Realistic Engine Physics

andrewtoplis · Post by **andrewtoplis** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:27 pm

Hi Guys,

I have downloaded a few engines now, but cant seem to find that many with realistic physics. The Lynton and Barnstable locos, while really excellent models accelerate like Linford Christie in the 100 metres. Can anyone recommend some NG locos with real physics? I am particularly looking for Truescale, if possible, but would like reccomends for 2x as well.

Many Thanks,
Andy

davidaward · Post by **davidaward** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:35 pm

The best I've come accross are the Talylyn locos on the V2 CD, very challenging to drive!

I've had a fair shot with my Isle of man locos, while not perfect, i think its a dam site better with the physics than some - no offence to the original creators, as I appreciate after taking a lot of time to create a loco, the last thing you want to do is fiddle with the eng file for hours!

andrewtoplis · Post by **andrewtoplis** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 5:57 pm

I think Terry Thornton's Wren is very good too, the best NG I have downloaded yet (although i haven't many). I will grab an IOM loco soon. What are the Southwold loco's like?

Andy

Nvincer · Post by **Nvincer** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 6:26 pm

andrewtoplis wrote:What are the Southwold loco's like?

Very good. Do you have the route itself? If you haven't, it is a really good download combined with the rolling stock and locos!!!

Ben

andrewtoplis · Post by **andrewtoplis** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:07 pm

Hi Ben

I'm not a premium user, so I am waiting until I buy Tallylyn V2 and get the free time then I will grab it. Do you mean the engines are good models or good physics? Or both? They centainly look good.

Andy

Nvincer · Post by **Nvincer** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:19 pm

andrewtoplis wrote:I'm not a premium user, so I am waiting until I buy Tallylyn V2 and get the free time then I will grab it.

Both of them are well worth getting - you've invested a good 6.50 by buying the Talyllyn!!

andrewtoplis wrote:Do you mean the engines are good models or good physics? Or both? They centainly look good

The physics are pretty good - not the best but they do make a reasonably realistic driving experience and the models are really excellent!!!.

Ben

andrewtoplis · Post by **andrewtoplis** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:10 pm

Hi Ben

Nvincer wrote:The physics are pretty good - not the best but they do make a reasonably realistic driving experience and the models are really excellent!!!.

I can see the difficulty as often the engines themselves were scrapped long ago, but comparable engines sometimes still exist, maybe not the exact same gauge but similar dimensions, boiler, wheels, cylinders etc. Good engine data really makes a model fantastic, as does a cabview...do the Southwold's have one of those too?

Andy.

Ps, do you work on a railway yourself, and what is that crest as your avatar?

andrewgadd · Post by **andrewgadd** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:00 pm

Andy, this loco has been sat on the PC for a while as I continue to tinker with the physics. I am now getting some good results with accurate fuel consumption, good low speed levels, lack of pulling power and an overall effect of "can't pull the skin of a rice pudding"!!!!!!!

Nvincer · Post by **Nvincer** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:19 pm

andrewtoplis wrote: I can see the difficulty as often the engines themselves were scrapped long ago, but comparable engines sometimes still exist, maybe not the exact same gauge but similar dimensions, boiler, wheels, cylinders etc.

I suppose so, the problem is finding the extra time to put the correct physics data in, I know from experience with the Romney locos that there is a load of data in there .eng files that is unauthentic and so they don't drive overally correctly.

andrewtoplis wrote:as does a cabview...do the Southwold's have one of those too?

Sadly not but I think there are a few in the download library that possibly could replace them?!

andrewtoplis wrote:Ps, do you work on a railway yourself,

No I don't however my dad worked for many years on heritage railways and so I have sort of picked up tips and things off of him and he sometimes comments on the locos that I drive on MSTS.

andrewtoplis wrote:and what is that crest as your avatar?

It's the RH&DR crest, which I took from a photo which I was using for texturing the Romney coaches.

Cheers
Ben

andrewtoplis · Post by **andrewtoplis** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:21 pm

Hi Andrew,

Why do you think that is then? Do you want to email me a copy and I will run it with a few test trains over christmas? It certainly does look fantastic. As strange as this sounds, do you have any dimensions for it? If you could get me the boiler dimensions, wheels cylinders, etc. I know these may just be made up but then I could then work out the tractive effort for you, so it could be compared against real locos to find whether its performance is accurate, if you see what I mean.

Andy

Nvincer · Post by **Nvincer** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:26 pm

Andrew, are your two new locos for the Piddington, that you posted on here the other day, going to have realistic physics when they are released?

Ben

Earl1 · Post by **Earl1** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:29 pm

simple question sustained TE or Max TE ?

andrewgadd · Post by **andrewgadd** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:43 pm

Actually I'm quite happy with the complete lack of pulling power; it was the effect that I was trying to achieve!
Andy check your PM,
Andrew

pitleyfalley · Post by **pitleyfalley** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 11:00 pm

What are the Southwold loco's like?

Cabviews never got made as by the time we got that far I was sick to death of the route and just wanted to get the damn thing uploaded.

Did attempt a version two, but it killed the route editor a bit. Also got rather fed up again rather fast, but maybe a last job before MSTS gets replaced by the next gen sims in the future.

As for the physics, dont quote me on this but I dont remember doing a lot to them, think Jur might have played with them a bit more than me... changed the coal and water maybe and tinkered a bit with the power but not a lot else. Certainly no big calculations involved, more a case of "should be about right."

Chris