Darjeeling Himalayan Railroad: Redux

[narrowgauge]

Kenny

It will need a medium to high end computer to run although we are always aware of the need for good frame rates and try to optimise these where possible. One thing that works in our favour is that train length will be low, one loco and three traincars is the norm and the maximum speed is 12 mph.

It is quite possible that by the time we finish the route, what is now classed as a high-end computer will be middle range, only time will tell. One thing to remember is that if you download the route and the frame rates are too low, you can go though and delete content as much as you like.

Cheers

Narrowgauge

 

[kcdowdy]

Why would i mess up this awsome work of wonder?


Not taking off content.

 

[HiBaller]

That is a very difficult question to answer. Given the variations between computers with a similar set of specifications Trainz will run poorly on one and nicely on another. I built my system, for instance, three years ago and changed just the video card in order to run Flight Simulator X. It has a CPU running around 1.2Ghz and 1.5GB of RAM. Nothing special I assure you. Our route runs fine in low-poly areas, but will pause briefly (perhaps a half-second or so) coming around corners into a high-poly area. Remember also that you can set Trainz visual distances yourself. What I have may not be what you have. I also have TrainzTuner and have set the distances way, way out so I can develop scenery better.

If it is any help, I can run FSX with the sliders around midpoint. I run FS2004 with sliders set all the way to max. Other games (such as a couple of point-and-shoot games) run fine.

We hope to release a route that will be both pleasing artistically and mechanically (no freezing) but can offer no guarantees. Current plans are to offer two versions; what we call a "lite" route and a "heavy" route. The lite route will be out before the heavy one for obvious reasons.

Hope this helps.

Bill

You're fast NG

 

[mp5a4]

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[thegrindre]

Agreed...

 

[kcdowdy]

Ok, I have a frying pan in my hands, Ready to harm this computer if you don't give me update now!!!!


Please!

 

[narrowgauge]

UPDATE!!!!!!!!

We have done about one week of work since last Tuesday and next week we expect to do another seven days, so are you satisfied now?

Put the pan away.

Cheers

Narrowgauge

 

[DaSnakke]

Well, as a matter of fact, we are.

By the way I have a question: You are building the route in TRS2004 or 2006(don't remember). After the route will be complete, are you making a 'special-indian-TRS' as a stand-alone version? How?

 

[narrowgauge]

DaSnakke

We are working in TRS2004 but checking that our content is all troublefree in TRS2006.

After the route will be complete, are you making a 'special-indian-TRS' as a stand-alone version? How?

I'm not sure what you mean here but are you asking if we will make a special UTC version? Without committing us in any way, it is possible that with some hard work modifying the config.txt files, it might work in UTC. However that is very much dependent how we feel at the end. To be honest we hope that the Indians will be using TRS2004 when we finally release the route.

Cheers

Narrowgauge

 

[DaSnakke]

Not qiute..what I mean is that will you make the route built-in for a TRS2004 'indian-special'?The indian version of TRS?(if such thing exists)

 

[dmdrake]

Not qiute..what I mean is that will you make the route built-in for a TRS2004 'indian-special'?The indian version of TRS?(if such thing exists)

No.

 

[ash05]

Sadley the Darjeeling now use diesels on the long distance journeys.:'(

Here is an image of one if your intrested in making a trainz version for your route.

 

[dmdrake]

Sadley the Darjeeling now use diesels on the long distance journeys.:'(

Here is an image of one if your intrested in making a trainz version for your route.

Peter has already built one but we are not sure about using/issuing it. We'll see how it 'feels' when the time comes.

Dave

 

[kcdowdy]

NO! I'm getting this route for the "Steam" Feel of things and your going to use that!?!?



:'( :'( :'( :'(
Don't do it! :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'(

 

[juhis]

A must have!

 

[dmdrake]

Stop, don't jump! You have everything to live for!

NO! I'm getting this route for the "Steam" Feel of things and your going to use that!?!?
Don't do it!

It might be available... You would NOT have to use it! Relax!

 

[narrowgauge]

Ash05

Thanks for that, even though we prefer the steam working, the diesels were there in our target era so they must be available.

Kcdowdy

We have set the year 2004 as our target era, mainly because details and images for a previous era are not very plentiful. As Dave pointed out, when you run on the route you can imagine that you are farther back in the past, and if the diesels do not fit, you have no need to use them. You will note on our web site that some of the freight stock is already made, despite being no longer in service at 2004.

I am hoping that I will be able to make some of the earlier passenger stock, even the original 4 wheel trolleys, but that will depend on the time available. We already have the original Garratt, beautifully made by Ben Neal, and while this was a failure on the hill route in real life, there is no reason why this can't be used.

One appealing thing about the DHR is that even the modern one looks like it belongs 50 years back.

Cheers

Narrowgauge

 

[ash05]

Here are images of two different oil fired loco's used on the DHR. The first is one that the DHR built themselves using alot of electrical devices powered by diesel generators and is numbered 787

This one was built using technology developed by the Ffestiniog railway and is numbered 1001.
Thought you might want to make models of them for trainz.

 

[narrowgauge]

Ash05

Thanks for posting the images.

I am in two minds about 787, it is an ugly beast and not very successful. I have the impression it is not used much because of the noise and oil consumption.

B1001 is a possibility but what are the visual differences between it and it's sisters? I guess that the fuel tank replaces the coal bunker, what else is there? As it came after our chosen era, I nad not given much thought to creating it. Maybe I will.

Strange that in a country with no domestic oil sources, they feel pressured to convert from coal whch they have in abundance.

Cheers

Narrowgauge

 

[ash05]

Ash05

Thanks for posting the images.

I am in two minds about 787, it is an ugly beast and not very successful. I have the impression it is not used much because of the noise and oil consumption.

B1001 is a possibility but what are the visual differences between it and it's sisters? I guess that the fuel tank replaces the coal bunker, what else is there? As it came after our chosen era, I nad not given much thought to creating it. Maybe I will.

Strange that in a country with no domestic oil sources, they feel pressured to convert from coal whch they have in abundance.

Cheers

Narrowgauge

I completely agree with what your saying about 787, as far as im conserned its not worthy to be called a steam engine after all the work thats be done to it. It looks like a diesel with the cosmetic features of a steam engine.

Ash 05