Atomic Systems

Ooveecouk wrote:

TheTazman wrote:Just a query here as i am not sure about the usage with regards to the red flashing lamp thas usually hungon the back of the engine. I am sure i have seen videos with a flashing lamp on them. Could a lamp be included some how?

Cheers

Simon

Not required since the rear tail lights are functioning. Would probably be used if it was a trailing unit with no power in real life.

So perfect for the 57/3 then mate
Edit, pillock features here put in the wrong photo

Despite only load 4 plus the 57 dead on the rear, they certainly clagged well thundering up the bank from the Severn Tunnel!
cheers

jo

Ooveecouk wrote:...Since RailDriver is based on USA trains I never saw any use for it on UK stock and I believe the inertia feature is more valuable?...

I'm astonished that anyone would think this device is designed solely for USA style loco control.

I'm of the opinion that this loco is a quality product with the single failing that the RailDriver throttle has been routed as a velocity input to the engine power module and the throttle lever (and throttle lever graphic) not driven.

If it is now being said that in order to achieve engine inertia delay, the code had to be written this way then I have two things to say:

The RailDriver limitation should have been announced (pre and post) and
why would I now pay out for extra variants with the same limitation?

Just the ticket jo. Nice pic.

Simon

ewsjo wrote:

Ooveecouk wrote:

TheTazman wrote:Just a query here as i am not sure about the usage with regards to the red flashing lamp thas usually hungon the back of the engine. I am sure i have seen videos with a flashing lamp on them. Could a lamp be included some how?

Cheers

Simon

Not required since the rear tail lights are functioning. Would probably be used if it was a trailing unit with no power in real life.

So perfect for the 57/3 then mate
Edit, pillock features here put in the wrong photo

Despite only load 4 plus the 57 dead on the rear, they certainly clagged well thundering up the bank from the Severn Tunnel!
cheers

jo

do class 57's just have 2 tone horns or 4?

OrpheusRocker wrote:

Ooveecouk wrote:...Since RailDriver is based on USA trains I never saw any use for it on UK stock and I believe the inertia feature is more valuable?...

I'm astonished that anyone would think this device is designed solely for USA style loco control.

I'm of the opinion that this loco is a quality product with the single failing that the RailDriver throttle has been routed as a velocity input to the engine power module and the throttle lever (and throttle lever graphic) not driven.

If it is now being said that in order to achieve engine inertia delay, the code had to be written this way then I have two things to say:

The RailDriver limitation should have been announced (pre and post) and
why would I now pay out for extra variants with the same limitation?

I hear ya, like we said at the start a patch will be available for those with RailDriver. It will come with this update. Unfortunately RailDriver doesn't provide it's customers with enough support or options - otherwise you could have corrected the problem yourselves.

Cheers, Z

Ooveecouk wrote:...I hear ya, like we said at the start a patch will be available for those with RailDriver. It will come with this update...

Zane,
Thank you for your commitment. I'll look forward to this and the new variants.
Cheers,
AndyR

My only wish is for Oovee to have a crack at the 66, that would be heaven!!

DescendingSadly wrote:My only wish is for Oovee to have a crack at the 66, that would be heaven!!

Isn't the one we've got not terrible? ( I wouldn't know ).

An Oovee steamer would be something. Not quite sure which yet.

Kariban wrote:

DescendingSadly wrote:My only wish is for Oovee to have a crack at the 66, that would be heaven!!

Isn't the one we've got not terrible? ( I wouldn't know ).

Far from "terrible"; possibly due an "F" exam

Anyway, back on topic, the only things I'd ask, Zane, is, as others have suggested, a driver in the cab when, er, driving and no driver in the cab if the unit is a trailing unit/static, etc. and also to be able to hear it from afar a la AP sound sets.

It's a good loco, tbh.

Cheers.

Rik.

phill70 wrote:

Ooveecouk wrote: Regarding the RPM delay. I'm fairly confident in saying that all, if not most, UK diesel trains will have some kind of throttle delay, some larger than others.

All UK diesels have throttle delay, the 37 is probably the worse, HST's probably the least.
Shunters, have very little delay, but that's because there is not much to them.

I think there might be a bit of confusion here between throttle delay and a delay in the onset of power?? From my younger days as a marine engineer working on Paxman Ventura engines, almost identical to the HST Valenta, I seem to recall no delay in the engine spooling up from applying throttle. Like in a car there is a direct mechanical link from the power handle (accelerator) to the engine governor, so if you rev a power handle in a train or a ship you can expect almost instant changes to the engine RPM much as you do when you rev the gas pedal in a car. Where you see the delay is not in the engine revving up but in the transmission to power. In the case of a ship the engine RPM increase will in turn increase the amps at the generator, which will then be sent to the motors, which will then transmit the power through a gear box to the propeller shaft, which will then increase in RPM, which will then start to speed up the ship.
I think the same applies in a loco, the delay in power you experience is not from the engine spooling up but from the transmission / electrical power side of things.

Think there's going to be a little difference between faster motors like Ventura/Valenta/various MTU/MAN, and slow speed lumps like the EE series; would also depend on things like flywheel too ( and the inertia in the generator, even ). And the fact the EE engine design is pretty ancient. Engine spools up, generator spools up at the same time, electrical power increases as a direct function of engine revs, can't see where there'd be a transmission delay. Anyway the only thing I've driven is an 08 along a bay at Taunton when I was about 10(!), so I trust the drivers here

Of course an engine will take time to spool up to higher revs but from my experience there isn't a period where nothing happens at all. Overcoming inertia and friction will slow an engine from being able to increase in power but it won't stop it from revving up, unless of course it stalls due to too much load. The way I see it is the same as your car, you hit the gas the engine will instantly respond. Doesn't mean you'll get instant power and speed but the engine will instantly go to full power setting to try and get you there. The transmission side of things is where the engine meets resistance, by transmission I mean motors, gearing, wheels etc. Unless it is specifically designed that way there is no way a throttle input will do nothing to the engine for 5 seconds, the delay is in power transmission and overcoming inertia. Can you imagine that in your car if there was a 5 second delay every time you moved your foot? You would be spending a lot of time crashed!!

I think that video above highlights my point. If you watch it you will hear the engine rev up then there is a 5 second delay before the loco starts to move. Can you see the difference? The engine is revving up but nothing is seemingly happening for 5 seconds as the inertia and friction is overcome. I think some people are confusing this with pulling the power handle and then nothing happening at all to the engine for 5 seconds when in fact the engine is revving away but no motion has yet commenced.

jimmyshand wrote:The way I see it is the same as your car

Although a car has far smaller and lighter pistons than a heavy locomotive. This is why things like motorbikes / chainsaws / small engine(s) can rev into the thousands, whereas car engines generally rev into the hundreds.

Whilst I'm not a train driver, I'm an ex bus driver and the older vehicles without turbos fitted quite often had around a quarter to half second delay to start revving up due to the reasonably heavy pistons fitted. (MCW Metrobus, Leyland Titans, which use a 'fluid based flywheel'* ) *I'm no mechanic, but I think thats what my instructor said years ago when I was training.

Kariban wrote:

DescendingSadly wrote:My only wish is for Oovee to have a crack at the 66, that would be heaven!!

Isn't the one we've got not terrible? ( I wouldn't know ).

An Oovee steamer would be something. Not quite sure which yet.

Sorry to detract from the topic, just a quick explanation!!

The 66 uses a Westinghouse brake where the driver makes an application on the brake handle, and the bar steadily increases (he can control the speed of the pressure increase) he also has another 'step' to hold the brake at the current pressure. For a good example of how it works have a go on the 66 for openBVE, which has the correct braking procedure.

The current RW 66 was good for its time but to have stepped brakes like on a multiple unit isn't prototypical.

I've also noticed when hauling heavy loads that the 66 suffers from a plateauing of engine power, so you'll motor along at a steady 21mph and suddenly the engine gets a surge of power and you start to gain speed after maybe 5 mins of less power.


Good for its time but now needs bringing up to date.