UP Steam Megapack *sigh*

Ok, so I don't usually complain about ANYTHING, especially freeware...but I have to admit that I'm disappointed by some aspects of this NALW release.When the Big Boy was released I think we were all overjoyed. Something like that was a HUGE leap for our community. Now that I have a new puter that will run train-sim with all the sliders maxed out and no stutters I've been driving my original Big Boy for days with extreme delight.So tonight I download the Megapack. Took 3 hours on my dial-up connection. I get it installed and quickly load the sim to drive my favorite locomotive ever, the 3985. Cab pops up with NO water visible in the sight glass. In the hud I'm told I have .02 boiler water. Ok, I guess I'm taking over for a crew that didn't know how to fire her right. Begin putting water in. Right away I notice my 120??!!?? pounds of boiler pressure decreasing VERY rapidly. Erm, ok. Shovel some coal, open the blower, try to get the fire hot enough to gain pressure and add more water (by this time I'm at a whopping .03 boiler water).Pressure creeeeeeeeeeeeeps up. Begin adding water again. Get to .04 and pressure is down to about 50 psi. GRR! Time to have a looksie at the eng file. Everything looks ok to my semi untrained eye, but I go ahead and change boiler eff to 3.27Load AGAIN, no water but good pressure. Begin adding water with both injectors. Once again, after minutes I'm only up to about .04 boiler water. Hmm. Ok, maybe it's a fluke. Let's try an FEF. Hey! At least I start with .50 boiler water....but same trouble with pressure. Can't get my loco to pull a simple passenger train.For giggles, took out the FEF and inserted the 4-4-0 General. Whadda ya know? She pulled it! Ok, I know this seems harsh. I DO appreciate the effort that went into the pack. But it truly seems like a rush job. Textures are sub-par with other NALW releases, and the eng files...I just can't see how anyone actually beta tested this thing. When a 4-6-6-4 can't pull 30 cars on a flat grade, something's amiss.So I check the forums. Turns out others have reported the same problems (so at least I didn't mess up the install or something) and it's reported that "a patch is in beta" to solve the problems. That post was made on May 27 I believe. After searching the file library I don't find a patch.Soooooo PLEASE tell me that one of you eng file gurus has modified these files for your own benefit and can either email them to me or let me know how to make the locos usable. Or that a patch is coming soon...or something.NALW, you guys have provided my favorite units (Buzz's extraordinary F40's in particular) but this seems unlike you guys. The 3D models for these locomotives are great. The sounds, cab...I LOVE. Just seems like the eng files and textures were rushed. Can anyone help a Challenger lover out? I'm a professional fireman and I can't get these locos to even take water without losing all pressure! HELP!!!**Again, thank you guys for providing the units. Take this as constructive critisism rather than bashing. I dig the units, I just wanna run em!**Blake Harris
Engineer/fireman, Jefferson and Cypress Bayou Railroad

Vice Dean, Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies

Alert | IP

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

RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, heffed, Jul-15-03, 03:15 AM, (1) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, IcyFire, Jul-15-03, 03:19 AM, (2) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh* - Blake, email me, HAC, Jul-15-03, 09:59 AM, (3) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh* - Blake, email me, Fastruck, Jul-15-03, 10:36 AM, (4) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh* - Blake, email me, plainsman, Jul-15-03, 10:44 AM, (5) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, Boilerbuster, Jul-16-03, 12:20 PM, (6) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, BlakeTyner, Jul-16-03, 03:33 PM, (7) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, Musicman, Jul-16-03, 09:03 PM, (8) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, kevarc, Jul-16-03, 10:20 PM, (9) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, Boilerbuster, Jul-17-03, 00:18 AM, (10) Blake - you have a PM, HAC, Jul-17-03, 10:40 AM, (11) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, Boilerbuster, Jul-17-03, 12:30 PM, (12) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, crick14a, Jul-17-03, 01:00 PM, (14) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, baldwin, Jul-17-03, 03:46 PM, (15) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, sstyrnol, Jul-17-03, 12:53 PM, (13) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, Teacherpat, Sep-30-03, 07:33 PM, (30) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, crick14a, Oct-01-03, 06:37 AM, (31) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, HAC, Oct-01-03, 10:44 AM, (32) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, NW_611, Oct-01-03, 11:06 AM, (33) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, JensChris, Jul-20-03, 12:51 PM, (16) RE: UP Steam Megapack *sigh*, Boilerbuster, Jul-21-03, 11:28 PM, (21) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, chucksc, Jul-20-03, 08:38 PM, (17) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, BlakeTyner, Jul-21-03, 00:07 AM, (18) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, BlakeTyner, Jul-21-03, 00:17 AM, (19) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, johnf, Jul-22-03, 01:40 AM, (25) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, baldwin, Jul-21-03, 04:23 PM, (20) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, chucksc, Jul-21-03, 11:47 PM, (22) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, Boilerbuster, Jul-21-03, 11:53 PM, (23) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, chucksc, Jul-22-03, 00:04 AM, (24) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, sstyrnol, Jul-22-03, 02:48 AM, (26) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, Geepster, Jul-22-03, 05:11 AM, (27) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, crick14a, Jul-22-03, 06:17 AM, (28) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, Boilerbuster, Jul-23-03, 12:28 PM, (29) RE: UP Steam MegaPak *sigh*, Teacherpat, Oct-09-03, 06:00 AM, (34)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

There were some patches released by a third party. They were in no way endorsed or supported by NALW.Don't know if they're still around or not. Never bothered looking for them, let alone install them. IIRC, there were people having trouble with them.-Jeff

Union Pacific is my drug.

Alert | IP

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

gotta give NALW some credit, they pioneered the articulated steam loco technique, 2 eng files to make up 1 locomotive will have bugs, in it, they're tricking the sim as it is, Hell I'm still ecstatic they even did a big boy, I was bouncing off walls with excitement for v1's release, I always use the AI fireman, so i never noticed any problems, But.. with all that aside.. You should have e-mailed NALW rather then post publicly, Last time someone did that, It wasn't pretty....

____________________________________________
Shawn K, shawnssk@yahoo.com
Texture dude for TKW & YLW, Forum Mod. Feel free to e-mail me.

The NYO&W.. Running from somewhere to nowhere, But never forgotten
____________________________________________
READ the forum rules!
Have a general question? Try Google
Looking for an answer to a Train-Sim Question? Search the Forum Archive First
Looking for a certain Trainsim add-on? See Here First!

Alert | IP

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

The real problem is that, as stated, MSTS does not handle two part locos well at all. The trailing unit is handled as an AI loco, not to mention that any putting a tender behind the AI loco makes MSTS think there's no tender for the lead (controllable unit)
Running with tha AI fireman helps, but is not perfect. I've got some experimental eng files that seem better, and these will be included in the patch. I doubt they will ever be perfect, given the state of MSTS inperfections, but they do seem to be better.
You seem to know how to run steam manually, Blake, so if you'd like,
email me, and I'll send you some .eng files to test. I'd be very interested in your input.
Cheers
HAC

Alert | IP

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

LAST EDITED ON Jul-15-03 AT 10:38 AM (EDT)

guys, I really think that the problems with this pack is the injectors are the problem. only tinme for me when the injectors are on the useage rate passes the generation rate. now when the injectors are off it drops to normal.
thats my take on the problem hope this helps.

Alert | IP

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

Hi Blake,
Another problem of the sim in this version, is it did not anticipate locomotives of this size. The sim seems to limit or poorly utilize parameters outside its expected range. This precludes just putting all the go in the lead locomotive. In the steam model, the adhesion is poorly handled (probably not used in the same way as in the lead) and this makes the trailing units TE less than it should be. The Kuju folks did not expect these monsters would be used in the sim, so the physics engine has limitations. I still prefer to run unarticulated locomotives for big steam. I have a few big steamers which I have modified to pull very well, but I don't know how they behave as to water use vs. the actual??
Bob

Alert | IP

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

that is just it the SP&S 700 is nearly as large as the 844 and it really out pulls it by far. the orignal Big Boy has one hell of a pulling ability and it seems that they missed it on the challenger and the FEF 844 wich is lucky to pull its own weight.
I am in constant search for Pictures of it to fix the Paint issue but I dont know anything about the Engine File.
Yes there is a Fixed engine file out there but still it dosnt fix it all. For Some reason as soon as I start rolling with the locomotives the Boiler Pressure drops to 195 PSI. this is on Auto fireman and with that I can get about 30 MPH out of the FEF 844.
If I could I would fix it myself but as it is I am going to repaint it unless some one else beats me to itDon Pottorff
Long Live the Steam
www.vmf323.com

Alert | IP

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

Well, I sent HAC a private forum message because I couldn't find his email addy, but I'm not sure he got it....anybody have his real email? When I look at his profile for it it tells me "invalid user".Secondly, I've spent the days since I posted this tweaking eng files. I'm still no expert, but there just aren't THAT many values that effect the loco's fire, water, steam, and pulling power. Seeing that I probably won't run the "other" challengers (i.e. anything but the 3985) or FEF's (again, anything but 844) I've only "fixed" those locomotives. It's still not perfect, but they'll pull better and I can get the included consists up past 50MPH. I still have issues with the AI fireman, so all my tests have been as engineer/fireman. I can keep steam up and normally don't work my pop-offs too hard.As someone suggested, the value "Boiler efficiency" is too low on the NALW eng files. I tried it at 3.0 and 3.5 but then you just end up with safety valves popped at all times. I think right now I've found a happy medium at 2.25Also, since the original Big Boy seemed closer to prototype, I took a look at it's eng file and discovered that each eng file was treated as it's own whole Big Boy, rather than the halves used in the Megapack. If the sim was perfect, the new way would be much better, as both "parts" of the locomotive would equal out to be one "whole" Big Boy (or Challenger)...however, the sim just doesn't treat 'em right...so I changed the articulateds to be closer to what the original Big Boy was. Pretty big difference there.I've "fixed" my Big Boy 4012, Challenger 3985, and FEF 844 (which was easier since it's just one eng file) to about 80% tolerable. If need be, I can post my adjusted files in this thread for others.At any rate, thanks for y'alls help. I do appreciate it. :-DBlake Harris
Engineer/fireman, Jefferson and Cypress Bayou Railroad

Vice Dean, Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies

Alert | IP

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

Seein how these engines are in my top 10 all time must drive, I have to add.
I played with the engine files some. I only run on manual fire too. I can run 50 car trains with the BB's and Challangers up most grades with no big issuses other than water level dropping. I have for the most part descovered some things that work to keep it up.
1. I keep both injectors on all time with feed set at 30% to 40% normaly. When it starts to drop I increase to 90% max and not full flow.
2. One big thing I noticed was to drop back on the regulater to about 7%. This will increase the water flow when trying to build it up. I know you don't want to do that when pulling hard, but it doesn't have to stay there all that long to get some boiler water.
3. The best way to avoid wheel slip is to use the regulator to it's fullest most of the time with the reverser as your go pedal!

Joe

Alert | IP

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

the easyest way to fix it is swap it out for a diesel.Kevin Arceneaux
DEFAULT IS FOR DUMMIES
Cry havoc and Let slip the dogs of war.
Lone Wolf Activities Forum and Activity Packs are on www.3DTrains.com

Alert | IP

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

I got it and it is good to see it running fast. I rased the Boiler Effiency up to 2.75 on mine and got some good resoults. Boiler Pressure came up to 300 PSI and stayed there I was able to get it above 70 mph and was good to finaly see the 844 running like it should
Thanks for the Ideas this means I will finaly be running it more.
look down at the picture for the proof that it can run as fast as it should projected at 85 mph so it does runDon Pottorff
Long Live the Steam
www.vmf323.com

Attachments

http://www.train-sim.com/dcforum/User_files/3f16236a17dd576c.jpg

Alert | IP

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

my email is hacmsts@shaw.ca
Let's start chatting on this and see where we can take it. I'll send you the latest .eng files that I'm working on..Cheers
Harold

Alert | IP

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

After Running it some more It seems to be running where it should be I was running a passenger train and was able to hold the speed above 60MPH thru the entire run and it still takes a bit to get there but its not a hot Rod so I didnt expect quick exceleration. it does run alot better and 2.75 seems to be the number.... that is if you want to run Ai fireman as far as Running the fireman yourself you may want to go with a lower setting as it keeps pressure at 300 untill you push it to full power then it uses the pressure again.Don Pottorff
Long Live the Steam
www.vmf323.com

Alert | IP

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

If any of you can put up the boiler details for it
I'll set it up for you boiler details mean length of boiler
and diameters front and back also tubes large and small lengths and diameters again this is the info which is hard to get on the net
rest is easy...........R

Alert | IP

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

Rick
Will this do for a start, relates to Challenger #3985Tender Type: 14-wheeled
Water Capacity: 25,000 gallons
Fuel: 5,945 gallons
No. 5 oil
Gauge of Track: 4 ft. 8-1/2 in.
Cylinder: Diameter: 21 in.
Stroke: 32 in.
Driving Wheel Diameter: 69 in.
Boiler: Inside Diameter: 94-11/16 in.
Pressure: 280 lbs.
Fire Box: Length: 187-1/32 in.
Width: 108-3/16 in.
Tubes: 2-1/4 in. Diameter: 45 x 20 ft. 0 in.
4 in. Diameter: 177
Wheel Base: Driving: 12 ft. 2 in. & 12 ft. 2 in.
Engine: 60 ft. 4-1/2 in.
Engine & Tender: 121 ft.10-7/8 in.
Weight in Working Order,
Pounds: Leading: 102,300
Driving: 404,000
Trailing: 121,600
Engine: 627,900
Tender: 441,900
Evaporating Surfaces,
Square Feet: Tubes: 527
Flues: 3,687
Fire Box: 500
Circulators: 81
Total: 4,795
Superheating Surface,
Square Feet: 2,162
Grate Area: Removed, 1990
Maximum Tractive Power: 97,350 lbs.
Factor of Adhesion: 4.17 mervyn@madasafish.com

Alert | IP

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

haha!!! that's a good one kev!!!Cheers!SebastianFeel free to IM me on: sstyrnol@hotmail.com
My email is: sebastian.styrnol@gmx.de

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I eat trolls for breakfast!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Alert | IP

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

Have found this discussion very interesting we have been working on similar problems.
We would like a chance to see your adjusted files for all three engines. We have been working on these engines for days weeks and still no progress. We are not professionals just train lovers who want to make their train simulations as authentic as possible within the confines of MSTS physics. The steam out of the stacks, boiler pressure, etc has been driving us bats trying to juggle numbers and parameters. We have noted the lack of pulling power at first, we thought there was a grade problem we were unaware of but wrong, everywhere we tried the same lack of performance. We have gather putting in real world values doesn't work in the world of MSTS. That seems to be our stumbling block and we are unsure since we are not engineers what the mathematical ratios might be so that we have a place to start manipulating numbers to get a more realistic effect from these engines.
How come the smoke from the first stack is black and the second is white? Is there any way to correct this?
Thanks for any help you can send our way
Teacherpat

Alert | IP

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

TeacherpatIn the BB loco you have 2 eng.files one is player the other is A1,
the player file No1 will give you black smoke when loco is fired
the A1 loco No2 file only produces white smoke but at the same time
as the No1 so the NALW work Chaps cleverly mixed them, I thought anyway.
But you can also redirect this No2 smoke elsewhere i.e. steam leaks
around the cylinder areas which for some uncanny reason no one seems
to like even if it was real all this is done through the Stack parameters in the files.Now HAC ( Harold ) and the Chaps are nearly at the release stage of an update to these locos as they have stated many times, so hang on in
there it will not be to long now. There are other files in the library
to download and try not good, but as the understanding of the workings
of a steam loco such BB is limited it no wonder they are wrongExample you cannot have a boiler volume on a BB of ( 160 )the boiler
on a loco like that would hold something like 25 tons of water.............R

Alert | IP

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

If you understood anything about MSTS , you'd know why the paramters in the .eng file are not realistic. The sim simply cannot handle steamers properly. I've had discussions with MS on this, and they admit that KUJU's physics, especially for steam are horrible. This thing is a game, more than a simulation. As an example, its possible (ala Phil Skene) to put ridiculous numbers into a steam .eng file and still have it run.
I understand steam very well, thanks very much, and as an IT pro and railroader of 30 years, think I know what I'm doing in MSTS. My approach is not to slavishly copy engine parameters from real life, byt rather to look at actual steam loco performance and test data, and try to reverse engineer an eng. file to match that real life preformance in MSTS. As an example, lets pick my favouriite steamer, CP2816. I know fuel and water consumption, steam production and boiler
efficiencys, cut-off and torque diagrams, as well as TE at various speeds. I also know how she pulls eatbound out of Field on the real KHP with a given load. That's what I try to duplicate in the .eng file.
As far as BB, you should know that the KUJU sim engine treats AI steamers differently that lead locos. Rather than using all the parameters in the .eng file, the sim uses a simpler model, based on TE/HP mostly. I have verified some of this using run-time debuggers while running MSTS.
Biggest problem with BB is that we are stuck with having to use a 2 engine approach for articulateds. I have tried setting BB with the lead engine having all the power, and the trailer juts along for the ride, but thats not perfect either.
I get really monkey-sick of everyone complaining how we did it wrong. I don't get paid for this, and I'm gettign really tired of the whole TS scene with its petty wars and flames.
So..
HAC

Alert | IP

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

Look at it this way: The people who developed the Big Boy, FEF-3, and Challenger are the collective 'man in the arena' that Theodore Roosevelt and Richard Nixon were so fond of speaking about. You're out there trying, and win or lose, you're still better than the guy who sits under the canopy and issues catcalls without ever having gone down to ground level. Overlook the petty wars and flames, eh. For my part, you guys did a wonderful thing, working with an arcane and unreal physics engine to try and produce a jerry-rigged monster. From what I understand of the challenges that presents, the fact that you got anything out the door is remarkable. Keep up the work! It's vital that you don't lose heart or let the nay-sayers get you down.Anyways. I just got a development UP 4005 up to almost 60MPH on the CSX Blue Ridge running out of Spartanburg with the default 49-car consist, and despite the fact I was going down a hill to do this, I'm happy. Now to figure out how to make the transition from 'start' to 'road' speed; that middle step is a doozy. Any of you chaps have a suggestion as to where I ought to be running 4005 (and what with) in order to be in the same boat as the rest of the bunch, having a baseline for comparison as it were?

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

Alert | IP

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

What's wrong with the texture ?Jay-C

17 years old, from Germany, MSTS 3D Add-on maker and repainter ---- Jay-C ----

-- "Power for You" --

Alert | IP

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

Nothing is wrong with the texture I am just trying to find some pictures of the real Locomotive and retexture it useing the picturs to give it a more realistic look.
I was wondering if you had any planns to try to make the Wheels so you can see thru the spokes on them?
I tryed to make an alpha channel for the wheels but they didnt work.
other than that most of it is just trival and will be fixed. I am greatful for your work and just trying to improve it in my own way.
Some great works were done then redone like the Mona Lisa was started as a self portrate and was improved.
However I have been having problems finding any pictures that are a straight on side view of the Real 844 to cut the pieces out to make the repaint so it will be some time before I do anything.
the only thing I can find on the 3985 is the smoke stack on the sides are black on your paint but the real one is Grey like the front of the boiler. ( and Now that UP has added the Elephant Ears wich were just done on Saturday 19th wich took me by suprise as I saw it in the morning that day with out them and at 7pm that night it had them I mistaked it as the 844 when it first rolled into Ault Colorado.

Don Pottorff
Long Live the Steam
www.vmf323.com

Alert | IP

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

OK, I've calmed down enough not to blow a gasket over this....#1. As has been stated on here many times and many ways the MSTS Game engine Physics Parser has absolutely no frookin' idea what to do with a large compound and articulated engine! The Steam Engine section was coded to support the European Toys supplied by Kujo in the initial release, Period End of Statement.
Everything you see in the Big Boys and Challengers is us (Fowlis, HAC, Boudoin and Myself) trying to trick it into doing what it can't or won't..... I personally thought we got it as close as it was gonna get on the V1 physics, at least until a new version of the physics engine is released....
HOWEVER, certain benighted and mostly off shore members of this community joined in their inaccuracy campaign by the Me Too legions killed tons of electrons berating us because our rivet counts were wrong in the physics engines... Followed by reams of bull $hit figures attempting to prove that. Followed by a few more damaged quarks citing European Steam Practice as proof that A. we had the big boy wrong and B. UP/Alco had the Big Boy wrong!... No matter that we kept repeating that we were tuning for effect not rivet count accuracy!
So you know what We gave you what you demanded! And now it doesn't work as well? Tough Darts...
We have been trying to reach a compromise set of figures for all the engines in the Mega Pak that will perform both with the AI fireman and manual fireman.... We are pretty close to $hitcanning the manual fireman option until MSTS2 comes out.... That is the hold up on the update.... We can make it work, sort of, for one or the other but not real well for both.... Now HAC does have a set of physics that is pretty close IMHO! But I'm not sure we want to release it to the kind of reaction we see on here. Guys, the MSTS 1 physics engine is screwed and every thing we do will be a compromise until Kujo fixes that....
Does anybody remember we invented 2 part ENG files which allowed the Big Boy and Challenger to even be attempted.....And BTW Blake, John re-weathered the textures to try to suit you and some of the other Steam Heads on here so what the hell is wrong with them now, 6 months later??????BTW, when will some one answer Jay-Cee's question about the textures below???????Flame Thrower Off!I'm going back to bed now and this krap just delayed the E60s and AEM7s again as far as I'm concerned.....Chuck Schneider
(Virtual) CEO
North American (Virtual) Locomotive Works

Alert | IP

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

Thanks for the heads up about the thread Chuck, I thought it had died...Ok, when I said the textures weren't up to NALW par I didn't mean versus anyone else's work. I simply meant that when compared to the textures from the F40PH (mainly, but also the other NALW locos I run) they didn't seem to be as...realistic? I'm not big on the "photo" textures that some folks use, but I thought that specifically on the 844 it just looked a little too clean. That's not to say it's a poor job, because compared to what I am capable of (and a lot of other work in the file library) it's in no way poor. But when earlier releases set the bar so high it's easy to become disheartened.Secondly, I'm aware that the physics engine of the game isn't anywhere near perfect. You can drive any of the diesels in the game and figure that out. However, I personally thought the performance of the original Big Boy was better (with each .eng file treated as one whole locomotive, rather than half). For the locomotive to be too weak to pull an 8 car passenger train it's safe to say something is amiss. Had I latched her to a 500 car ore train things would be different.When you release a package like this to the public you do open yourself up to the buttnuggets who'll berate every aspect of the product. I think, however, that the vast majority of people are appreciative (perhaps not as vocal in their appreciation though) and supportive. But even the rudest of compaints should have it's benefits in the form of "Hey...we can do this better on our next release". If not, where's the progress? I could care less what the values in the .eng file are....tell the game the locomotive weighs a million tons for all I care, so long as the result is a semi-realistic performance. I had to shrink the boilers down to get that result...but if it works it works. *Quote* So you know what We gave you what you demanded! And now it doesn't work as well? Tough Darts... *Quote*So in other words, the vocal minority dictated the content of the release? That's what's happening socially in our country and methinks we agree the direction we're headed in these here United States.*Quote* We are pretty close to $hitcanning the manual fireman option until MSTS2 comes out.... That is the hold up on the update.... We can make it work, sort of, for one or the other but not real well for both.... *Quote*Ok, I'll concede that most people more than likely use the AI fireman. However, if you can make it work for each one individually...isn't there a way to release the update with a couple of batch files that will extract the proper information into the .eng file so that we'd have the option of manual vs. AI? Kind of like the way the VIA trainset lets you select which interior view you want...or at the very least post an alternate .eng (or even .txt) file with the best manual parameters. Beats excluding an entire group of simmers.
*Quote* Now HAC does have a set of physics that is pretty close IMHO! But I'm not sure we want to release it to the kind of reaction we see on here. *Quote*Ok, then I don't understand why you'd want to release ANYTHING. If the critisism isn't your cup of tea it's kind of the wrong hobby to be in. I realize y'all probably get more than your fair share of hate mail, and if it were me I'd probably have just said "screw it" a long time ago. But as long as you're in the game...do or do not, there is no try. (A little funny lookin' green dude told me that once)*Quote* And BTW Blake, John re-weathered the textures to try to suit you and some of the other Steam Heads on here so what the hell is wrong with them now, 6 months later?????? *Quote*Again, nobody did anything to "try to suit" me. I never said anything about the textures till now. If others did, then Mr. John tried to suit THEM. Squeaky wheel gets the grease. Had I complained back then and continued to bitch after a re-texture you'd have every reason in the world to call me on it. But I didn't.*Quote* I'm going back to bed now and this krap just delayed the E60s and AEM7s again as far as I'm concerned.....*Quote*Delayed them to make them better? Or delayed just because? I don't have any desire for electrics, so the delay of the E60s and AEM7s makes no difference to me personally. For the sake of those who've been waiting the past couple of years for them I hope they're out soon, but whatever...they're y'alls toys.The bottom line is: Once you've released your product it's out of your hands...praise and complaints will roll in. I'm saying that I was disappointed by some aspects of the Steam Megapack. When you boil it all down though Chuck, it's just a series of 1's and 0's and pixils on a moniter. Don't let it get you so pissed man...it's not healthy. Take care and God bless.Blake Harris
Engineer/fireman, Jefferson and Cypress Bayou Railroad

Vice Dean, Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies

Alert | IP

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

Also, I just wanted to give HAC props because he did indeed email me his .eng files, which I'm in the process of testing. Haven't had much time to run virtual trains lately but I'll be sure to let him know what I think.Blake Harris
Engineer/fireman, Jefferson and Cypress Bayou Railroad

Vice Dean, Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies

Alert | IP

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

Hi Blake,I understand were you are comming from and Hac and I value your comments and time in helping to make things better. In fact I feel all your comments have been fair and valid and I have taken no offence. Feel free to Email me jafowlis@shaw/ca (just put a dot on the slash - anti spam) and we can continue the discussion on a one on one basis.Its my opinion, THATS MINE AND MINE ALONE, that msts and articulated loco's are at odds with each other and that hopefully msts 2 will provide us with better tools to tackel the problem.

john fowlis

Alert | IP

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

As an "offshore" member of this community I have no problems with your product. There is nothing like the BB and Challenger this side of the pond, size wise, but we did have some garrats at one time, and your twin eng file can successfully be applied to these, although there are some disbelievers about who insist that putting all power in the lead unit is the only way to get them to work.Manual fireman. I feel that if you can get it right, or nearly so, for the AI fireman, then the manual side of things should follow naturally out of the same set of figures. One thing is certain, if the eng file is tuned to suit the manual firing then the auto fireman will not operate properly.
mervyn@madasafish.com

Alert | IP

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

Thanks MervynYou're right about the manual fireman buggering up the auto one...
We found that out the hard way....As far as the all the power in the lead engine...
When we tried that it made such an abortion out of it...
That the rivet counters really would go nuts...The other thing is that rear driver slippage at speed due to weight transfer in the real world units of this size was a real problem and it is one of the things we tried to emulate.... I personally liked to blast by at 50mph with a freight and have the rear drivers slipping at about 110% of the the front driver rotational speed....
Really cool visual image IMHO!Garratt's what are they? Some kinda toy?
ROFLMAO! Sorry couldn't resist....
Chuck Schneider
(Virtual) CEO
North American (Virtual) Locomotive Works

Alert | IP

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

Chuck where I am concerned I am not trying to insult you guys. as with these little chats we have at least come up with a small fix for the 844. so if we just keep sitting on our hands and say nothing then some of us who may be able to help may come up with an idea these little sessions of the complaints may promped others to find a fix. we cant just leave it on your sholders to bear alone. why are there people out there who do repaints.... is it not the same readson so you guys dont have to do it all that others can take some of the burdon off the sholders of those who do the models.
I have asked over and over for Locomotives to be done however I have stoped asking and with your advice started to repaint. I too contribute to the hobby and not just take. I am not trying to put your guys work down nor am I trying to insult you. Please dont jump down our throats for saying something as I have said that I would personaly be glad if I got Negitive comments on my work as well. what dosnt Kill me only makes me stronger and the negitive comments will only make me improve what it is I do as I may have had those thoughts myself just need to hear them from some0ne else to make them truly register..
However you guys are making those who would critisize me gun shy and I have yet to learn anything from my mistakes.
So Chuck Please pick at my work I wish to here your thoughts truth not just ya its good where should I improve.
Just to add to this I will pick at my own here and you can see how I see my own work
AT&SF 1337 I didnt rely on makeing the textures myself to add to the detail. Instead I reshaded what TA had already done. I took many short cuts that made it a quick start to finish. Some Parts are darker then others and it looks like a mismatch. I didnt take the time to look for a better Font for the Writing on the locomotive.
I didnt research it enuf to see if there were any improvements that I could make. I used the AT&SF Harrald on the front instead of the Baldwin Manufactures plate. I continued to repaint it after I reliesed it till my version of the 1337 is nolonger what can be downloaded and mine looks more like the real one then the one that can be downloaded. I had no patients when I did the Repaint.
I didnt do enuf Research on the tender and wich one to use untill I relised it for download then had to fix it later.
The Tender is two far into a bluish hue instead of the black it should be.
So there it is I am even more Critical of my own work then others.
I only put in my 2 cents when I think it may lead to a Soulition to a fix. on another note Critizem is always going to be around as we have our likes and disslikes.
If you wish to be insulted and not bring out your other works that is your choice I am not asking you to make anything but what you want to make yourself. I will continue to look for a fix for the Challenger on my own and if I find it I will post it that is all. but I would not have found that fix that I did for the 844 unless I had others like this post has telling what others ideas are cause I am at a loss when it comes to the engine file. This was not ment as a Flame so please dont take it as so I do enjoy your work and will continue to make my remarks good and bad as I do for my own work
Don Pottorff
Long Live the Steam
www.vmf323.com

Alert | IP

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

Relax Don!
Just me venting my frustration....
We got a tremendous amount for flack from several self proclaimed steam experts (mostly from France and Germany) over how "unrealistic" the physics were. Now I'm not talking about constructive criticism I'm talking about threads and files that are entitled "Fixing the Incredible mistakes and inaccuracies in the NALW Big Boy" and then went down hill....
Think was if you applied that particular a$$hole's fixes then the damn thing couldn't even pull its own tender....
So nothing happens in a vacume....
Constructive Criticism is always welcome...
Sniping, attacking and Trolling will be answered in kind...
And I obviously mistook your post for that!
My apologies Sir!Chuck Schneider
(Virtual) CEO
North American (Virtual) Locomotive Works

Alert | IP

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

We had that discussion about the differences between Europe (!) and US railways once with the dieselhydraulics.
Obviously there are quite some people who don't understand the differences between the two systems. You made it clear to me about the Krauss-Maffeys and I think I saw it before that already with the steamers.
Now, just for the record. During WW2, the Deutsche Reichsbahn and Borsig planned an articulated steamer (2-6-6-2), which was unfortunately never built due to the developments in the war.
Due to the relatively short runs, most of the German steamers for example where optimised for speed. Also trains were normally shorter as well as the average length of each run. So you wouldn't need the dimensions of one Big Boy.
Now, what I wonder, is the following. I remember two articulated locos, the 2-6-6-2 DRGW and the Rayoneer 3100, 2-6-6-2 as well. How where they done? Is there a barrier concerning size of the locos, when it comes down to the articulation? Because those ones are as one loco. You see, I have absolutely no idea and would like to know more.Hope things calm down a bit... Still waiting anxiously for those nice electric engines by NALW, but as you say: PATIENCE IS A VIRTUE!!! but............ Cheers and best regards from Germany!!!Sebastian
Cheers!SebastianFeel free to IM me on: sstyrnol@hotmail.com
My email is: sebastian.styrnol@gmx.de

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I eat trolls for breakfast!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Alert | IP

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

just sitting back gathering hints on how to fix 'em myself. NALW...I look at it this way, "You guys didn't charge me one red cent for them, and you made no claims pre-release as to their perfection. Nor did you make me press download. So thanks guys and I'm not gonna bug you to do one damn thing for me. (except of course keep makin bad-ass diesels...that you've got nailed!)"

Cheers,
Randy

Alert | IP

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

LAST EDITED ON Jul-22-03 AT 06:19 AM (EDT)

well said matey your spot on they are brilliant models everyone of
them, a little tweaking here and there read a bit of there history
what they done and where, you can get them spot on near enough anyway
All we really need is Sherman hill route for them mine run OK in auto
and manual just get your figures right. NALW cheers chaps keep at it
it's appreciated from other side of pond follower............R

Alert | IP

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

Chuck you have no reason to apologize to me I like your guys work
I am sorry if I came across that way I sometimes word things wrong and often speek before I really think it thru. I should put warning stickers on my feet that say warning may have a bad effect if put into mouth.
but as I say these locomotives belong to you guys and not me but If I can help anywere I will. Granted the Challenger and Big Boy are way Beyond what MSTS was designed for and this is M$ and Kuju's Fault.... they made it an open arctecture program and they should have antisapated that someone would Make such Locomotives. Like you I hope that MSTS 2 will incorperate the Physics to support such locomotives.
I am thinking that they will because Microsoft does listen even though some think not.Don Pottorff
Long Live the Steam
www.vmf323.com

Alert | IP

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

We just wanted to let you know as train simulator buffs we appreciate and applaud your work. You all have set standards and made contributations that we have praised not criticized and we want to let you all know how much we have appreciated your contributions.Thanks
Teacherpat

Alert | IP

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