finding in the analysis.

In the end you will always be able to call KRS an improved version of MSTS (or/and Trainz) and I do not even see a disadvantage in that, if the improvements are significant (enough, for me).
For me, the most important improvement is (if they get it right, of course) the improved signalling and the network simulation: that makes the huge difference between simulating a train, and simulating a whole railway.
James E. Petts
mickoo737
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 11:10 am
Location: Felixstowe
Contact:

Post by mickoo737 »

Ok in real simple humpty dumpty terms :).

Steam locomotive, a vehicle propelled by steam and moves ( rail )

Steam engine, an engine driven by steam but does not move, pump engine, beam engine etc etc

Traction engine, a vehicle propelled by steam and moves ( road )

Electric locomotive, a vehicle propelled by electricity and moves ( rail )

Electric engine, an engine driven by electricty but does not move, factory motor, washing machine etc. Also commonly called in modern times an electric motor.

Diesel locomotive, a vehicle propelled by a diesel prime mover ( rail )

Diesel engine, an engine driven by diesel that does not move, stand by generator etc.

Engine, ( original term 'generic' ) a machine that converts power from one form to another.

Motor, ( modern term 'generic' ) a machine that converts power from one form to another, usually electricity.

Traction motor, railway parlance for the above

There, simple as ABC, but of course, us great unwashed masses just mix it all up and then the best bit.....pick holes in others who are equally wrong.

Technically a solar panel is an engine but you'd be called stupid if you said so, you'd be right, but stupid right !.
plainsman
Getting the hang of things now
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:32 pm

Post by plainsman »

One point that I am misunderstanding, Does KUJU mean that in KRS there will be a limit of 5 stages of field weakening (shunting is the term used over here)? The reason I ask, is the EMD GP35 had 9 stages prior to transition, and 5 stages following transition. I think this is the most complex unit I am aware of in North American operation. Will KRS allow this unit to be modeled accurately? Also will you be able to define series and parallel configurations in transition? The typical variations are S, SP, 2S-3P, 3S-2P, and P.
Bob Boudoin
User avatar
johndibben
Bletchley Park:home of first programmable computer
Posts: 14007
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Bletchley

Post by johndibben »

mickoo737 wrote:Technically a solar panel is an engine but you'd be called stupid if you said so, you'd be right, but stupid right !.
Right, sad, anal and pedantic .... if members were being polite :)
mickoo737
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 11:10 am
Location: Felixstowe
Contact:

Post by mickoo737 »

johndibben wrote:
mickoo737 wrote:Technically a solar panel is an engine but you'd be called stupid if you said so, you'd be right, but stupid right !.
Right, sad, anal and pedantic ....
Depends who your talking too, if its for an engineering or technical exam, you'd be top brownie points, but if its most of the people here in a train sim community then yes you'd be amongst close friends.

I dont know who are the sadest, those that are sad for knowing the above or those that tell the others there sad for knowing it, l think the latter as the former are usually oblivious and quite happy in there own little special world.
User avatar
steampsi
Been on the forums for a while
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:42 am
Location: Sideney

Post by steampsi »

plainsman wrote:One point that I am misunderstanding, Does KUJU mean that in KRS there will be a limit of 5 stages of field weakening (shunting is the term used over here)? The reason I ask, is the EMD GP35 had 9 stages prior to transition, and 5 stages following transition.
the Kuju post said
users will be able to input how many field diverts a loco has, and the speed and amperes at which they operate
so implies more than 5 stages are available, but you're right it's not certain.

Glad someone is back on topic ...
plainsman
Getting the hang of things now
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:32 pm

Post by plainsman »

Here is the part from KUJU that is confusing me:
"Field Diversion is used on higher speed Diesel Locomotives in the UK. Up to 5 stages are possible."
I hope the section you quoted takes precedence.
:-?
Bob
User avatar
AndiS
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 6207
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:43 pm
Location: Jester's cell in ivory tower
Contact:

Post by AndiS »

Half of me thinks "if they do not implement all these features with maximum configurability then they learnt nothing from MSTS and forum feedback", but the other half remembers that the issue of a hardcoded absolute minimum radius which is too large for trams and narrow gauge still is not settled. :-?
Locked

Return to “[RS] Pre-release Discussions”