The case for makeshift self-propelled passenger and freight vehicles in Railroad Tycoon III

on

Experimental stuff is being developed and tested

The Red October Works working overtime through the Easter holidays to catch up with the 5-Year plan before it even begins!

One of the numerous weaknesses of Railroad Tycoon's intended operating concept is that it allows exclusively loco-hauled trains, with no ready-made provisions for any form of multiple unit (M.U.) operations. Contrary to more sophisticated concepts, like Chris Sawyer's "Locomotion", which simulates self-propelled railcars not only by allowing motive power to carry a specific cargo (which is quite sufficient by itself), but by letting them carry different cargoes simultaneously (such as passengers + mail in its dedicated compartment)! This is quite unfortunate, since it deprives the user from this important option, to simulate such a technology, especially on low-traffic shortlines. Admittedly, the very inflexibly determined scale of operations in Railroad Tycoon III allows limited scope for local networks (which by the way makes the provision of the Shay and Fairlie locomotives rather a waste of slots for what it matters), yet powered railcars are widely useful for longer distance runs too, as long as the intended load remains light.

Some users had made up motive power with railcar carbodies, yet these are fake in the sense that they carry no revenue load per se, everything is carried behind them in conventional cars. They are nothing more than conventional locomotives disguised in railcar skins.

So, one of the first things that sprang up my mind as soon as I discovered the modifications that the user community had managed to apply on the default Railroad Tycoon fleet, was the idea of a virtual, negative-length "locomotive", which would "bury" itself inside the leading conventional car, as though as if it were its "motor". The only necessary visible elements would be the ones likely to protrude from the carbody, such as a smokestack for a steam railmotor, or a pantograph for an electric one. Previous discussion had already taken place long before I had taken notice.

The dilemma, whether the "rail motor" or the cargo car should engulph the other, is answered from the Railroad Tycoon's own procedures: Since there is no choice of determining a specific cargo for a powered unit and the order of cars in a consist, a shell has to be modelled that will look as decent as possible, no matter what the leading cargo car will be. Thus, a railcar has to be more or less fit for any cargo, hence the carbody for the leading cargo prevails and it should not be concealed by the motor unit's shell.
Moreover: If all available freight cars featured a brakeman's cabin, it might be less imperative to provide a driving cab. The way things are, a cab is unavoidable for any railcar that won't be confined to express traffic. Alas, this cab will have to engulph the eventual express car's front end too, there is no way to avoid this when hauling passengers or mail.
Due to the same constraints, livery choices are limited too. A certain uniformity concerning at least all express car categories is desirable, so that the aforementioned cab will not look totally out of place with any of them. They cannot deviate radically from each other, as it might be otherwise desired.
The operational parameters in need to be taken care of are the operating costs (which must be advantageous in comparison to a loco) and the speed/load tables (which must be unfavourable in excess of 1-2 extra trailers at any grade) in order to simulate the railcar's application field. This is at present far from finished.

A philosophy governing the present experiment is that an absolute minimum of addon stuff should be required. Besides, the highly awkward format for 3-D objects in Railroad Tycoon III makes the development of completely new stuff from scratch especially tortuous for non-top graphics experts.

Nonetheless, serious cosmetic problems are caused by the default Railroad Tycoon's own inconsistencies, such as enginehouses and double-stack containers that interfere with the provided catenary's clearance, and consequently with the proposed E.M.U.s' pantographs. For that matter, one can either live with these or undertake the painstaking task of correcting the coordinates of these scenery elements so that they look less obtrusive wherever they occur.

Dipl.-Ing. Nikolaus Sbarounis

An intermediate era semi-streamlined electric and diesel concept

trying to match default express stainless steel stock, complete with headlight, cab door and bogie skirting
Looks best with the default mail stock, perhaps requiring a slight revamping of the passenger coach
This "Galloping Goose" obsession again! Is it "Galloping Goose" No. 12? I'll need to see a doctor for this.
Maybe Sid Meier thought that these double-stack containers should be utilised to conduct power from the catenary to the traction circuit? At any case I think I'll substitute this load model for its earlier counterpart, since it ruins electrification in general as well as enginehouses!

Comments

Post a Comment

A modern era CargoSprinter-inspired electric and diesel concept
For some unknown reason, this scene brings a "Galloping Goose" to my mind
It looks relatively OK with some types of freight wagons, but would require some livery coordination with express stock in order to provide a more appropriate appearance when on passenger service
Out of all models tested, this one shows the lowest linear misalignment on tight curves, as well as no angular misalignment at all. Further investigation will be required to resolve carbody superimposure on curves satisfactorily.