Thames Trains 166 model:

[166Driver]

I have noticed a few flaws with this latest release. I will list them below.

1: The sounds are not right, from the outside, it sounds like a reasonable approximation of a 166, on the inside, sounds nothing like one.

2: The wipers don't function, and the black bar below does not wrap around far enough.

3: No cab view at all, and no passenger views.

4: Driver's door is too far back, very noticeable.

5: The current drivers viewpoint is too far back

6: When looking through the train, the windows on the other side don't match up.

Overall, I still like this train, and wont uninstall it. However, this being my local train, I am more likely to notice faults like that, Although I must admit it took more than 20 minutes for me to realise that.

[rwaceyw]

1 and 3 aren't really faults, just stuff that wasn't completed in time for the models release, and may come in the future

David

[166Driver]

#2 and #4 are my main concerns.

[rufiky4]

You could put things like this in a PM to the author, which would probably be more effective than slapping it all over here.

And if you're so 'concerned' why don't you have a go yourself.

Chris

[buffy500]

I have noticed a few flaws with this latest release. I will list them below.

1: The sounds are not right, from the outside, it sounds like a reasonable approximation of a 166, on the inside, sounds nothing like one.

2: The wipers don't function, and the black bar below does not wrap around far enough.

3: No cab view at all, and no passenger views.

4: Driver's door is too far back, very noticeable.

5: The current drivers viewpoint is too far back

6: When looking through the train, the windows on the other side don't match up.

Overall, I still like this train, and wont uninstall it. However, this being my local train, I am more likely to notice faults like that, Although I must admit it took more than 20 minutes for me to realise that.

Apart from the obvious I'm in a bad mood answer of "tough .", all I can add is as ever, its not what people say, its the way the say it that annoys.


1. The sounds were never advertised as proper 166 sounds.
2. you can't really add a wiper to curved screen like the 166 as it does not work.
3. Cabview was not advertised, passenger view..... oh well youll probably live without it, and if you are that bothered then use the one from the 465.
4. Never noticed.
5. WTF are you talking about ?
6. Unlucky.

[LucaZone]

Fair enough. The trains are also my locals too, as i live in the Windsor Slough area and thus there is nothing but 166's and 165's, and the odd HST or 2. All elements of the textures were drawn from actual photo's i took.

But as others have said, and as i stated in the info of the file download, proper sounds and cab will come at a later date.

The reason there is no cab at all, is because there is no 166 cab currently modelled, and im so keen to get one done that i thought people would be more inclined to help out if they dont have one at all, rather than providing it with a cab from another class, and people simply putting up with it.

Again with the sounds. Although we did get real 166 sounds recorded, the process of getting them into MSTS adn working with the model was taking too long, and as the model and skin were finished, and had been for a while, i thought it best to release the model for everyone to enjoy, while the other details were sorted out.

Number 2 is related to Buffy's efforts. Personally i did notice this myself, but during the process of creating and fine tuning the model to match the textures, i realised that achieving a 100% accurate texture and model ment the train didnt look enough like the real 166. I know this sounds odd, but to get the train in MSTS to look like the real thing, i had to use a bit of creative licence, as direct copying didnt appear to work.

Number 4. This is partly due to the way the model is mapped, but its not that far out. We're talking about a foot, as the side textures were drawn directly from an image i created of the entire length of a 3-car 166, edited together from about 20+ photo's i took.

Number 5. Its impossible to be too far back, its set in the cab of the unit. What u may be finding is that its too high. I did my best to get the cab view at the right height, but what i did do on purpose was set the view directly in the middle of the cab and not slightly to one side. This was because i was not including a cab in the release and felt the view was more comfortable in the middle.

Number 6, when u say looking through the train, do u mean in the cab as well as the passenger area? if so then u may be right, something i didnt touch on when reskinning the model, was the interior. This is something i will be updating when a cab gets released for the model. The plan is to release an update once the cab/sounds/interior get done.

[166Driver]

As for the drivers view, it seems that it is a considerable distance behind, and without the cab, you get quite a long shadow in front of the train.

The driver's access door really is too far behind, just does not look right. I have had other people confirm this.

I'm not too bothered about a passenger view, but for the cab, I tried to find one (with a lot of effort) that is a reasonable approximation. I settled with the Class 333 cab view.

I was going to start work on a 166 cab, I just don't know where to begin.

And finally, Dave's reply was very rude. When I released the F/A-18A 3 years ago, I had similar comments, and guess what, I was not rude to the people complaining, I actually took some time to solve the issues raised.

[james100]

I think the model is quite realistic and am looking for to the cab to be realesed. I think the train will go well with the Hereford-Paddington route realesed at the end of 2004.

[buffy500]

As for the drivers view, it seems that it is a considerable distance behind, and without the cab, you get quite a long shadow in front of the train.

The driver's access door really is too far behind, just does not look right. I have had other people confirm this.

I'm not too bothered about a passenger view, but for the cab, I tried to find one (with a lot of effort) that is a reasonable approximation. I settled with the Class 333 cab view.

I was going to start work on a 166 cab, I just don't know where to begin.

And finally, Dave's reply was very rude. When I released the F/A-18A 3 years ago, I had similar comments, and guess what, I was not rude to the people complaining, I actually took some time to solve the issues raised.

whatever.
I'm not in the right frame of mind to respond without a rant, so I pass.

[LucaZone]

As for the drivers view, it seems that it is a considerable distance behind, and without the cab, you get quite a long shadow in front of the train.

The driver's access door really is too far behind, just does not look right. I have had other people confirm this.

I had similar comments, and guess what, I was not rude to the people complaining

Im affraid its impossible to be too far back. As far as i know u cant set the distance forward or backwards, u can only set the XY position (height and width). So how its too far back i have no idea. Im pretty sure its purely because the cab isnt there.


As i said before, the reason the drivers door isnt quite forward enough is because of the way the model is mapped with the textures. Remember this model is not a custom build, it was a conversion of the 465 model.

If u check here - Turbo Project Improvements], i posted a topic requesting anyone with ideas or comments that might help me improve the model. Posted not long after the model was released. Be sure to add your input into the topic, as it is there that im colating info to from which i can make any changes / improvements to the sets. I like them too, and if i can comment without looking like a total arrogant big head, if it wasnt for me we'd still be using the original 166/165 models (also by Buffy500) that were made back in 2001. Yet i think you will find the issues u have raised with the current one are specs of dust compared with the 2001 model.

[jjules]

I think the model is quite realistic and am looking for to the cab to be realesed. I think the train will go well with the Hereford-Paddington route realesed at the end of 2004.

Agreed. I've not used the train enough to notice problems, but I am most grateful to buffy500 and LucaZone for providing this great model. I prefer HSTs, so I'll be running one up and down the route continuously when it is ready...

Oops, forget I mentioned the route!

[richardpratt]

I have noticed a few flaws with this latest release. I will list them below.

1: The sounds are not right, from the outside, it sounds like a reasonable approximation of a 166, on the inside, sounds nothing like one.

2: The wipers don't function, and the black bar below does not wrap around far enough.

3: No cab view at all, and no passenger views.

4: Driver's door is too far back, very noticeable.

5: The current drivers viewpoint is too far back

6: When looking through the train, the windows on the other side don't match up.

Overall, I still like this train, and wont uninstall it. However, this being my local train, I am more likely to notice faults like that, Although I must admit it took more than 20 minutes for me to realise that.

Blimey, you know your stuff. Are you a TT driver based at Oxford?

Anyway, more to the point, the only problem I found when driving the turbo was that the front cab was crystal clear, but the side of it looked 'fuzzy', and not as sharp as the models on the pictures used to promote it. I'm not sure whether this is a general thing, or if it is just my version of MSTS....

[LucaZone]

Read the readme (but the download info mentions it to). By default the train is textured in 512x512 pixel textures, this is because some graphics cards dont like 1024 textures and will cause problems. Where as all the screenshots are taken with the train using 1024x1024 textures (twice as sharp and detailed)

Instructions are included in the readme, and are noted on the download info, that included in the trains main folder are the higher resolution textures. All u need to do is a bit of file name adjustments and u will get the better ones

[Backfoot2002]

To all:

For one, this is a freeware model right, so complaints arent really a factor, it is not as though they have made money or anything, so dont be expecting a perfect model. Im sure if Buffy and Lucazone wanted to, they could have created a prefect model, and sold it, but they did not choose that way. In fact you should be thankful that it is free in the first place.

I like the trains and think they are great, even though i think there are problems, but nothign major that pisses me off to the fullest.

Im sure if they were getitng paid for these models then they would have done the whole nine yards and done a cabview, passanger view, and sorted all the other problems you listed.

Also, not on a really bad note, but Lucazones pictures of models looks 10x better than they do in train sim due to the effects which has used in graphics programs, and also like he mentioned, he used the 1024x1024 textures which were twice as sharp, so they looks twice as good.

In this event i suppose he could have released two versions, the normal 512x512 version and 1024x1024 version, as did someone did when creating the Mk.2 carriages, (sorry i dont know the name of this uploader), but as run the game in 1024x768 pixels, then the 1024x1024 texture does look alot better.

Anton

[LucaZone]

i suppose he could have released two versions, the normal 512x512 version and 1024x1024 version

No need as i included both texture versions in the same download. That then gives the user the choice of which version they want to use, without the need for extra downloads.