NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives

Gentlemen –Many of you will be aware that the Management of the Dragon Railroad Company been very disappointed by the performance of the ex-Union Pacific “Bigboy”, “Challenger” and “FEF3” locomotives aquired from the North American Locomotive Works.These locomotives have been particularly unpopular with locomotives crews.The litany of woes has included:
Excessive steam leaks from piston glands, valve gear seals and flexible couplings, particually arround the cylinder areas;
Hauling capacity well below that expected;
A poor steaming boiler that quickly runs out of steam;
Indifferent sounds; and
A braking system that often refuses to release.However, following the outshopping of the “General” and the Pacific locomotive, our Chief Locomotive Engineer has turned his attention to these larger locomotives.We are pleased to announce that all the above faults have been rectified, to the pleasure of both locomotive engineers and wayside observers who can now drive and see these superb locomotives in all their glory.
Phil Skene
Chief Executive
Dragon Railroad Company
Seriously guys, like me I guess that these magnificent locomotives have been languishing in some remote corner of your yard because of the above problems and the difficulty in driving them.Over the past several nights I have delved into the innards of the .eng files, and the result is outstanding performance from these outstanding products from NALW. Instead of being a nag they are now the thoroughbred they should be. Quite amazing – the beautiful looking and performing locomotives that you always wanted.My only concern is how to share the results with all, knowing from past experience (and how can I put it diplomatically?) touchy NALW can be about individuals tampering with and then publicly releasing their copyrighted work.I have revised .eng files for all three types. Any suggestions about distribution, please?

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, derekmorton, Sep-09-03, 06:17 AM, (1) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, frank_burns, Sep-09-03, 09:00 AM, (2) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, henry3, Sep-09-03, 09:52 AM, (3) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, HAC, Sep-09-03, 10:29 AM, (6) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, HAC, Sep-09-03, 10:24 AM, (4) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, HAC, Sep-09-03, 10:26 AM, (5) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, philskene, Sep-09-03, 06:37 PM, (7) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, philskene, Sep-09-03, 07:13 PM, (8) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, HAC, Sep-09-03, 09:33 PM, (11) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, Caffeine, Sep-09-03, 07:27 PM, (9) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, philskene, Sep-09-03, 08:52 PM, (10) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, frank_burns, Sep-09-03, 09:38 PM, (12) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, johnf, Sep-09-03, 09:49 PM, (13) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, philskene, Sep-09-03, 10:07 PM, (16) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, xlspecial261, Sep-09-03, 11:38 PM, (20) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, chucksc, Sep-09-03, 09:59 PM, (14) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, NW_611, Sep-09-03, 10:44 PM, (18) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, chucksc, Sep-10-03, 03:31 PM, (21) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, johnf, Sep-09-03, 10:01 PM, (15) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, philskene, Sep-09-03, 10:13 PM, (17) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, Caffeine, Sep-09-03, 10:44 PM, (19) RE: NALW Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3 locomotives, philskene, Sep-11-03, 02:40 AM, (22)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

I would suggest tar and feathering if you don't post them.Derek

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Just ask them....an Email sure couldn't hurt, meanwhile, I sure wouldn't tar and feather you but please don't make me resort to begging...LOL
Cheers, Frank
"Remember the MOP?"
http://www.geocities.com/frankoburns/Mopac1.html

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Phil,I would suggest contacting NALW directly with this stuff, if for no other reason as to make sure that you're not working at cross purposes. Who knows, you might even save them a lot of work in the process.I think a whole lot of the folks here at train-sim would enjoy these improvements.Good luck.Henry

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

so.. would you like to compare and share the revised .eng files I'm working on for the update? BTW, the update will include new skins, 3d smoke, improved sounds, etc.. Email me and we can discuss. As far as the steam leak effect, its gone in the update, too many folks didn't like it. Cheers
HAC
(hacmsts@shaw.ca)

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

so.. would you like to compare and share the revised .eng files I'm working on for the update? BTW, the update will include new skins, 3d smoke, improved sounds, etc.. Email me and we can discuss. As far as the steam leak effect, its gone in the update, too many folks didn't like it.
Thats the easy way, talking to me.. there's the hard way as well, talking to Chuck <G>Cheers
HAC
(hacmsts@shaw.ca)

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

so.. would you like to compare and share the revised files I'm working on for the update? BTW, the update will include new skins, 3d smoke, improved sounds, etc.. Email me and we can discuss. As far as the steam leak effect, its gone in the update, too many folks didn't like it. Cheers
HAC
(hacmsts@shaw.ca)

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

HAC -The same (almost) e-amil three times - this must be important!Just for my benefit and because I'm relatively new to all this, do you mind clarifying your role? Are you are a member of NALW?I've had dealings with Chuck before, and he seems a most reasonable gentleman, but should I be talking with you or him on this matter?If possible I would still like to release my revised .eng files into the public domain, and this is reinforced by the views expressed in the other responses to my post. These highlight the obvious need for a patch (if patch is the correct term) to improve the UP big-power locomotives.If you can speak on their behalf, does NALW have any objections to this?In my revised .eng files I removed all the leaking steam effects mainly because this detracts from the view of the wheels and wonderful valve gear.I disliked the pathetic chuff-chuff sounds, so I have aliased to the fscot sound files, but with an alternative whistle (see my most recent upload to train-sim about whistle and bells for the Flying Scotsman).The adhesion, boiler, brakes and other controls come from one of my earlier locomotive uploads, with appropriate modificationsBUT THE MOST REMARKABLE VISUAL EFFECT IS BY INCREASING THE DIAMETER OF THE WHEELS.I know that this is not prototypical, but WOW!!, you should just see these magnificent locomotives just rolling along. And they are such a pleasure to drive.If you could clarify your position I'll be more than willing to share my material with you.Best,
Phil

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

On reflection, I guess I need to clarify my comments about wheel diameter.The wheel size and appearance as seen in the external views of the locomotive are, of course, specified in the locomotive's .s and .ace files. I have not changed these files.However, in the .eng file there are two references to wheel diameter. Changing these does not change the appearance of the wheels but it does change the rotational speed. Obviously increasing the wheel diameter reduces rotational speed.In my revised .eng files I have increased the diameter of the driving wheels, quite considerably. The end result is that the locomotives literally just seem to lope along (that horse analogy again!) and the valve gear, coupling rods and wheels all remain highly visible. Sounds damn good too!!Phil

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Phil..
What you have found simply points out how badly KUJU's code handles the physics of large steam. What I've found is that once you get past a certain size/HP/TE in a steamer, Kuju's physics go crazy. I have set of BB engine files that performs pretty much as the real thing did, until you hit 75% throttle or regulator. Then all of a sudden its "engage!" and you hit 300MPH and climbing. Also it should tell you something about the games handling of loco physics in that if you increasing the driving wheel size to an unrealistic, the loco still runs.. Largest diameter driver I ever saw in real life was 8ft on a UK "Spinner", and those were from what I have read, really tricky to start.
As far as releasing an alternative set of eng files, I have no problem with that, but you probably should chat to Chuck, he's the
head honcho..
Email me and we can take this offline, I'd really like to see your .eng files and compare to my current working set.

Cheers
Harold

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Sep-09-03 AT 07:32 PM (EDT)

G'day mate...If the performance of these rather great-looking but poor-performing locos is as great as you claim it to be, then I'm sure that NALW can't but be obliged to grant you permission to upload the revised .eng files. If not, then they're doing the Train Sim Community a disservice, by not letting us get the most joy and absolute pleasure out of their products, when they apparently couldn't be bothered after so long, doing what Phil took such a short time to archieve.I've also had the "refusing-to-release" brake problem with one or two of the locos myself and been mightily pissed off with it, but as a result, haven't been using them a lot. To be strictly honest, they're all great locos, both in detail and looks, but not in performance, unfortunately, so a fix of Phil's proportions can't but be welcomed with open arms by those of us who love these machines.I recall having a single Big Boy stall on the westward run using the Tehachapi route, where a couple of Dash-9s didn't get below 15 mph with the 49 or 50-car consist in the original Big Boy release. And I don't seem to have gotten the 800 Class locos very fast at all over any appreciable distance, even with an 8-car consist of UP Smoothside passenger cars. Not quite what I'd have expected of them, with their ability to top 100 mph in their heyday... provided they were in top mechanical condition... maybe NALW has provided an 800 Class model with an authentic 300,000 miles or so on the clock, and in the sort of condition you'd expect them to be in before some serious visiting to the UP workshops... ? So, Phil, thanks for your time in doing these improvements, so get off your backside and buzz NALW (if you haven't already done so) for permission to post your upgrades to these fine examples of steam power, so we can all enjoy them to the max, and thanks again !Regards...Jim McDermott

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Jim -I have just sent the following e-mail to NALW, using the e-mail address at their site."Gentlemen -

If you have been reading the posts at train-sim about your UP big-power, there are a number of expressions of support for releasing my revised .eng files for the Bigboy, Challenger and FEF3.

Do you have any objections if I upload these files to train-sim, with appropriate acknowledgement to NALW?

Phil"
Unfortunately I have also just received an "undeliverable message" notification.Does any one have a current e-mail address for NALW?Phil

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Phil...please PM me if you would....These are wonderful machines and what you have done with them certainly sounds like a major improvement in their performance....I wonder how a Big Boy would look on Dragon Mountain Pass...!!
Cheers, Frank
"Remember the MOP?"
http://www.geocities.com/frankoburns/Mopac1.html

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

When I first started following this post I was hopefull of a new view on how to make articulated engines physics work better in the game and perhaps make the engine work in two parts with a tender. But thats not to be, what you have done by increasing the wheel diamiter setting is multiplied the power and increased the distance traveled per revolution. Fudging up the eng file for performance and forsaking the real specifications of the engine. When we released Big Boy v1.0 the eng flies were tuned to provide the reported performance of the engine but the internal eng file settings had to be skewed (though I used power rather than diameter) and we were roasted by the pure physicists in the forums. For me personally the idea of the wheels turning slower than what they should as a loco goes by (reverse slip as it were) would bug me.But if it gives you what you want then have at it, I myself still use the version 1 physics on Big Boy and I am happy with that too.I'm hopefull that articulated steam paramiters and provisions for the largest engines are improved in Version 2.0

john fowlis

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Harold –I can give a very positive assurance that my rejuvenated BigBoy, Challenger and FEF3 work perfectly at all speeds and all regulator openings.How ‘bout you dudes at NALW just say you have no objections to me uploading, and then you can compare your files with mine?From what you say you guys are planning a new release of the big-power anyway. Mine is just a patch for the existing locos. Doesn’t seem to present any problems to me – I’ve fixed your old work; you can concentrate on the next release.I can package them up and upload them tonight?
Frank –The locos look wonderful on Dragon Mountain Pass. Early this morning (South Australian time) I had a loco crew haul a set of 35 loaded 100 ton coal hoppers from the coal mine at the northern end to the interchange at Musswellbrook. The crew had nothing but praise for the Bigboy they used.
John –From my experiments with .eng files, wheel rotational speed is a derived parameter. I think that the sim takes the speed of the locomotive (determined from drawbar force, drag and time – the classical Newtonian equation) and uses this to calculate the speed of rotation of the wheels. Unlike a real loco, there appears to be no relationship as far as the sim is concerned between wheel size, boiler pressure, cylinder bore and stroke and the power of the locomotive.Once you try the revised parameters, I’m sure you will agree that the overall effect is superb.All of this is in no way intended as a criticism of you or NALW - I’m a great admirer of your work. But in the case of the Bigboy I think you got it slightly wrong.
Phil

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

When we released Big Boy
>v1.0 the eng flies were tuned to provide the reported
>performance of the engine but the internal eng file settings
>had to be skewed (though I used power rather than diameter)
>and we were roasted by the pure physicists in the forums.
Let the pure physicists moan. Tune them to work right.I use the actual numbers as a starting point, then adjust from that so the locomotive matches the actual tonnage ratings over an actual route with correct grades, with cars having proper physics.You don't see the numbers in the wag file when you are running the train, so I don't see why it should be a problem.Todd

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Sep-09-03 AT 10:19 PM (EDT)

Phil,You need to send me the request to release anything NALW related.We do not take applications/requests in the forums and we do not respond to those requests either...It's all done via e-mail.....As you well know having corresponded with me about other licensing issues. That e-mail address you used is still intact and I just tested it so I don't know what your problem is with it.....Chuck Schneider
(Virtual) CEO
North American (Virtual) Locomotive Works

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Chuck, this issue about the e-mail thing has come up before. People have said "I sent you mail from the site but it comes back" and you've sworn that it's working. Everybody's right, and I think I know why this keeps coming up:nalw.macfall.com's contact page has nalw@cox.net as the text-displayed address for the all of NALW. The HTML, on the other hand, has nalw@cox.rr.com in the mailto link. It's displayed properly, but it's not coded right in HTML; my guess is that 'cox.rr.net' is a legacy address that wasn't changed over.

____________________________________________________________________
Norfolk & Western’s Radford Division, Pulaski District: Who needs the Marias Pass?

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Sep-10-03 AT 03:32 PM (EDT)

>Chuck, this issue about the e-mail thing has come up before.
>People have said "I sent you mail from the site but it comes
>back" and you've sworn that it's working. Everybody's right,
>and I think I know why this keeps coming up:
>
>nalw.macfall.com's contact page has nalw@cox.net as the
>text-displayed address for the all of NALW. The HTML,
>on the other hand, has nalw@cox.rr.com in the mailto
>link. It's displayed properly, but it's not coded right in
>HTML; my guess is that 'cox.rr.net' is a legacy address that
>wasn't changed over. Now that I look at that I believe you are correct!
I'll ask our Webmaster to fix it....Chuck Schneider
(Virtual) CEO
North American (Virtual) Locomotive Works

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

If not, then
>they're doing the Train Sim Community a disservice, by not
>letting us get the most joy and absolute pleasure out of
>their products, when they apparently couldn't be bothered
>after so long, doing what Phil took such a short time to
>archieve.
>Jim, we have been very bothered to produce the best we can and we have not forsaken the steam pack or relegated it to the virtual dust bin. All Phil did was sprinkle majic fairy dust on the rails. The very thing we were roasted for here on this board. Considering that what we do, costs you nothing and provides you with a modicum of personal satisfaction. The only dis I see here is the one you just lobbed at us.

john fowlis

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Chuck -That's the exact e-mail adress I used an hour or so ago - but it bounced!Can you just send me an e-mail at philskene@hotmail.com. I can reply to that and we can take this all off-line where it actually belongs.Guys, can we also stop the flame war? Our objective, for all of us, should be to get locomotives that perform as well as they look.Thanks,
Phil

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

> If not, then
>>they're doing the Train Sim Community a disservice, by not
>>letting us get the most joy and absolute pleasure out of
>>their products, when they apparently couldn't be bothered
>>after so long, doing what Phil took such a short time to
>>archieve.
>>
>
>Jim, we have been very bothered to produce the best we can
>and we have not forsaken the steam pack or relegated it to
>the virtual dust bin. All Phil did was sprinkle majic fairy
>dust on the rails. The very thing we were roasted for here
>on this board. Considering that what we do, costs you
>nothing and provides you with a modicum of personal
>satisfaction. The only dis I see here is the one you just
>lobbed at us. Whoopsie !! Apologies all round here. No real intention of thumbing my nose at any of you guys, at all. It may well have just been the thoughts that Phil provoked, with his suggestions that we may actually see the Big Boys and FEF-3s etc, performing as they were intended, and let me get slightly carried away with my enthusiasm here. Sorry if it sounded like I was saying you weren't doing your homework or anything like that. 99.99% of your work is indeed excellent, and there's no way anyone can say different. Cheers !Regards...Jim McDermott

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Gentlemen -Just a quick update:I have sent an e-mail to Chuck of NALW asking if I can upload the revised .eng to train-sim. There was no "can't deliver" so I assume he has received it.Chuck - if you are reading this forum, can you please confirm?
The hiatus has given me an opportunity to tune the .eng files.
The locomotive (both engine and tender) brakes now work correctly.
I've improved the damping on the rear tender coupling of the Bigboy - it had a tendency to behave like an elastic band because of the tremendous drawbar power of this locomotive.I have fully road tested all three locomotives and they now perform to my satisfaction.One other tester has given a glowing report.I have prepared the readme file, file_id.diz and .jpg graphic for the upload package.So it's all go once I get a favourable reply from Chuck.Phil

Alert | IP

[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | File Library ] Copyright © 2002 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.