Is Trainz Just Like The Real Thing?

[TrainzAreTheBest12]

If I can master the controls of an SD40-2 or GP38-2 on TRS2004, could I really drive the actual locomotive? I was thinking to myself while driving the engine, Is it really this easy? Sure it has to be more of a challenge in real life! If a 13 year old can drive and SD40-2 then why is it so difficult to get on with a rail company? This is my dream job. I want to know if this may help! Long story short-Can I drive a train?

 

[VinnyBarb]

I guess yes you would be able to drive a train BUT HOW you would do this is another matter. I recently was looking at a locomotive maintenance centre here in Australia where the engineers had a locomotive standing there idling its diesel engine without anyone on board. The security handle to drive this locomotive was in its slot, so theoretically, yes, I could have just hopped into the cab and started to drive. But there is more to it as I know, one needs to deactivate the bogie brakes and other various safety devices not configured in Trainz, do various other checks and manipulations etc. and I could have driven off. How far I would have gone without anyone knowing this particular locomotive was on a section of the tracks, now with GPS positioning and telling the ones that need to know where it was plus me not pressing the "dead man switch" every minute etc. I dont think I would have made it very far. If indeed I would have made it at all.

There is more to engine driving than just to be able to use the controls as they are in Trainz, I am NOT an engine driver and I am sure, the real drivers here in the forum will tell you more than I can.

Cheers

VinnyBarb

 

[TrainzAreTheBest12]

I would love to hear something from an actual engineer! The only thing I know is the dead man switch and releasing the bogie brakes. That's kinda cool how I know the controls of a train! How are things up there in Australia? Do you have those long coal and sugar trains and stuff?

 

[sniper297]

why is it so difficult to get on with a rail company?

I learned to fly in Cessnas 35 years ago, and with a flight yoke and rudder pedals with the realism cranked to 100% I can tell you that aside from the pressure feedback and sensation of movement, Microsoft Flight Simulator is pretty close to the real thing. That doesn't mean the airlines would hire any kid who mastered the mechanics of flying an airplane, the selection process is looking for cream of the crop coolest of the cool who will never endanger their multimillion dollar equipment. He has to have the judgement to know when the weather changes, do I press on to Pittsburgh or divert to Detroit? He has to be right 100% of the time, if he diverts when it wasn't really necessary it costs the company money, if he decided to press on and a thunderstorm slams him into a mountain it costs the company a lot more money.

Same thing with locomotive engineers, they're responsible for a lot of expensive stuff and could do a lot of expensive damage if they make a mistake in judgement, so the railroads would be looking through all the people who can master the basic controls for the responsible reliable intelligent ones who will do the job right first time every time.

 

[boyerm25]

... Like anyone but me. :hehe:

 

[Robert2d6]

I have about 600 hours pilot time in single engine aircraft, having got my license in the late 70's. While flight sims are fun, you could have a million hours in Microsoft Flight Sim, get in a real aircraft, and take off and you will crash rather than land. I had occasion about 3 weeks ago to talk to a real railroad engineer at a railway museum in the Atlanta Area. He even invited me into the Cab of the Diesel that he operates on the weekends for the museum, and showed me around and we talked for about 45 minutes. . I told him that I had become interested in Train sims, and had started with Trainz ( which he knew and liked).

He then said, " The one problem with all the train sims, is that you don't get the real feel of actually driving a train, from a sim". This is the same thing in flight sims, and that is why "Full Motion Simulators" that the airlines use for their training, at the cost of about $20+ million dollars a sim, are utilized to train airline pilots on many of the more current aircraft. I have about 6 hours in a Level D Full Motion sim at the Delta Training center in Atlanta, about 11 years ago, and it is like flying the real thing. When you take off and are climbing out after rotation, you actually get pushed back into your seat. If you abort the takeoff, it will throw you against you seatbelts, and if you don't have your seatbelts on, you will probably be catapulted forward into the instrument panel. It is exactly like the real thing, and when a Pilot is trained on one of these simulators, and checked out , he gets one check ride in a real aircraft after that, and then he is on his own with passengers. So the sim, duplicates reality as far as the airlines, the FAA, The NTSB, and the pilot is concerned.

There is no PC sim, now, or in the future, that will ever be able to do that.

 

[sniper297]

Not my point, OP's question was "then why is it so difficult to get on with a rail company?" if it's that easy to learn? And I'm sure it is, you could take practically anybody and teach them the basic control manipulation to manage any vehicle, that doesn't mean the airlines, railroads, or shipping companies would hire the first people through the door who could demonstrate the necessary skills. Exxon Valdez is a good example, steering a tanker ain't that hard, the trick is not to run it onto the rocks when there's a possibility of running it onto the rocks.

 

[Bill69]

snip

There is no PC sim, now, or in the future, that will ever be able to do that.

Robert2d6 is right here up to a point. A PC could be linked to a live motion sim, but the live motion part is what costs the bulk of the money.

I have a couple of hundred hours in a live motion sim, normally called a link trainer, mainly on training for an IFR clearance. IFR = instrument flight rules.

But as sniper297 and robert2d6 say it is not possible to get the required feel with just a PC.

Cheers,
Bill69

 

[64Warhorse]

I would love to hear something from an actual engineer! The only thing I know is the dead man switch and releasing the bogie brakes. That's kinda cool how I know the controls of a train! How are things up there in Australia? Do you have those long coal and sugar trains and stuff?

You might like this website, owned by a former Penn Central and BNSF engineer: http://www.alkrug.vcn.com/home.html

 

[Euphod]

Under perfect conditions, on my best day I could probably drive a real engine for a distance, especially if it were not attached to a consist. I think what Sniper is trying to say is there's much more to it than that, and perfect days when you are at your best are rare indeed. You have to be perfect every day, in the worst possible conditions, and I don't just mean weather. You have to be perfect after you've just had a ten hour fight with the wife and she told you that "if you go to work today and don't stay here to show me how important I am to you then me and the kids will be gone when you get back!" After you loyal dog has been hit by a car and dies. After the doctor just discovered a lump. After your neighbor has started a law suit against you because of your new fence. After your parents have told you they have bedbugs in their house, or your child has been arrested for selling drugs.

Yes, there are many technical and mechanical problems to overcome that a rail sim won't teach you, and there are also many factors in you own life that you must be able to overcome as well.

 

[64Warhorse]

Robert2d6 is right here up to a point. A PC could be linked to a live motion sim, but the live motion part is what costs the bulk of the money.

I have a couple of hundred hours in a live motion sim, normally called a link trainer, mainly on training for an IFR clearance. IFR = instrument flight rules.

But as sniper297 and robert2d6 say it is not possible to get the required feel with just a PC.

Cheers,
Bill69

... and sometimes, even the live motion sims get it wrong. I recall reading at one point that the USN was considering imposing a mandatory delay time between flying in their F-14 simulator and flying the real F-14, because the real bird behaved just enough differently that a couple of guys crashed, thinking it would behave like the simulator ...

 

[TrainzAreTheBest12]

I know that they would hire just some kid who knows the basic controls of a locomotive. Sometimes I get so into the game, I turn my head expecting to see the city lights of the USA gleaming in the background. Nope. Just the TV. I have had some pretty sweet sessions on TRS 2004. Ive done it all from going into emergency, shunting cars in a busy yard, working with other drivers, obeying speed limits, passenger based operations, loading and unloading all kinds of freight wagons, mechanical failures, idiot drivers willing to risk their lives, and so much more. I am getting the most out of this simulator, and if isnt realistic, then what is! I honestly think that if they put me on a mechanical fail proof EMD SD/GP unit, I could get some stuff done! Please tell me how you all get the most out of your simulator. This is a great forum comminity.

 

[Mouse84]

To answer your question, yes. If you can move a SD40 or GP38 in cab mode in the game, you should be able to move one IRL. Running it for a distance or with cars is something different. For me it's different, I started running trains quite a while before I tried this sim. Some won't like it, but to me, 2009 and 2010 is more realistic feeling than TS12.

 

[Bill69]

... and sometimes, even the live motion sims get it wrong. I recall reading at one point that the USN was considering imposing a mandatory delay time between flying in their F-14 simulator and flying the real F-14, because the real bird behaved just enough differently that a couple of guys crashed, thinking it would behave like the simulator ...

I can believe that, even the link trainers are not 100% like the real thing. But when the instructor throws in a couple of emergencies it can still get quite exciting.

Cheers,
Bill69

 

[William0d0]

I can believe that, even the link trainers are not 100% like the real thing. But when the instructor throws in a couple of emergencies it can still get quite exciting.

Cheers,
Bill69

I been in a bunch of F-15 simulators. All we did was emergencies (engine related). Do enough simulated emergencies and the real ones are a piece of cake.

 

[Robert2d6]

Robert2d6 is right here up to a point. A PC could be linked to a live motion sim, but the live motion part is what costs the bulk of the money.

I have a couple of hundred hours in a live motion sim, normally called a link trainer, mainly on training for an IFR clearance. IFR = instrument flight rules.

But as sniper297 and robert2d6 say it is not possible to get the required feel with just a PC.

Cheers,
Bill69

Actually, in the airline type full motion sim that costs about $20 million, the hydraulic part of it that gives you the motion simulation cost about 1 1/2 million, which is a small portion of the total cost. Much of the cost is modeling the physics of it, from data collected from the aircraft manufacturer, and the mechanical construction of the sim which exactly duplicates the smell, the feel, the sound, and everything else of the real aircraft right down to the seat cushions and upholstery and the pressure it takes to throw each and every switch.

To get back to the original question, the real engineer that I spoke with at length , who had spent time with Trainz, felt that it was pretty good for a PC sim, and the best PC sim he had tried. He had a copy of it on his PC at his home.

 

[itareus]

One factor in driving that has not been mentioned so far in this thread is 'knowing where you are going' (known here as Route Knowledge) It may not apply as much in the US with long distance freight lines but it certainly is a major factor on many UK routes and probably applies to some US line e.g. LIRR. 'Up front' going into somewhere like Birmingham New St you will be faced with, maybe, 20 or 30 signals - which one of the 3 showing green applies to you ?

Think of it as the difference between driving a car in an empty parking lot as opposed to through a major city.

But knowledge of and interest in the prototype should count for something if applying for a railroad job.

 

[BD1]

placemarker

 

[JCitron]

One factor in driving that has not been mentioned so far in this thread is 'knowing where you are going' (known here as Route Knowledge) It may not apply as much in the US with long distance freight lines but it certainly is a major factor on many UK routes and probably applies to some US line e.g. LIRR. 'Up front' going into somewhere like Birmingham New St you will be faced with, maybe, 20 or 30 signals - which one of the 3 showing green applies to you ?

Think of it as the difference between driving a car in an empty parking lot as opposed to through a major city.

But knowledge of and interest in the prototype should count for something if applying for a railroad job.

This is where the simulators shine because they can show the route fairly accurately to the drivers (engineers) to familiarize them with the route. This is true of both short, fast commuter routes running in complicated city areas as well as long distance freight. The better the engineer is at knowing what's coming up, he can anticipate the situation. The problem though, which I've read about and seen on video (my SPAD videos I posted for example), is complacency. The engineer gets too familiar with the route and then ignores the signals and warnings because he's "played" through them so much not only in his mind, but also in real life.

First of all, RR jobs are not that easy to get your foot in the door, and expecting to be driving a locomotive soon, would be like joining the Navy, expecting to fly a fighter in the first year, you won't.

Alot of physics and training is required to handle a 15,000 ton train, that could have the slack run in on you at speed, string lining which pulls the entire train off at the center of the curve, or breaking knuckes and tearing out draft gear.

This is very true, the recruiting process is quite long, and believe it or not, the highest-level and highest caliber recruits they can find are chosen. Everything about the rail job is safety, how you think, how you act. As you pointed out, driving a locomotive is no joke, and it takes a lot of mental as well as physical abilities. More interestingly and recently, the major rail companies, such as NS and CSX, have a mandatory conductor to engineer promotion. After two years as a conductor, the recruit must pass the engineer's test and promote up to engineer. If they don't pass the tests and promote up, they are terminated. I know because I have applied in the past for conductor's positions with CSX, although I did withdraw my application due to medical reasons.

John

 

[Robert2d6]

First of all, RR jobs are not that easy to get your foot in the door, and expecting to be driving a locomotive soon, would be like joining the Navy, expecting to fly a fighter in the first year, you won't.

Alot of physics and training is required to handle a 15,000 ton train, that could have the slack run in on you at speed, string lining which pulls the entire train off at the center of the curve, or breaking knuckes and tearing out draft gear.

Bet you would get a bad review if you did any of that