<kmath>
YouTube - LIVE Southern Most Beach Resort Beach & Pier
<icefire>
some streams from the keys as irma closes in
Lyneira has quit [Quit: Bye]
<Iskierka>
I'm getting less and less convinced by railworks steam modelling
<Iskierka>
I don't think turning on the blower is supposed to give you a significant immediate boost to boiler pressure (~5 psi/second, possibly more)
<Iskierka>
also don't think it's penalising me for overfilling the fire. Trainz definitely did quite badly
<Iskierka>
pushing it up to 70% full could easily result in an underpressure I'd need to sit still for 10 minutes to fix by burning the excess
<Iskierka>
(on a loco with a 50% ideal)
<Iskierka>
... holding 136 in the Bittern by just keeping firebox and water filled as much as possible
<Iskierka>
Which apparently does have the fancy brakes I suggested that auto-balance to the gauge
<Pinkbeast>
The blower can do quite a lot, it's just expensive to run; AIR (from some years ago) 100% fire in railworks is optimal & your stoker has the wit not to overstoke (the optimal fire mass is in the loco definition file... somewhere)
<Pinkbeast>
Auto-balance> well, somewhat to my surprise I think now many combined brake/ejector controls do that for moderate application
<Pinkbeast>
Is this the Just Trains A4 pack or another one?
<Iskierka>
I more found the blower remarkable that it made significantly more of a difference than full/zero regulator at 80 mph
<Iskierka>
doesn't do much at 136 though
<Pinkbeast>
That's a different A4 pack, indeed - I don't think the JT A4 will do 136 mph. What was the cutoff at 80mph?
<Pinkbeast>
Gresley thought 130 was possible IIRC
<Iskierka>
20% cutoff was what I went with at speed and pulled the regulator back
<Iskierka>
that feels like it gets better steam efficiency and I was assuming that might be a real effect of steam not having time to get into the cylinder if you use too little
<Iskierka>
was only taking less than 20% regulator at that point though
<Pinkbeast>
I don't think you can have too little cutoff efficiency-wise IRL
<Pinkbeast>
On superheated top link locomotives one generally leaves the regulator open (when not trying to slow down obv.) and drives on the reverser alone
<Pinkbeast>
I don't remember the blower doing much when in motion in railworks but ofc it has been some years since I've driven steam much.
<Pinkbeast>
Single or double chimney?
<Iskierka>
Odd. Definitely ends up feeling like I can get more top speed for a steady pressure by having a bit of cutoff but limited regulator
<Iskierka>
but maybe that's just when trying to absolutely maximise the power
<Iskierka>
modelled as double
<Pinkbeast>
The accuracy of the simulation may not be complete :-)
<Iskierka>
This seems like an odd thing to end up with, however
<Iskierka>
tbf I think I feel similar effects in Trainz, but at more like 4-8% cutoff as a minimum
<Pinkbeast>
Cutoff in these simulations is also confusing because it often is not clear if one is getting it on some arbitary scale or in terms of percentage of IRL maximum cutoff or in the terms actually seen in the cab (which are also percentages but don't usually go to 100%)
<Iskierka>
this is probably true. most railworks ones go to 75% but the A3 to 100%
<Pinkbeast>
It makes it very hard to compare with contemporary running reports
<Pinkbeast>
Let me fire up TS2017 and see what the JT A4 will do.
<Pinkbeast>
Also I kind of miss the addons that actually caused you to break down if you set off with the cylinder cocks closed
<Iskierka>
I presume that they generally aren't written by the kinds of people to write down the label when they could just say "open it to full"
<Pinkbeast>
Oh, no, they're generally super precise - but if we don't know how the simulation is measuring it... :-)
<Iskierka>
Well I figure if we can assume a linear range then we can map the 75% to what they write down
<Pinkbeast>
Also at least some locomotives had notched reversers which you rarely see (& which don't, in simulation, require you to close the regulator before adjusting the cutoff)
<Iskierka>
I should probably do speed tests in Trainz just to check myself on whether the raised-cutoff low-regulator works there
<Pinkbeast>
Gah I bought the A4 pack separately and it's not installed, this may take a little while
<Iskierka>
The (absurd) suggestion may also be that I found a trick the drivers of the time didn't know about, as it would only reach 112 before I closed the regulator (was doing it the normal way until then), which might be more believable for the Bittern ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
<Iskierka>
would be veeeeeery surprised if it was modelled that well though
<Pinkbeast>
Whoah, 264Mb. Don't hold your breath
<Iskierka>
The steam one is 290 MB
<Pinkbeast>
AIR back when one routinely saw the steam chest pressure (before the graphical hud existed at all) the simulation there was felt to be dodgy so I don't expect it to do well in these edge cases
<Iskierka>
there isn't a way to sanity check that now (p sure even the F5 HUD doesn't mention the SC) but I do notice things like a slightly open regulator will never build up enough pressure to open the brakes, but a full open one will
<Iskierka>
perhaps some limited the input by the steam chest pressure, but I don't think that was normal?
<Pinkbeast>
... I'm confused and also I have to remember how to drive the World Editor (spoiler: I don't)
<Iskierka>
if you have the east coast mainline that has 125 limits coming out of york so the curves are sane, can quick drive from there
<Pinkbeast>
We're on different A4 packs ;-)
<Iskierka>
Preeeetty sure this isn't part of the A4 pack but sure
<Pinkbeast>
Oh, yeah, point. The pack decides where you can Free Roam but not I think where you can quick drive. Let's try that
<Iskierka>
(I thought it did come with scenarios but I don't have any now, have to drive it with just quick-generate routes)
<Iskierka>
I went with 3 carriages if we want to balance it. I know Gresley liked to prove them with the full express load
<Pinkbeast>
In that case I'll make myself popular by dropping 5 carriages at York :-)
<icefire>
ah the silly steamers with the aerodynamic plates on them
<icefire>
iirc those did little for actual performance?
<Pinkbeast>
icefire: Not on the A4s, which is why they're the one streamlined class where BR kept them
<icefire>
really? They only went like ~75 normally didn't they
<icefire>
I can't imagine it being that effective at those speeds
<icefire>
mph that is
<Iskierka>
What I read was a ~650 hp reduction from the streamlining, the loco pulled 1800
<Iskierka>
which is definitely appreciable but doesn't overpower the friction loads
<Iskierka>
would probably make more of a difference with a modern rebuild like the Tornado, with roller bearings and such
<Pinkbeast>
The A4s were designed to routinely do 100 but also the streamlining was both better and lighter - on a Princess Coronation, say, it's a big pointless steel lump
<Iskierka>
Overpowering your drag reduction with friction definitely would be a silly idea
<Iskierka>
(plus it's definitely not as aerodynamic as the A4. There's clear relationship between A4 streamlining and say, an N700 shinkansen. Clearly there's *something* to it)
<Pinkbeast>
Simulation-wise I appear to be accelerating with 0% cutoff and no gradient, which is a neat trick
<Iskierka>
pffft
<Pinkbeast>
Oh, also the A4 (and P2 and Hush-Hush) streamlining acted as an effective smoke deflector whereas on (say) the Merchant Navies it had the opposite effect
<Iskierka>
Nice job those guys
<Iskierka>
Did they even bother with a wind tunnel? I know gresley did
<icefire>
I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't? the plating was all marketing at the start
<icefire>
unless you mean the Shinkansen
<Iskierka>
Shinkansen shouldn't really be a question there. I do mean all the other streamlined engines
<Iskierka>
if they built a 360 km/h N700 without a wind tunnel it'd frankly be impressive in its own scary way
<icefire>
it was mostly a response to car and plane design at the time
<icefire>
the old steamers were suffering from an image problem
<Iskierka>
That would justify dismissing their effectiveness on most steamers then, sure
<UmbralRaptor>
Being slower than cars, or something?
<UmbralRaptor>
(As opposed to now, where Amtrak is, erm, slower than driving.)
<Pinkbeast>
The railways had been thrashed to death in WW1 while all the maintence staff were off getting killed, which didn't help matters
<Iskierka>
but Gresley did use a tunnel and arrived at measurements that there was a 600 hp difference to be had from his lightweight conversion (not just a covering; the smokebox is actually that shape, because that IS the smokebox)
<Iskierka>
so it worked for him, if possibly not for *anyone* else
<Pinkbeast>
icefire: Bit of both - the notoriously skint LNER might not have let Gresley build them if they didn't look cool, but he built them to go faster
<Iskierka>
And yet they let him build the original W1?
<Iskierka>
(which I do say looked super-cool and it's disappointing they didn't keep working to fix the issues)
<Pinkbeast>
Well, it might have both looked cool and gone very quickly :-/
<Pinkbeast>
If I'm stupendously rich I'ma build a Hush-Hush
<Iskierka>
well if an A1 with full plans costs £5mil in the 90s you probably want £20mil at least for something that needs to be re-engineered to fix boiler design
<Iskierka>
(I would totally be up for that too, though)
<icefire>
I'm still waiting for nuclear steam engines
<Pinkbeast>
Ha, this A4 pack predates Train Simulator lights actually illuminating the landscape, so it's got some default light, so my A4 appears to have a great big searchlight on the front
<Iskierka>
pff
<UmbralRaptor>
icefire: Does it count if the nuclear and steam parts are a few hundred km away from the train?
<icefire>
yes
<UmbralRaptor>
(TGV)
<Pinkbeast>
Reached 75mph steady at 20% cutoff
<icefire>
closest we're ever gonna get, I'll take it
<UmbralRaptor>
icefire: then I think the French have you coveted.
<UmbralRaptor>
*covered
<icefire>
lol
<icefire>
I wonder if rail use will increase as oil decreases
<icefire>
particularly in america
<Iskierka>
probably only if they can keep enough of the network in good condition to be a viable alternative. and get on electrifying it
<Iskierka>
if it's no good more likely people just stop travelling rather than find alternate
<icefire>
not really thinking about people
<icefire>
freight
<egg>
<UmbralRaptor> icefire: Does it count if the nuclear and steam parts are a few hundred km away from the train? <<< :D :D :D
<icefire>
america uses a decent amount of freight trains... but it REALLY loves its trucks
<egg>
UmbralRaptor: though tbh who needs the steam, orion train!
<icefire>
theres a surprising amount of cross-country trucking just because companies are too impatient for rail but not so impatient as to use air
<Iskierka>
they are under-utilised in the US, despite their size (by emissions the network as a whole actually does worse than a number of steamers could)
<Iskierka>
measured by litres-equivalent of CO2 per tonne-mile
<Iskierka>
(converting to equivalent litres became convenient)
<Pinkbeast>
Hit 100mph 26 miles from Darlington at about 9% cutoff but having trouble keeping water in (because I can't use the exhaust injector, GRUMBLE)
<Iskierka>
yaaaay for "simulation"
<Iskierka>
I had the opposite problem that I couldn't maintain coal at full, though it seemed self-balancing from burn rate?
<Iskierka>
my trick probably wouldn't help insufficient water as I just balance the steam level
<Pinkbeast>
Couldn't get much above 100mph, but there are slight inclines. I dropped the 3 carriages and hit 128mph before running out of water (whoops!)
<Iskierka>
that's probably a bit more real than what I ran but probably not that real with the oddness we find with RW
<Pinkbeast>
I think mine's a bit underperforming - the A4s would do 100mph with 8 on, let alone 3
<Iskierka>
wasn't the 126 run with 8? Though there was variation between the units, obviously. So questionable if it might be accurate for that particular one
<Pinkbeast>
125. :-P (And yes, but it was downhill)
<Iskierka>
IIRC it was still entering like 120 on the uphill approaching it. Faaaaast train
<Pinkbeast>
I'm just looking to see if the A4 pack I've got has different performance for different locos
<Pinkbeast>
Sadly, but for the outbreak of war, it seems pretty clear the Reichsbahn could have smashed Mallard's record
<Iskierka>
with any particular loco? (Though we would still have the W1 to try if it became a competition)
<Pinkbeast>
05 002, which set the 200km/h speed record that Mallard beat
<Iskierka>
3400 hp: yeah even with that iffy streamlining it's gonna compete like that
<Iskierka>
Mallard is impressive for doing it with 1800 on the drawbar though
<Pinkbeast>
The Germans weren't going downhill, didn't have a lightended train (Mallard had 6 on and the dynamometer), and the locomotive wasn't broken afterwards - they didn't go faster because 200kph is a nice round number
<Pinkbeast>
*lightened
<Pinkbeast>
No, that bit's wrong - the German train was lighter
<Iskierka>
The downhill bit is a weird one because yes it was downhill, but wasn't it still accelerating when they had to brake for the curve?
<Iskierka>
so it might've still been in that range on a flat
<Pinkbeast>
Well, Sir Nigel was probably right that 130mph was possible, but it's hard to know what the Reichsbahn could have done with the ball back in their court. (Also, if the LMS had anywhere to do it, I imagine a Princess Coronation could have given them a run for their money)
<Iskierka>
Just based on sheer power?
<Pinkbeast>
Mmm. The Big Lizzies were enormously powerful (50 ft^2 grate compared to 41 1/3 on the A4s)
* Iskierka
looks sideways at rebuilt W1 with also 50 ft^2 grate and A4 streamlining
<Iskierka>
basically it could've been all-round an interesting contest if everyone had nice flats and if not for the war
<Pinkbeast>
The unrebuilt W1 could also have been a contender with much more efficient use of steam (if it had worked, sigh)
<Pinkbeast>
Chapelon's 242A1 at 5300 ihp could have been ludicrously quick too
<Pinkbeast>
Going back a bit, all the JT A4s share one physics model, so nothing to gain there
<Iskierka>
I do find it entertaining to read up on the record runs, and compare "This was a secial three-car set specially tuned for just this run at great expense on a closed track" with "This was a regular service with the schedule moved up and some minor streamlining covers, which were removed by the people installing the dynamo car, and also it wasn't even supposed to be Mallard as they'd changed the engine, but they did it
<Iskierka>
anyway"
<Pinkbeast>
I still hope the Project 130 Yanks have a bash at it, that might stir things up a bit