Atomic Systems

Hi Dave,
PHEW!!! That was touch and go in the tunnel, but I made it, with Eastleigh 33020, only to have a broken coupler approaching Sevenoaks Thank goodness I saved after the tunnel!

Regarding your inability to couple the Tonbridge Q1s - I only changed the Player loco in the activity, retaining the original (Tonbridge) tender and second loco (33035), but mine didn't couple the first time! I had to hit it quite hard, then it did couple OK, but it looks as if there is something amiss with the bounding box at the front of the Tonbridge locos - when coupled, the buffers are overlapped quite a way. Of course, it could be the tender bounding box which is at fault, but I've not investigated yet.

Cheers,
Ged

Hi Gentlemen,
I managed to complete this activity As Mike said earlier, it is a challenging - VERY challenging! - activity, but very enjoyable. Thanks Martin!

It's a pity that I couldn't do it with the specified Tonbridge Q1. I couldn't determine which coupler broke, but on examining the eng and wag files, found that the Tonbridge Q1 tender has its chain coupling Damping entry set as ( 1e6N/m 1e6N/m ), so I changed it to ( 1e6N/m/s 1e6N/m/s ) and finished the activity without further problem. Of course, it could have been any of the other couplings which originally broke, as they all have their Break parameter as 1.1e7N, which seems a little low.

Cheers,
Ged

'Morning All,
Is anyone still watching this thread?
Is anyone bothered!?
Is it STILL raining
Has anyone managed to get through Knockholt Tunnel with an unmodified Tonbridge Q1?

I've run many tests and found that although the parameters in the .eng file of 33029 work perfectly OK when running on the level or slight upgrades, it's not possible to climb the gradient in Knockholt Tunnel (also possibly the gradient nearer Tonbridge). Amending the values for Friction, MaxPower, and MaxBoilerOutput to those included in the Eastleigh Q1 enabled me to get through the tunnel and complete the activity successfully. Changing just one or two values didn't help. Also, I found that changing the value for BoilerVolume had a small beneficial effect.

I tried using Joseph Realmuto's program FCalc to recalculate the Friction parameters; although it gave values between those shown in the two downloads, they didn't work in this case, so I reverted to using the Eastleigh values

One other difference between the Eastleigh and Tonbridge Q1 .eng files is in the weight (Mass) of the loco. Those in the Eastleigh download are shown as 37.7 tons, whereas the Tonbridge locos are shown as 51.25 tons. I initially thought that may be a contributing factor to the difficulties with the latter locos, but it actually had little, or no, effect! I also discovered that 51.25 tons is correct, according to Kentrail.org.uk. The Eastleigh value of 37.7 tons is nearer to the weight of the fully laden tender, 38 tons.

Cheers,
Ged

I'm still here!

I tried substituting Eastleigh 33020 following your lead, but still got stuck in the tunnel.

I tried both maintaining full boiler pressure, and running down the pressure to minimum, but in both cases failed miserably.

If I try again, I think I will use two Deltics - that should do it!!

Mike

Has anyone managed to get through Knockholt Tunnel with an unmodified Tonbridge Q1?

Well, actually, yes, and first time, and I did not sneak a class 60 on to the back, either! The loco does have the punch to do this, but you have to drive within the envelope, and it does seem to be a bit slow.

Also, the gradients for this route do not match the real world, so things would be worse if it did!!

regards

Hi,

SDtrains wrote:The loco does have the punch to do this, but you have to drive within the envelope, and it does seem to be a bit slow.

Many thanks for your reply!
It could be that, due to outside influences, MSTS behaves slightly differently on different PCs. Using the proscribed loco (33029), I could only get to 1.1 miles from the next signal when I came to a stop; regulator was between 92% and 100%, cutoff at 75% and sanders on. This was just holding the train stationary and any reduction in either caused it to roll back; it wasn't due to lack of boiler pressure as that was over 200 psi, due to my constant juggling of regulator and cutoff.

MikeandDi wrote:I tried substituting Eastleigh 33020 following your lead, but still got stuck in the tunnel.

My only run with an Eastleigh loco was with the same one, with which I managed to complete the activity. This is why I compared the eng files of both locos and found the differences.
I suggest you try with 33020 again! The most important thing is to keep the Boiler Pressure up by making sure the Steam Generation Rate is higher than the Steam Usage Rate for as much time as possible - you can't necessarily while filling the boiler with water! This involves 'playing' with the Regulator and Cutoff (Reverser) all the time. The lowest speed I had with 33020 was 2 mph whereas the lowest with a modified 33029 was 0.5 mph! This would imply there are other differences between the two, like weight (Mass).

However, I did enjoy the activity - much better than a straight thrash up the main line, with nothing to think about other than speed limits

Cheers,
Ged

Hi Ged

I think you have much more patience than I.

Once I'd slowed to a crawl around Petts Wood, I decided to call it a day with trying to maintain boiler pressure, as at that rate I would be unlikely to reach Tunbridge Wells the same day, if at all.

Still, it has been fun trying, and it's good to see that MSTS still has some excellent content creators, so thanks to Martin and the other active uploaders, for keeping the game well and truly alive.

Regards
Mike

Hi Mike,

Once I'd slowed to a crawl around Petts Wood

Oh dear, mate I think you need some steam loco driving lessons!
I've had about half a dozen runs, with 33029, and in all cases, Petts Wood was passed at around 15 mph with the worst being 14.9 and the best 16.2.

Cheers,
Ged

Hi one and all,
I haven't lost track with this thread, just been very busy of late. I just had a gander on the downloads page and there is a new update as of today; http://members.uktrainsim.com/filelib-i ... leid=29340
Before I download the updated version I will try again over the weekend with my current installed version. You never know!!

All the best

Andy

Hi Andy,
The only difference in the new update is a document with steam loco driving instructions.
Steve (SDTrains) has done it with 33029, so it is possible! I will give it another go myself.

Cheers,
Ged

I completed it with the Tonbridge Q1s running the act as it comes. Its hard to couple the two locos together, I think the size perameters and the bounding box parameters are all wrong. I also had to change the RSH ballast wagons to Chain coupling though as I couldn't couple the different rakes of wagons together. I didn't have any problems with steaming for the most part (more on this later) and went though Petts wood at 27mph (230 PSi) and exited Knockholt Tunnel at 9 mph (185PSi). I'm manual fireing BTW. However this is when my problems started. I was throwing so much coal on the fire to maintain its volume that it was unprotypically rapidly cooling down. Now I know from experience when a steam loco is working hard and your shovelling coal on like theres no tomorrow it does not cool down unless the fire is in a mess and badly clinkered. I didn't exceed 15 mph for the next couple of miles with the regulator been moved between 50% and 85% on a 25% cutoff. This enabled the fire to heat up again. Then the blower stopped working which didn't help matters, and then all sorts of odd things started happening, like the basic water usage rose to 7000lbs/hr, and the only way to maintain steam pressure was to drive it hard! However I made Tonbridge in 1 hour 9 minutes.
Jim

jimmyladd wrote:... and the only way to maintain steam pressure was to drive it hard!

Perhaps this is prototypical behaviour! I think I read somewhere that Bulleid locomotives had a reputation for responding to hard driving and that if they were steaming badly the best thing to do was open the regulator. If you tried to nurse them they would die on you.

Dennis

(Don't know that much about steam)

Hi Gentlemen,
Thanks to the clues given in this thread and in Martin's additional driving tips, I have managed to complete the activity, without having to make any changes!! Except that I couldn't get into Sevenoaks due to a broken coupler three times, so I changed all the wagons' coupling strength to 6e9N and got through without problem. (But that's no fault of the activity).

Unlike Jim (jimmyladd), I used the automatic fireman and I think the problem I had before was that he couldn't keep the fire mass at the optimum level and I'd 'forgotten' that I could help him by using the F and R keys!! Even though I exited Knockholt Tunnel at 11.1 mph with 212 psi in the boiler, it took me 1 hour 23 minutes to complete the activity.

It does help when one uses ALL the 'tools' at one's disposal

Cheers,
Ged

Ged, I'm mystified why you keep getting couplings breaking. I had no issues at all, I kept saving expecting them to break after what you had posted. The only thing different I can think of is that particular msts install on my PC doesn't have the BIN patch installed, and I'm guessing yours does?

Hi Jim,
Yes, I have version 1.7.0519 of the Bin patch installed in my LSE setup.

I even got a break when I was 'coasting'! You could watch the wagons jumping backward and forwards as they each passed a certain point on the approach to Sevenoaks.

Maybe you've already done a global change to the Break parameter for all your stock, using Route Riter?

Cheers,
Ged