Speed adjustment considerations

Creating and Editing Rollingstock
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

What you're doing is a good test, but it will be a bit different if you ran the gradient from corner to corner than if you do it horizontally or vertically. As a general rule, more complex patterns tend to get chewed up less and you have to wiggle the noise percentage a bit to get it right for some things.

When I settled on 1.6% (all those years ago) it was several versions of the DDS filter plug-in ago. It was probably in 2003 and I was working with DXT1 textures to approximate human skin for 3d characters, which tend to have large portions of the texture at nearly the same colour since people are not generally striped or polka dotted. DXT1 is a particularly unforgiving format, not that DXT3 and DXT5 are loads better. Honestly, some of my first attempts looked like they had been done by an orangutan with house paint.

On a complex texture, like a locomotive or building, there may be times where you need to do one portion with more noise than the rest of the texture since some part are a good deal more complex than others. This was often true working with textures for a human body shape. Especially the sides of the torso, arms, and legs which have very few features to break up the field of colour. And anything that was subtly shaded was very often wrecked on conversion to DDS. The part of the texture for the face was usually sufficiently complex enough to not need much if any noise added.

Now, if I need to do a large field of a single colour, I will set up the gradient (foreground, background) with two nearly identical colours, one shifted about 1% red, the other shifted 1% green, then do a fill with the render clouds filter. Then I add noise as needed to stop banding/colour-blocking. It usually takes more than one try to find the magic number.

Long story short, 1.6% is my goto number because it saves me an hour of tinkering :lol:
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

Good tips. !*th_up*!

Anyway I've been deborking the 1.06 Mogul. This is minimal tweaks to the default Connie model, with the style based on Erie's 254 (a Baldwin from 1865).
Mogul_revamp_1.jpg
Made it shorter, coz early Moguls were shorter. The weird type with the last pair of wheels fives miles behind the drivewheels seems to have come in later. Presumably when they decided they wanted longer boilers and/or bigger fireboxes.

I think this is sufficiently deborked, and will give us an extra freighter for the 1860's. The Connie can be rejigged to come in ten years later, since 1865 is a bit early for Connies in general use. Then maybe double Connies in the 1880's. Or something.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

Very nicely done. I always wondered why the Connie was featured so early in RT3, when IRL it was largely ignored until about 1880. Once the companies finally noticed it, they couldn't get enough of them. In one form or another, they were being made into the 1930s. Admittedly not many were made by Baldwin after 1910, but they kept getting the occasional order. Granted, the late models bear little resemblance to the Connies in RT3, but they were Connies nonetheless.
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

We used a lot of them over here too, although not in the US style. The D50 and D53 were in service for over half a century. The Europeans used quite a few too.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

TBH, I look the look of the D50 and D53 better than the "old west" version in RT3. But I guess that is because the "wild west" thing isn't part of my cultural background. My people dealt with lions and hyenas and malaria and angry natives that usually won, so there's not a great lot to romanticize there. Still, I like a good spaghetti western :lol:
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

You like spaghetti westerns and obscure fallen flags?
Mogul_madness.jpg
I'm having too much fun with this. (0!!0)

I gave them a bit more of a tweaking. Minor stuff. Fixed a gap between cab front and roof. Tweaked wheelbase and body length a bit. Detailed the graphics a bit more. Gave the wheels some extra layers for thickness. The wheels on the loco front truck and the tender are going to be done as actual bogies, instead of the fixed graphics the default Connie has. These same tweaks can basically be copy pasted over to the Connie too, which will make it a bit more fun.

So the Mogul modification is all sorted now. Just have to do the mesh and skin LOD's, then pack it up. Then I can have a crack at the Connie. ::!**!
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

I've been looking at the models in SMR. With the DX Goods, there are probably 200 triangles tied up in details that you'd never be able to see. About another 800 triangles wasted on fluff that could be done better with a texture. The same is true of just about every loco in SMR. On top of that, they use a very peculiar mix of textures and lighting model to paint colours on the surfaces, so the textures all look sort of cruddy grey over large areas. I whacked around on the DX Goods model this evening to see if anything could be done to port it into RT3. It looks hopeful and hopeless at the same time.
DXGoods-0.jpg
DXGoods-1.jpg
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

I already have the DX modelled.

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=3642&p=42425#p41928
DX_Goods.jpg
That's 999 verts and 1334 tris, including the tender.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

Heh. I guess it figures that if it's iconic and steam, you'd have it already modeled. You're 2 years ahead of me, how am I ever gonna catch up? :lol:

I was fairly certain I'd seen the DX on the site and I was fairly certain your post, but I couldn't (re)find the post. Now I can happily return to making my Frankenstein creations. *!*!*!
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

No, I don't have them all. ^**lylgh If you want to know, my current stash is:

1.06 2-6-4T Suburban Tank (single and double header)
1.06 BR39 2-8-2 (deborking, not too far off being usable)
1.06 G4 0-6-0 (barely started on deborking ages ago, but not enthused)
1.06 G10 0-10-0 (half or so deborked, ages ago, got sidetracked)
A1 Berkshire (my existing version, might tweak her up sometime)
GWR Hurricane (lunacy)
HR Jones Big Goods 4-6-0 (fairly solid start)
Midland Spinner 4-2-2 (basic starting model)
LMR Lion 0-4-2 (must finish soon, ready for skinning)
LNER A1 and V2 (basic starting models)
LNWR DX Goods 0-6-0 (just about ready for skinning)
NSWGR Number 1 0-4-2 (1855, NSW's first loco, mixed traffic version of the DX Goods, just about ready for skinning)
NSWGR AC39 4-6-4+4-6-4 (a mythical streamlined express Garratt I made, just about ready for skinning)
NSWGR C38 4-6-2 (iconic express loco, about one third done)
NSWGR D57 4-8-2 (beastie freight choof from mid 1920's on, about 3/4 done for mesh)
NSWGR D50/D53 2-8-0 (saturated/superheated freight choof from mid 1890's on, just about ready for skinning)
NSWGR P6/C32 4-6-0 (saturated/superheated express choof from mid 1890's on, just about ready for skinning)
NSWGR E17 0-6-0 (1865 freight choofer,just about ready for skinning)
NSWGR T14 Class 2-2-2 (1865 express loco, just about ready for skinning)
SAR Class GL 4-8-2+2-8-4 (largely done as far as mesh goes, just about ready for skinning))
SPR Class R2 4-6-2+2-6-4 (about half done as far as mesh goes)
SR Schools Class V 4-4-0 (must finish, just about ready for skinning))
VR Class S 4-6-2 (thumping great 3 cylinder Art Deco streamliner, about one third done)

Plus I have just about all 1.05, 1.06 and available custom steamers sitting around, in case I ever want to play with them. Like for Stirling skinning or whatever.

So apart from that I haz nothing. Go for it. (0!!0)

Edit: Oh yeah I forgot, also have...

Chapelon 160 A1 2-12-0 (incredible beastie, muchly gruntatious, technically very interesting, roughed out)
NSWGR AD60 4-8-4+4-8-4 (monster freight Garratt, roughed out)
SAR Class 620 4-6-2 (South Australian, rather cool lightweight express, Irish gauge, built to be able to operate on 50lb rail, roughed out)
TGR Class L 2-6-2+2-6-2 (freight Garratt, 1912, one of the first mainline Garratts in the world, about one third done)
TGR Class M 4-4-2+2-4-4 (express Garratt, 1912, one of the first mainline Garratts in the world, about one third done, apparently the only locomotive ever built with 8 cylinders, in the same state as the Class L)
Last edited by Gumboots on Sat Dec 31, 2016 2:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

LOL Sleep much?

That's quite a list of locos. Mine goes something like this:

Cherpanov 0-4-0 (completed, not happy with the textures)
Steam Elephant 0-6-0 (all but done, stalled due to lack of animations on the beams)
John Bull 0-4-0 and 4-2-0 versions (stalled at about 90% completion)
DeWitt Clinton 0-4-0 (complete except for weird smokestack)
Tom Thumb 2-2-0 (all but done, stalled due to lack of animations)
Stourbridge Lion 0-4-0 (all but done, stalled due to lack of animations on the beams)
Mississippi 0-4-0 (all but done, laziness and lack of focus)
Camden and Amboy 6-2-0 (madness)
Liverpool 6-2-0 (madness)
Lima-Hamilton Centrecab A-3177 C-C (diesel, roughed out)
2 Russian mid-century diesels (roughed out, need textures)
LNER ES1 Bo-Bo (almost identical to B&O 1894 electrics by GE, model completed, needing textures that don't suck and aren't green)
LNWR 2-2-2 "Cornwall" (meh)
General Electric CE1 electric and petrol conversion (completed, not happy with the textures)
Camelback 2-8-2 (meh)
Camelback 0-8-8-0 (meh)
The Fontaine Fiasco (how do you even start?)
Pneumatic 0-10-0 (for the lols)
Pioneer 2-2-2 (for the lols)
Several Steam-turbines (for the lols)
Three inspection locomotives (roughed out)

and this bit of madness, because The Little Engine That Could just needs to be made into a scenario...
short-640-1.jpg
Then there's an assortment of buildings (e.g., auto dealership, coal camp, MoW shed with handcar, signal control tower, semaphores and lights, etc) and weirdo rolling stock (e.g., MoW caboose, MoW crane car, Nitroglycerine car, LNG tanker, Milk tanker based on the Borden model, 19th century open hopper, Tub cars, etc) that will probably never be used.

Several others were knocked off my list after seeing your list. I'll aim my lights at diesels and electrics for serious stuff in the future. The bene for me is that they're easier to model and texture :D
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

About walking beams: it just occurred to me that the best (read: least bad) way of faking their actual motion would be to use the standard connecting rod and piston files, but use L-shaped graphics for the connecting rod. IOW, it would include the vertical connecting rod and the oscillating beam, with the attachment point to the piston obviously being at the end of the short arm of the L to keep things all connected.

This might provide reasonable faking as long as travel was kept fairly short. The catch is that the point the "beam" oscillates around would be travelling vertically, so you'd have to fudge length of travel and surrounding frame graphics to some extent.
Several others were knocked off my list after seeing your list. I'll aim my lights at diesels and electrics for serious stuff in the future.
Realistically I have too many projects on the go. If you want to play with any of the models I'm happy to let you have a crack at them.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

I will keep that in mind... in the meantime, allow me to offer you this piece of engineering genius... or is that madness?
9foot1c.jpg
9footera.jpg
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

Yeah I've seen that one before. Another of Brunel's marvels, but I can't recall the name offhand.

Edit: Found it. http://spellerweb.net/rhindex/UKRH/Grea ... nTank.html
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

Eh, back to speed adjustment considerations.

So I just played through Express D'Orient again but with some changes: namely that I removed the +100% mail production and +25% passenger production to see how it would play for express without those boosts. It still plays well. By building hotels in all the obvious spots there ends up being enough pax traffic to make things worthwhile, although it takes longer to really get going, and by using post offices in most towns the mail goals are no problem either. My roster ended up being split into all express or all freight, with no mixed traffic trains, and about 1/3 of all trains were pure express. This was a way of testing new stats for locos, but it worked so well that I can see myself using it often. !*th_up*!

So stats. I used the adjusted Stirling stats that I posted in the cargo revamp thread. IOW, this lot:

Loco weight: 90
Tender weight: 0

Top speed: 85 mph
Free weight: 16
Pulling power: 2
Acceleration: Above Average

Pax appeal: Ultra Cool (12 00 00 00 on the new scale, 140% revenue)
Fuel economy: Very Poor
Reliability: Above Average
Cost: $140k
Maintenance: $8k

This seems to be a pretty good balance for the new pax car weights, at least for a starting point. Speeds and revenues were decent, without being over the top.

I also tweaked the stats for the Mogul and Connie. These were running default PopTop freight cars, so 10 ton cars before 1900. Basically I knocked the Mogul's acceleration back to the same as the Connie, and made it a little bit slower in top speed but a little bit cheaper to run, and still with enough grunt to get itself up grades. The Connie stats I used are fairly close to Lirio's stats, but still a bit different. A bit slower, but a bit gruntier. The tweaked stats for Mogul and Connie seemed to work pretty well too. It gave each loco more of a niche, and kept speed more towards actual 19th century freight speeds without making things painful.

Connie starts were these:

Loco weight: 65
Tender weight: 0

Top speed: 50 mph
Free weight: 44
Pulling power: 8.5
Acceleration: Poor

Pax appeal: Gruesome (OB 00 00 00 on the new scale, 70% revenue)
Fuel economy: Poor
Reliability: Average
Cost: $120k
Maintenance: $7k

The Mogul used these stats:

Loco weight: 52
Tender weight: 0

Top speed: 47 mph
Free weight: 44
Pulling power: 6
Acceleration: Poor

Pax appeal: Very Ugly (OC 00 00 00 on the new scale, 80% revenue)
Fuel economy: Poor
Reliability: Average
Cost: $85k
Maintenance: $5k
low_grade
Dispatcher
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

RulerofRails wrote: Jim, I'm not aware of any plan to fake loco stats in the current roster so that all gaps are filled. There will always be gaps for new locos. What I hope is that we can come up with some documentation which together with the spreadsheets is simple enough for a loco maker to get an idea of how to make their loco perform the role of their choosing without the "whatever-looks-good" approach used in the past.
Ohhhh, it's not perfect, but ever take a look at my loco spreadsheet? This is exactly why I made it, and why I modded a bunch of engines. I have realized in the years since I made it that it would be most useful also broken into period and data specific to each period for each loco used to judge vs contemporaries... maybe someday.
viewtopic.php?f=67&t=2006&p=19225
viewtopic.php?f=67&t=2005&p=19212
viewtopic.php?f=67&t=2002&p=19195
viewtopic.php?f=67&t=2001&p=19192

But more to your following point...
My main motivation for a re-balance of the engines is to bring their economic/performance ratio closer together. Maybe things will be a little more realistic, and progress in this direction is good, but it's a game after all so improving game-play is higher priority. I'm quite tired of playing with only the most efficient (according to RT3, not real-life) locos. At the moment I tend to play a whole scenario with one or maybe two engine types, because game economics dictate that.
This was exactly my feeling expressed in the first link above 8 years ago!
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

low_grade wrote:Ohhhh, it's not perfect, but ever take a look at my loco spreadsheet?
Yes. My 2c is that, due to the lack of knowledge of the game's formulae at the time, it's basically qualitative and not quantitative. Which limits its utility since it can only provide generalised information rather than specifics, and really specifics are needed to make the sort of decisions this game demands. For example, knowing the fuel economy rating of a locomotive is useless, unless you also know the weight of the loco, and the weight of the tender, and the weight of the consist, and how much mileage it will cover. Once you know all of those factors you can combine them with the fuel economy rating to get a running cost, but the rating by itself tells you nothing. This sort of thing is why we decided to develop our own sheets: so we could nail things down and know exactly how much or how little everything would cost us, or benefit us.

Edit: Here's a good example of what happens when you can calculate things accurately. It makes clear what I've always felt, namely that if the Connie is available there is no point using the Stirling or Duke, except for very specialised situations. For example, a Stirling could be good for short hops on flat terrain, where its acceleration is useful despite the lack of hauling power. So if you had a branch line that only had light consists and was dead flat, with closely spaced towns stopping all stations, a Stirling could work. However, once you have long runs and any sort of grade at all, even 1%, the Connie so far outclasses the Stirling that it just becomes a joke. Which is frankly abysmal setting of stats on PopTop's part.
low_grade
Dispatcher
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

Well, I should have said far from perfect, as I see so many game mechanics do not behave as I thought... Pretty amazing though that the fuel costs running a Connie are the same as a Duke! In my own install I've tweaked the Connie up to 48mph from 45mph and down to 100k cost from 120k, and in my spreadsheet with those stats pulling long trains of mixed cargo it falls right below the Duke, with the Stirling a few spots below that. Now if as in 1.05 the Connie had a top speed of 60mph....

I think my main goal with the spreadsheet was to give myself some sort of justification to first mod a few locos so that they would (at least appear to me by my numbers) fill a niche at some point, so that I could (in my mind) justify running 3-5 different kinds of locos at a time...

The Stirling I've only ever used for short trains of express, because again there was a game mechanic which I took for face value which appears to not be at all true, namely the stated max speeds with consists being too slow by one time period... So I've never seen the Stirling say that it can carry so many cars at near top speed, in my games it always says it can carry a few cars near 75mph and then speed drops off quickly. I'll have to reconsider using it for longer trains, it appears.

And now that I've installed your adjusted caboose/express packs, I should see even better performance from some of these little choofers.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

low_grade wrote:Well, I should have said far from perfect, as I see so many game mechanics do not behave as I thought...
We were pretty amazed by some of it too. The one about making your loco lighter to make it haul more tonnage better up grades got me laughing. Not exactly closely in tune with reality, that one.
Pretty amazing though that the fuel costs running a Connie are the same as a Duke!
Yup. The fuel economy ratings are really misleading. The Connie is nominally worse, but it's lighter. This means that, at least for B era express, the total train weight is lower by an amount large enough to balance out the difference in fuel ratings.

The Duke+tender is 101 tons. The Connie+tender is 70 tons. Consist weight for 6x B era express + default dining car and caboose is 68 tons, so total train weights are 138 tons for the Connie and 169 tons for the Duke. 138/169 = 0.817, which is a tiny bit under 5/6, and 5/6 is the ratio of their fuel ratings. End result is they cost the same to run. Hey ho.

Loco/tender weight is also why people have trouble using the Challenger and Big Boy profitably. They're supposedly "Average" on fuel, but are so heavy that they cost a mint to run.
In my own install I've tweaked the Connie up to 48mph from 45mph and down to 100k cost from 120k, and in my spreadsheet with those stats pulling long trains of mixed cargo it falls right below the Duke, with the Stirling a few spots below that. Now if as in 1.05 the Connie had a top speed of 60mph....
Yes those figures were with 1.05 stats. My feeling is that freight in general shouldn't be much over 45 mph even into the early 20th century, simply because it wasn't. Improvements in freight haulers should come in terms of grunt and reliability, not top speed. I reckon the Mogul should be the 1865 freight introduction, with the Connie coming in ten years later with extra grunt. I've played with customised Moguls into the early 20th century, and although they're not rockets they're still perfectly usable for mainline freight.
I think my main goal with the spreadsheet was to give myself some sort of justification to first mod a few locos so that they would (at least appear to me by my numbers) fill a niche at some point, so that I could (in my mind) justify running 3-5 different kinds of locos at a time...
We're basically after the same thing. We just decided we had to nail down the maths behind it first, so we had some consistent basis for changes and didn't have to do everything by endless trial and error. I'm also revamping the entire cargo weight scale to have changes every 25 years instead of 50, and only about half as big, so you don't get the old "nothing happens for yonks then your trains get hit by asteroids". It seems to work, from the limited testing I've done. Older locos are much more usable when an era changes, but over time you still want to upgrade as the changes accumulate.
The Stirling I've only ever used for short trains of express, because again there was a game mechanic which I took for face value which appears to not be at all true, namely the stated max speeds with consists being too slow by one time period... So I've never seen the Stirling say that it can carry so many cars at near top speed, in my games it always says it can carry a few cars near 75mph and then speed drops off quickly. I'll have to reconsider using it for longer trains, it appears.
Oh yes, those stats. Handy, aren't they? ^**lylgh The way several aspects of this game are set up gives me the impression that the devs just liked messing with people's heads. I can imagine them chortling over beers. "Hey why don't we do this? That'll #%@$ 'em."
And now that I've installed your adjusted caboose/express packs, I should see even better performance from some of these little choofers.
You might like these too: 1.06 Mogul deborkification und skinz and Autoracks, and similar vehicular beasties.

The autoracks are done to the same weight scale as the express and cabeesi. Ultimately we're planning on adjusting loco stats to suit the new scale for best overall balance.

The Mogul update is just because the looks of the old one annoyed the crap out of me. The only change I made to stats in that pack was to set its start year back to 1865, but I've been playing with other adjustments on my test installation.
User avatar
RulerofRails
CEO
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 1:26 am

Re: Speed adjustment considerations Unread post

low_grade, yes I've taken a look at your spreadsheet. I "stole" some of the engine data from it too. :oops: But, my initial inquiry was about fuel costs, and nailing down how they are calculated. It was obvious that nobody had understood fuel cost properly in the past (plus other things like the speeds being for wrong era, the scales of the ratings being not uniform). That's why we made our own.

There is some art to adjusting fuel costs with engine weight as well, because engine weight is a component in the speed that a train will travel up grades. Look at Gumboots spreadsheet to see how that works.
Post Reply