Annie's Virtual Pre-Grouping, Grouping and BR Layouts & Workbench

[Annie]

Irish Nielson 2-2-2WT at Moxbury.  There's a creator for Trainz that makes Irish railway models and this is one of his that I particularly like.  The way he does his texturing and sets up the ambient, diffuse and emissive on his model meshes is weird though as before I started work on this engine it was one black lump with none of the texture work visible.

 

[Compound2632]

25 minutes ago, Annie said:

Irish Nielson 2-2-2WT at Moxbury.  

 

What do you do about re-gauging?

 

Pedantry: Neilson & Co., founded by Walter Montgomerie Neilson, from a Glasgow engineering dynasty of at least three generations - so not at all Danish, more likely the name has gaelic origins related to those of the name O'Neill.

Edited May 2, 2020 by Compound2632

[Annie]

31 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

What do you do about re-gauging?

 

Pedantry: Neilson & Co., founded by Walter Montgomerie Neilson, from a Glasgow engineering dynasty of at least three generations - so not at all Danish, more likely the name has gaelic origins related to those of the name O'Neill.

Fortunately Irish models in Trainz use standard gauge track Stephen.  Since it's very much a Victorian design of engine I think I can get away with running one or two on my Norfolk layout.

 

 

[rocor]

24 minutes ago, Annie said:

Fortunately Irish models in Trainz use standard gauge track Stephen.  Since it's very much a Victorian design of engine I think I can get away with running one or two on my Norfolk layout.

 

 

 

I can understand Irish 4mm modellers not wishing to have to scratch build all their own track, so sticking with a 16.5mm gauge, but is it difficult to specify a 5 foot 3 inch track gauge in Trainz?.

[Annie]

1 minute ago, rocor said:

 

I can understand Irish 4mm modellers not wishing to have to scratch build all their own track, so sticking with a 16.5mm gauge, but is it difficult to specify a 5 foot 3 inch track gauge in Trainz?.

I'm sure it can be done.  Australian broad gauge track is available as an example.  It's just a case of someone wanting to do it really since nearly all of the models/assets in Trainz are created by members of the Trainz community.

[MikeOxon]

As I recall, Annie, you mentioned to me that Trainz doesn't require the engine gauge to match the track.  I've not tried it but I believe you said that I could run Broad Gauge stock on normal track if I really wanted to!

[Annie]

2 hours ago, MikeOxon said:

As I recall, Annie, you mentioned to me that Trainz doesn't require the engine gauge to match the track.  I've not tried it but I believe you said that I could run Broad Gauge stock on normal track if I really wanted to!

Yes you most certainly can Mike.  It's just that it looks odd that's the problem.

[Annie]

This is a Nielson 'Ariel' 2-2-2WT which is supposed to be the same as the engine I have.  There were seven of them in all that were built in 1865 for the Dublin Wicklow & Wexford Railway.  They were named  after supernatural beings.; - Ariel; Elfin; Kate Kearney, Kelpie; Oberon; Titania; and Banshee.

 

 

This little 2-2-2WT does not look like that.  Mostly the fault lies with its boiler being larger in diameter and its cab side sheets being too high; - its dome and safety valve cover aren't correct either.  I think the model's creator took a shortcut and reused a boiler from a previous model he'd made along with its boiler fittings.  But that doesn't really matter so much since it's now an imaginary Nielson single driver well tank the E&GR  reboilered  at some stage of its existence.

It's taken a bit of fettling to get right since out of the box it was about 10,000 Kg too heavy and it had an engine spec intended for a GWR Pannier Tank.  It also used a version of a script that was incompatible with a large percentage of my engines and rolling stock so that needed to be removed from its config file and banished into the outer darkness.  Which led to further repairs and fixes needing to be done so it would function without the heretic script in place.

BUT it was worth it because 'Titania' is now running very sweetly.  By all accounts the prototype engines weren't up to much and 'Titania' is pretty much the same.  That's fine though because running small 19th century engines that are a bit weedy and have a problem with stopping quickly are a lot of fun and I enjoy the challenge.  More than likely 'Titania' will get sent off to run things on the Mulling on the Hill branch which shouldn't cause her too many problems.  Great Mulling has three branchlines that make junctions with its lines, - two are goods only branches, - and Mulling on the Hill is the odd one out with a requirement for a passenger service.

It would be simple enough for me to sort out more Nielson well tanks, but really they would have no work to do so 'Titania' will have to remain a singleton.

 

 

 

[Adam88]

This lucky survivor is a John Jones and Son locomotive of 1864 and may be found in Madrid.  They have a very interesting collection including one locomotive closely based on a Highland Castle.

 

[Annie]

Very nice, - thank you for posting that picture Adam88.

 

'Titania' now has a proper set of buffers, better couplings and has been vacuum fitted.  The buffers I used are 19th century self contained buffers that are fairly close in appearance to those in the photos I posted earlier and 'Titania' is looking a lot better for having them.  Nothing like a little attachment point plotting to get my silly sleepy brain kicked into gear.

The next thing I should do is sort out something to represent the lower half of the firebox and ashpan between the frames since this is conspicuous by its absence.  And that would be about all I can do with making something of this little single driver tank engine.  It still has some faults, but I think I can live with those.

I've been working out a morning passenger service between Moxbury and Bluebell Magna which involved some rearranging of trackwork at Bluebell Magna to allow an engine to run around its train without too much fuss and bother and 'Titania' has been helping with the test runs.  This allowed me to put the final polish on Titania's config settings as well so all in all a worthwhile exercise.  'Titania' has limited coal and water carrying capacity and can only do 30mph so the B&FER mainline isn't really the best place for her to be so I'll be sending her off to Great Mulling very soon.

 

 

Edited May 4, 2020 by Annie
can't spell for toffee

[Compound2632]

On 03/05/2020 at 02:24, Annie said:

They were named  after supernatural beings.; - Kate Kearney

 

Supernatural? Apparently not, though she dealt in spirits - not the hands-on-the-table sort, either: illegal hooch.

 

 

I had to look her up, so that's my education for today!

Edited May 4, 2020 by Compound2632

[Annie]

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Supernatural? Apparently not, though she dealt in spirits - not the hands-on-the-table sort, either: illegal hooch.

 

(sheet music image clipped)

 

I had to look her up, so that's my education for today!

Fascinating.  I wonder what led to one of the engines being named after Kate.  More than likely one of those stories now lost to time so we will never know.

[Annie]

I had an interesting chat with the maker of my odd little Nielson single driver well tank.  He said that it was one of his early models from when he was still learning how to make digital models and that he's presently working on an updated version.  From the picture he posted of the WIP 3D model I can predict that it's going to be very nice indeed and a much more exact representation of the prototype engines.  I gave him the photo I had of 'Banshee' and he was very pleased because it was one he hadn't seen before.  Photos of 19th century Irish engines are rare and hard to find it seems.

 

Presently I'm teaching 'Titania' how to run the passenger service from Mulling on the Hill to Great Mulling and back again without getting in the way of the big and important mainline trains.  It seems that 'Titania' is a bit too short to operate the interactive platforms at Great Mulling properly being a stumpy little sort of engine so I had to place a trackmark at No.2 platform road for her to stop at.  Once I did that all was well, 

I think I'm going to reduce the train length down to only three or four coaches.  With six coaches there would be nobody left in the village if all the seats were occupied!  The question is what should the makeup of the train be?  The train presently consists of; - Brake 3rd - 3rd - 1st - 2nd - 3rd - Brake 3rd.  I'd really prefer to keep the two Brake 3rds since their luggage compartments are needed for parcels and other such traffic from the branch.  2nd class coaches are on the way out on the E&GR and are only presently found on the branchlines,  A 1st class coach would be out of place on a three coach train, but might be fine on a four coach train to carry the occasional local worthy who wants to travel.  Which I suppose leaves a 3rd class coach to fill the final slot.  So that would be; - Brake 3rd - 1st - 3rd - Brake 3rd.

 

 

[Northroader]

Despite the Midland Railway levelling up, there were quite a lot of socially aspiring folks, who whilst not being totally flush with funds, would appreciate being able to get away from the rough and tumble that third class could involve. I’d be inclined to keep a second and ditch one of the thirds. Sorry to be a petit bourgeois snob, but there tis.

[Compound2632]

There was a bit of ad-hoc reasearch done in relation to LSWR set trains by @sem34090 and others if I recall correctly, to which I contributed some Midland and LNWR data. The conclusion was, roughly, that for suburban sets, provision was one-third each for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd (by compartments, not seats) or one-third 1st and two-thirds 3rd on lines where 2nd had been abolished. For country sets or rural branch lines, the proportion of 1st (and 2nd) was lower.

 

My attention was recently drawn to the Great Western's sets of 4-wheelers for Metropolitan services, built in the 1890s. These rather bucked the trend by having an unusually high proportion of 2nd class - typically 12 first class compartments, 20 second, and only 10 third, with there being a batch of loose second class carriages built for strengthening sets. The proportion of 3rd class did increase in the last few sets built.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Compound2632

[Annie]

41 minutes ago, Northroader said:

Despite the Midland Railway levelling up, there were quite a lot of socially aspiring folks, who whilst not being totally flush with funds, would appreciate being able to get away from the rough and tumble that third class could involve. I’d be inclined to keep a second and ditch one of the thirds. Sorry to be a petit bourgeois snob, but there tis.

I did actually consider that Mr Northroader and wavered over adding in the 2nd class coach instead of the 3rd class coach.  

 

18 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

There was a bit of ad-hoc reasearch done in relation to LSWR set trains by @sem34090 and others if I recall correctly, to which I contributed some Midland and LNWR data. The conclusion was, roughly, that for suburban sets, provision was one-third each for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd (by compartments, not seats) or one-third 1st and two-thirds 3rd on lines where 2nd had been abolished. For country sets or rural branch lines, the proportion of 1st (and 2nd) was lower.

 

My attention was recently drawn to the Great Western's sets of 4-wheelers for Metropolitan services, built in the 1890s. These rather bucked the trend by having an unusually high proportion of 2nd class - typically 9 first class compartments, 20 second, and only 10 third, with there being a batch of loose second class carriages built for strengthening sets. The proportion of 3rd class did increase in the last few sets built.

By the one third of each rule then making up the train as; - Brake 3rd - 1st - 2nd - Brake 3rd, - would cover that reasonably well.  That would give three 1st class compartments, four 2nd class compartments and four 3rd class compartments.  One 1st class compartment short, but in the context of a passenger service to a small rural community I don't think that would be a problem.

Strengthening coaches can always be added on market days & etc, but for the daily service  Brake 3rd - 1st - 2nd - Brake 3rd should be fine.

 

Thank you very much for your comments gentlemen they have been more than helpful.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Annie
more to say

[Edwardian]

26 minutes ago, Annie said:

I did actually consider that Mr Northroader and wavered over adding in the 2nd class coach instead of the 3rd class coach.  

 

By the one third of each rule then making up the train as; - Brake 3rd - 1st - 2nd - Brake 3rd, - would cover that reasonably well.  That would give three 1st class compartments, four 2nd class compartments and four 3rd class compartments.  One 1st class compartment short, but in the context of a passenger service to a small rural community I don't think that would be a problem.

Strengthening coaches can always be added on market days & etc, but for the daily service  Brake 3rd - 1st - 2nd - Brake 3rd should be fine.

 

Thank you very much for your comments gentlemen they have been more than helpful.

 

I had started out thinking my ideal branch set was Brake Third / First or First-Second Comp* / Third / Brake Third

 

I think, though, that such a formation would be less typical than one involving a Luggage Brake.

 

Now, my "default" 4-coach branch formation is now: Luggage Brake / Composite (2/1/1/2) / Third (3/3/3/3/3) / Brake Third (either 3/3 or 3/3/3)

 

For 3 coaches, I think two brake thirds is more likely, something like:  Brake Third (3/3) / Composite (2/1/1/2)  / Brake Third (3/3/3)

 

Suburban trains would be different again, often 1 or 2 block sets forming a train and being longer trains. Here, I suggest, you may be more likely to find dedicated First and Second class coaches, with or without First-Second Composites in addition. 

 

* depending upon whether the Abolitionists have yet struck the line in question (crimson rag to a Midland bull, but the MR was proud to be the outlier there; GER 1893, GWR 1912 etc, so the choice is yours). 

[Annie]

Unfortunately my small collection of 1870s 4 wheelers doesn't include a composite James.  It would be nice if they did as it would help to solve the problem.  They are small coaches with the brake 3rd being 3/3, the 1st being 1/1/1 and the 2nd and the 3rd being four compartment coaches.  I have got some 1850s composites, but introducing those would be too much of an anachronism even for me.

 

The Affiliated (Imaginary) Railway Companies have different policies towards second class coaches.  The B&FER abolished second class at the same time as the GER.  The Hopewood and Windweather Tramways still retain second class coaches on some services with most being found on the Tenpenny Branch and the Windweather Loop.  The E&GR trailed behind with abolishing the second class on the more important trains and then gradually abolishing it on ordinary mainline trains.  On E&GR branchlines though second class coaches are still in use and there were loud protests from local communities when it was announced that second class coaches would be withdrawn, - so for the present time at least they remain available.

 

I could 'borrow' one of the Hopewood Tramway's longer 1880s 4 wheel composites and see if I could persuade it to change colour from dusty red to red brown and letter it for the E&GR.  That would certainly help things out with the Mulling on the Hill branch passenger train.

I'll give that a try and report back.

 

[Edwardian]

2 hours ago, Annie said:

Unfortunately my small collection of 1870s 4 wheelers doesn't include a composite James.  It would be nice if they did as it would help to solve the problem.  They are small coaches with the brake 3rd being 3/3, the 1st being 1/1/1 and the 2nd and the 3rd being four compartment coaches.  I have got some 1850s composites, but introducing those would be too much of an anachronism even for me.

 

The Affiliated (Imaginary) Railway Companies have different policies towards second class coaches.  The B&FER abolished second class at the same time as the GER.  The Hopewood and Windweather Tramways still retain second class coaches on some services with most being found on the Tenpenny Branch and the Windweather Loop.  The E&GR trailed behind with abolishing the second class on the more important trains and then gradually abolishing it on ordinary mainline trains.  On E&GR branchlines though second class coaches are still in use and there were loud protests from local communities when it was announced that second class coaches would be withdrawn, - so for the present time at least they remain available.

 

I could 'borrow' one of the Hopewood Tramway's longer 1880s 4 wheel composites and see if I could persuade it to change colour from dusty red to red brown and letter it for the E&GR.  That would certainly help things out with the Mulling on the Hill branch passenger train.

I'll give that a try and report back.

 

 

If you don't have comps available, perhaps the abolition of second assists, permitting: Luggage Brake / First / Third / Brake Third?

[Annie]

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

 

If you don't have comps available, perhaps the abolition of second assists, permitting: Luggage Brake / First / Third / Brake Third?

That's a thought James.  The Hopewood's composites are very old models and all their maker did was change the class numbers on the doors of a 3rd class coach instead of making a proper job of it.  The interior of the compartments are all identical as well which doesn't help either.  I'll see if I can make something of it and if I can't second class will get abolished  on the Mulling on the Hill branch and I'll follow your suggestion.

 

That will leave the Grimwold mineral branch as the only part of the E&GR still offering second class tickets, but the lengthy Grimwold branch is almost an autonomous section in its own right so we'll leave them in peace for now.

[Annie]

And after much effort and frustration a  4 wheel 1st/2nd composite for the E&GR.

 

 

 

The original Hopewood Tramway coach.  I'm going to change the coach ends artwork on these too since the original is pretty naff.

 

 

 

A cruel close up.  The drop windows on the coach doors have been a huge source of frustration because if I try anything more than a simple colour change only one window on each side of the coach will register the extra setting.  With it being the same mesh and texture used on all the windows this is really silly.  I've not struck anything like this before and so far I haven't been able to solve it.

 

[Annie]

I ended up using a plain mid brown on the door window frames.  Anything else just didn't work.  There's something about the mesh piece that messes up colours and makes it impossible to finely adjust them.  I haven't come across anything like this before in all the time I've been doing texture work on Trainz models.

[robmcg]

I rather like the darker brown in the door window frame of the last picture posted, is that the one?

[Annie]

1 hour ago, robmcg said:

I rather like the darker brown in the door window frame of the last picture posted, is that the one?

No the brown I ended up using is a bit lighter Rob,  That darker brown was achieved by manipulating the ambient, diffuse and specular settings on the window frame mesh, but for some unknown reason only a single window frame each side responds to the settings.  The nearer window frame demonstrates how texture colour becomes washed out when applied to the window frame mesh.  Both window frames are share the same texturing  and ambient, diffuse and specular settings, but only one of them has responded to the settings.

[Annie]

Branch train at Great Mulling.  'Lots of time travellers again today,' commented Alan Dawson to George Bunn as he brought the old Nielson well tank to a stand at the platform.