Locomotive HP per Ton

V

virgil_182

New member
I am discovering that generally, I can only pull about 1000 tons per locomotive in Trainz 2010. I thought the real world general rule was 1 HP per ton of train ? So theoretically one locomotive should be able to easily pull several thousand tons of train.

Am I misinformed ?

In some cases I need far more locos than I should to pull a train. For example it takes 4 of Phil C's fuel consuming SD70's to pull a 2600 ton mixed freight load on the Avery Drexel route.... Even then, with 4 engines, I can acheive posted speed limits generally only on gradients below 1 %. This seems underpowered to me by quite a bit, since those locos are rated at 4500 HP each. Per the general guideline just one shoul be able to pull that load, and easily at that.

It seems very odd that I have to have almost as many locos as cars in my consists.
 
I like to pull 1 mile long trains @ 117 cars. On my route that has a 1.25% grade, if I put 4 locos on the head end, and two more pushing...thay poop out at 15mph on my 11 mile long grade. If I increase to 6 locos on the head end, and 2 pushers, it seems to make it up to the summit at 45mph. The prototype usually uses 4 locos, and add 2 pushers for heavy trains. Inversely they use the 2 pushers as dynamic braking units on heavy downhill trains. The average US train is less than 12,000 tons, has @ 125 cars, and is @ 1 mile long.

Lately on the Pittsburgh Line, NS has been using 3 locos only on the head end, where they take a full trottle running start up both sides of the mountain grades. And there have been lots of stalls on the mountain, tying up traffic untill they get assistance from local helpers, held in helper pockets, or swiped from oppoing trains consists.
 
Last edited:
I just did a test with a similar setup. Not sure about the number of cars, or the length of the train, but it was big. An intermodal just over 12,000 tons using the same locomotive setup as you described on the Clovis Sub route. It plugged along the .5 to .6 percent grades at about 30 mph, very slowly gaining speed using the same fuel consuming SD-70's.

That seems to be about right,... not sure why four of them have so much trouble pulling only 18 box cars on the Drexel route.
 
Hi All: I've been reading your discussion, sounds interesting..I think that it could be engine spec vs engine spec..You can have the same engines, but one person might have a stronger engine spec than the other..Maybe..
 
-a friend of mine that works for UP on the cajon sub told me a formula to go by. (i think it went like this) locomotives total HP, times, how many locomotives in the consist, divided by your consist tonnage = your hpt (horse power per ton) and a min. was 2.8 - 3.0.
-so if your using 4, 4500hp locos pulling a 12000 ton consist, that would put you at a 1.5 which is below the minimum. so you would need 8 locos which would put you at 3.0 to pull a 12000 ton consist, but i dont know if that is on flat ground or the states steepest legal grade. i've never put this to the test but i was just trying to help!
-Joe
 
Thanks for the replies. socalwb909, the real world advice helps make sense of it, and actually, fits the performance I was seeing in Trainz. I was moving underpowered consists, and although I could move them, the safety / efficiency margins were thin or non-existent.

I'm dealing with another problem now, database errors, doing a reinstall..... it seems to me that for all of Trainz 2010's brilliance, the CMP is a buggy, touchy, Achilles heel.
 
I would just perform an "extended data base repair" to fix the installation...

Maybe it's not the CMx but the objects it has to handle what makes one cry... :wave:
 
-your welcome! If my formula is correct i also think it comes down to a really good enginespec. i've used sporbust's 8-40b's in a mix of locos pulling a consist and just that loco was the only one spinning the wheels on it when all the other locos were fine, on the grade. so in other words the 8-40b prob. had a not so good enginespec.
-I'm not going to get into ts2010. i know that there's plenty of problems with it and its not going to be used by me til they fix a lot of stuff. i lost my cajon pass route cause of 2010 so now I'm rebuilding it in ts2009! (other words, starting over :( )
-Joe
 
Last edited:
-ok well i tested my formula on my cajon pass. i used 4 locos @ 4400hp a piece pulling 3240 tons. do the math that gives me well over the minimum, 3.0, @ 5.4. the best mph i came up with is 26mph when the whole train was on a 2.0-2.2 percent grade. i don't know how prototypical this is or how close it is to the real thing, but just trying to give another example, or some help :)
(-formula: total loco HP X how many locos / by tonnage being pulled)

-Joe
 
Yeah, I too am noticing that Trainz locos come up a little shy of the various real world guidelines I've seen. It always takes a few more locos in Trainz than one expects.

I'm not sure how prototypical the results are either.

I did discover a strange result on the Avery Drexel route. The order in which I put the locos in the consist makes a difference in the overall performance. In another experiment I put 13,500 HP worth of locos, in front of a consist of 18 loaded box cars. Total consist weight minus locos is a mere 2600 tons, so the setup easily, and handily, exceeds the formula's recommendation, yet they struggle, unable to maintain speed limits on any grades more than 1%. If I put one of the locos in the back however, pushing, the performance of the consist improves markedly. In fact it makes it to the summit, albeit slowly, on the steep grades.

Regardless, my initial observation stands, the locos in Trainz do not produce nearly the pulling power they seem that they should. (Again, I am guessing here, having no real world experience from which to draw) Perhaps it is a route specific thing, specific assets, etc...... Next I'll have to look into the engine spec files.... (I don't know how to do that yet so a bit of research is required.) Although the locos I was using, Phil C's fuel consuming Norfolk Southern SD-70's won't work for further experiments because he's locked them down for editing. Sheesh.
 
May I add to the confusion? And I am being serious.
http://www.alkrug.vcn.com/rrfacts/hp_te.htm
This may help.
But one thing to note in TS2010, Apparently Auran has "tweaked" the way that engine configs are used. So an Engine config that worked in 04 or 06 may not give the same output in 2010, the same for an engine that worked in 09 correctly may be underpowered in 10.
Just food for thought.
Kenny
 
-wow thanks smash! that was a very informational link. now i just need to convert that into trainz. but that is all given the fact that the rolling stock and more importantly the locos are setup correctly in game.
-sorry didn't mean to hi-jack the thread. this is good info to me!!!
-Joe
 
Thanks, smash, and rweber both, for the link. That is an excellent, lucid, explanation of real world factors that effect locomotive pulling power. An excellent read !

On a side note: socal, count my vote for your Cajon pass route, if you are still having trouble deciding between that and the Mojave subdivision. Both routes are gorgeous, actually, and believe it or not seeing your route, among a few others in development for 2010 (Even though you switched back to 2009) was one of the factors that tipped my decision in favor of purchasing Trainz 2010.
 
-thanks virgil for your comments! trainz really needs some cali routes so why not do the main attraction? plus i grew up in san bernardino on the cajon pass, camped at the tehachapi loop. i have plenty of reference plus i know some people who drive locos up and down it. i'm back working on it right now and put my mojave sub on hold for the mean time! sux doing sh*t over but fun at the same time!
-Joe
 
I was looking for some info along the same lines earlier this week. A few searches on google turned up a simple formula that worked out pretty well as far as traiz is concerned. Posted by a real railroader in response to someones question about how much weight a locomotive can pull and suggested this formula as a good guideline for the power you need on a train. As it is from the real world one thing reigns supreme....the ruling grade and as such the power required will be based on that grade. Tried it and seems to come out about right.

Rolling Train Resistance Formula
Formula for grades=HPT x 12/%of grade=speed that will be maintained up grade.
12-13mph at full throttle will burn up traction motors and indicates need for more power

Give it a whirl and see what you come up with
 
Your looking in exactly the wrong direction...

:cool: The enginespecs that are default match the locomotives fairly well....

The World of Trainz & SPorBUST locomotives are correct.

Jointed Rail sometimes gives some inaccurate mass weights(110000or400000). Same with RRMods, but both have been spot-on with the latest releases.

Your problem, clearly, is excessive mass weight for loaded cars...

I have done tons of research on this. In Driver mode, you can pull the details for a train. The weight of the train is expressed, for example, 17894t. The "t" stands for metric-tonnes. One metric tonne is equal to 2204.663lbs, 1.102 short-tons or 0.9842 long-tons. The train would weigh 19725 short(US) tons.

A loaded car to US-American Class I's weighs 143 short tons, but would weight 129.725 metric-tonnes in Driver.

And...

Then...

Most every load whether default or 3rd party-created(& face it folks, it's all about 3rd-party), is pretty much spot-on, created using metric mass & volume...it's the product weight that throws everything off.

If the count or amount is not correct, the car will not "weight-out," then the count is too low, or the volume of the load only weighs so much per car.

If you use "Instant-Load" & "Instant-unload," when you load the car, it can add several default products to "make the count," however different products alter the mass weight. This is like the 3800t container train that suddenly weighs 7200t, because it has loaded several containers in the same spot....that causes the textures to flutter between several different meshes...

Any way, no tank car should have a mass weight of 381t...

By the "weigh," Bell-Software Calc-It Converter 2.0 is a handy conversion tool for adjusting specs.
 
Hey everyone,
I saw this thread and thought I'd have a bit of a read. Reading this insipired me to make a train which had the same horsepower per ton as a Bugatti Veyron, to prove rails superiority over road.:cool:
I chose the BR Class 45, the one made by the Trainz Classics UK team, to produce the same horsepower per ton as the car. I got these results...
Stats:
Bugatti Veyron HP per ton: 446.3bhp
Bugatti Veyron total HP: 987bhp
BR Class 45 total HP: 2000bhp

Now, stick a 356t rake (exactly 10) of BR Mk1 coaches behind the BR Class 45: HP per ton: 5.6hp
Then, after coupling 79 more BR Class 45s to the consist:eek: , I achieved:
HP per ton: 449.4hp, 3.1 more than the Bugatti
But I didn't stop there, I thought:
Bugatti Veyron: 0-60mph 2.4 seconds
Then, with my 80 Class 45s and 10 Mk1 coaches, I set off at 10:00:20, with an instant burst of power. At 10:01:04 I hit 60mph, much slower, but still, bloody fast for a train! I kept going, but didnt get anywhere over 99mph, pretty good judging the max speed for the loco was 90mph.:hehe:

And that concludes my spur of the moment decision to make a train as good as a Bugatti Veyron, success?
Thanks,
Mitch
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
An Open Letter to N3V
9 10 11
Replies
212
Views
23K
boleyd
B
S
Who's Good At Math?
Replies
8
Views
3K
socalwb909
S
H
Numbers of locomotives required for mountain routes
Replies
12
Views
3K
norfolksouthern37
norfolksouthern37
Back
Top