Railworks America

I don't usually suggest other web sites but TruRail (https://www.trurailsimulations.com/) has come up with what we are all looking for. And they did it using the Kuju model which we all have. Bravo!

Sweet! Powder River Basin ready. Nice find.

So, I tried these out this evening in a scenario on the PRB.

3x SD70ACe on point (SD70Pack02)
120x loaded CMO cars
1x SD70ACe (SD70Pack02) trailing

This train ground to a halt climbing a 1.5% grade south out of Reno Jct.....

Anyone else run these yet? Your experiences?

gtrtroger wrote:So, I tried these out this evening in a scenario on the PRB.

3x SD70ACe on point (SD70Pack02)
120x loaded CMO cars
1x SD70ACe (SD70Pack02) trailing

This train ground to a halt climbing a 1.5% grade south out of Reno Jct.....

Anyone else run these yet? Your experiences?

Default locomotives?

Yes, not modded....

gtrtroger wrote:Yes, not modded....

That would be why.

The default equipment runs like garbage.

...guess I’ll try Fanrailer’s mod and see.....I will report back.

Maybe four units is not enough for 120 cars. This is the same car it's always been. Go try it with the original default and you will have the same result.

...not the same car Buzz. Physics and weights have been modified: https://www.trurailsimulations.com/cmo-hoppers....

Otherwise, I’d agree. I originally had the default loaded Sherman Hill cars in this scenario and it worked just fine. I run 120 car trains with ACe’s on the PRB doing testing at least twice a day..everyday for a couple of months...one scenario yesterday that was 2hrs long, so I do have some familiarity with the relevant rolling stock and how it performs on the route....just saying.....

I turn over my king. I have not run it with more than fifty cars and not with the stock loco.

The stock equipment does not have the correct values for weight and braking.

The locomotives aren't even remotely close for tractive effort or dynamic braking effort either.

The physics on the hoppers by TruRail are all based off of real life weights (110 tons loaded, and 18.6 tons empty). Coal is one of the heaviest commodities hauled, and with 120 cars at 110 tons each, you have 13,200 tons which equals 26,300,000 pounds.

BNSFdude wrote:The stock equipment does not have the correct values for weight and braking.

. Agreed. We’ve known this for years.....

[quote=“BNSFdude”]The locomotives aren't even remotely close for tractive effort or dynamic braking effort either.[/quote]
Agreed. We’ve also known this for years......

So, if these cars are corrected (?), and we know the loco’s, un-modded, are problematic, then, I’ll mod the ACe’s and report back....simple.....

Both UP and BNSF run multiple 3 ACe loco plus 120 car trains up and down the Powder River daily. Can we duplicate it? If not, what compromises have to be made?

What I was asking was what other player experiences were with these cars....opinions....would you use them....etc, etc....discussion.....

Would the Searchlight Simulations ACEs have the required power to pull that number of cars? Of course, I would probably use the ES44AC or ET44AC for that size of train. They used to run by my house on their way to power plants in Arkansas and had like 4 ES44ACs on the front, sometimes some in the middle, and usually 2 on the end.

BNSFdude wrote:The stock equipment does not have the correct values for weight and braking.

The locomotives aren't even remotely close for tractive effort or dynamic braking effort either.

Anthony do you just get on to tell us how bad everything is? I believe you are going over plowed ground,

And by the way the coal trains on UP that go by here in the Midwest with modest graded usually have three SD70s up front one midtrain and one on the back. Same configuration if they are ES.