1950's Riviera disappointment

[theorganist]

I would call myself a purist but if I get to the point of not purchasing a route because the signal arms are not long enough then I am just going to give up.

I do hope we see more steam period routes after this, I would love to see parts for the ECML and WCML produced as I feel we are lacking some long stretches of steam period mainline. Would also love to see some more networks like the welsh border branches around Kington or the Severn Valley and it's branches.

Hopefully DTG will see a positive response to the Riviera 1950's which will persuade them that they can make some money out of steam period offerings.

Peter

[longbow]

To be fair it may not be practical to replicate the prototype track layout due to constraints in the track editor and/or the limited range of signalling options.

Taking a look at Newton Abbott neither Glorious Devon or the DTG route have fully reproduced the steam-era track layout. In particular some of the scissor crossovers that allowed two trains to stand at each platform have been omitted. As for signalling both routes depart quite materially from prototype but that's quite understandable; you would need a huge amount of custom signalling to replicate the prototype with its plethora of special signal types and complicated pathing.

I have been playing with a Railfan scenario at Newton Abbott using the WTT so I'll be interested to see how close I can get to realistic Summer Saturday traffic!

[TransportSteve]

I was considering getting the route

Don't deny yourself Andi, you go for it matey..... 5 Steam locos ( Victory Works and SteamSoundsSupreme, no less ) with assorted passenger coaches and freight wagons on there own are worth the money, BUT, to have a 1950s Devonian route chucked in as well, you just can't beat it.

Cheerz. Steve.

[Trev123]

I'm not from the UK so don't know the route. But is a good buy. The Castle sounds terrific.

[smarty2]

Actually gents I was trying to bring it into some kind of perspective (clumsily ) of course I'm not going to stop using it! The point I was making; in that I was ignorant of the fact it is missing tracks etc and therefore to me these inaccuracies make little difference to my enjoyment of this particular "representation". Peter mirrors Derek's sentiment about photographs quite nicely.

[michaelhendle]

It's also has proper shut signals,maybe DTG could do a pdf file showing what the signal's mean,as there are different arms with different meanings,I believe a arm with a white S on it is a shunt signal,then there is a signal with a white O ,not sure what that means,and one with a white X means out of use,I think.
Mike

[Trev123]

Just did a short drive with the GWR Grange. Again impressive sounds. Better than the old Black 5 that had one sound for every speed.

[GWRKINGCLASS]

It's also has proper shut signals,maybe DTG could do a pdf file showing what the signal's mean,as there are different arms with different meanings,I believe a arm with a white S on it is a shunt signal,then there is a signal with a white O ,not sure what that means,and one with a white X means out of use,I think.
Mike

A ring on the signal arm is for a shunt signal exit on to the running lines. As for the 'S' I can only imagine that it was discontinued on new installations long before nationalisation, as I have only seen one example at Fairford.

For more information I recommend looking at http://www.signalbox.org/signals.shtml which has a lot of useful information on signals as well as photos of a few examples.

[Trev123]

Or this site http://www.railsigns.uk/home.html

[atlasduff47]

Every time we've got a free upgrade to TS20xx FIFA users have paid £40 a pop.

I think that should be quoted in every response to a moan from now on.

Or maybe better still, there should be a disclaimer based on The Clash song Know Your Rights...........................

You have the right to free speech.....................as long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it!

Also the disclaimer should include something along the lines of........"when you raise what you view as legitimate points, they will be portrayed by some in a patronising and derogatory manner as *moans*"

Now I appreciate that there are some on the forum that all but refuse to criticise DTG, whilst others appear only too quick and happy to do so, there are however lots of people somewhere in the middle who are adult enough to take an objective view. Can we therefore all at least agree, that this is a forum for public debate and discussion, which fortunately requires people of all persuasions to express their opinions (as long as they fall within forum guidelines), which they have a right to do, whether or not I, or anyone else agrees with them.

[tnleeuw01]

Taking a look at Newton Abbott neither Glorious Devon or the DTG route have fully reproduced the steam-era track layout. In particular some of the scissor crossovers that allowed two trains to stand at each platform have been omitted.

I'm wondering now, how did the old South Devon Banks route do in this respect? How faithful is it's track layout?

As for signalling both routes depart quite materially from prototype but that's quite understandable; you would need a huge amount of custom signalling to replicate the prototype with its plethora of special signal types and complicated pathing.

I think that the DTG routes are getting better at this. Look at the Wear Valley route - it's signal gantries are getting rather complex!
Haven't yet been at Exeter station on this route so haven't seen the signal gantries there yet.

But I doubt that the famous Rugby signal gantry can be replicated already...

http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lnwrrm867.htm
http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lnwrrm2413.htm

Cheers,

--Tim

[AndiS]

Thanks to all who answered to my outcry. I do know that the rolling stock is a great offering. I just feel that it is all about rolling stock, and scenery.

I do understand that they are not going to expand their signalling system at its core to be able to handle complex layouts, at this point in the platform's life cycle. But they still could have put in some sort of through road if it is important at that station.

And signal arms at 4 ft cost the same to develop as those at 5 ft. Note that they did spend some time to put different letters on them. They only did not take the time to get the information about the basic length. Obviously researching that takes longer than doing additional versions of the arm. Which means that they lost contact to the countless volunteers who would send them a scale drawing in no time if only they asked.

This is the background of my feeling, it makes me weary about the new thing to come. If it is all a painting by people who lost contact with those in the know, 2017 could be like 2007. (Let me repeat that I am not talking about the engines.)

[johny]

I don't get this argument about 4ft and 5ft arms, the GWR did have those sizes, the latter being for use 26ft above the rails, 3ft arms being for use for goods loops and sidings. Over the years changes did occur, especially with the use of letters, but when and where would be any one's guess. I have the signal diagrams on cd but no clue is given as to arm sizes, other than types.

Am currently downloading the said route and may or may not comment further.

John

[johny]

I can see the reason for folk's objections to 5ft signals, now. Reading the manual it is quite clear that 5ft arms have been used throughout the TS route on mainline track, which as I pointed out above is not the reason for them, the GWR and BR(WR) mostly used 4ft with the exception I give for 5ft. Incidentally, at Newton Abbot the signals were wooden types, not pressed steel, until August 1983 at least. And where are the Exeter Middle box signals on the island platform?

A non-signal related observation is that the Down Middle and Up Middle roads were used by LSWR, Southern and BR(SR)trains, they were obliged to stop by the GWR as part of being able to run over GWR lines. Thus, the Quick Drive and at least one Career scenario showing GWR trains starting from the Down Middle depict a rare event, if ever.

John

[michaelhendle]

I've just run the Churston railfan and there is one glaring mistake,the branch passenger train shouldn't be just SO,it should be either a Driver\BS\BCK or Autocoach,and if the coach hasn't got a drivers compartment the loco should have run round the train,before going back to Brixham,as far as I can remember all passenger trains should have 1 coach with brake compartment in it.

I'm also wondering if the DTG 57XX has push\pull apparatus fitted to it?

Mike