Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Magick

Regarding the new Drydock details...

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
23 posts

 

Just a small detail this, but my OCD is getting the better of me.

The boxcars in the Drydock port all read "Florence & Cripple Creek."

Believe it or not, that's an actual railroad, or...well, it was an actual railroad. There's just one tiny problem, or two if you want to really be specific.

Those being that

1.) the F&CC was a narrow gauge railroad (3 foot 6 inch gauge) in Colorado, and not a standard gauge (4 foot 8.5 inches) as we see in the Drydock,

and

2.) The F&CC went bankrupt in 1915, and thus wouldn't have been around during WW2.

Other small details I've noticed (which yes, are wrong.)

The boxcars are a wooden type. By 1940, FRA (Federal Railway Administration, at the time called ICC) rules had outlawed this type of boxcar for movements. The 40 foot steel, or composite (Steel and wood, with outside bracing) type had taken over.

Examples:

Steel:

http://www.steamerafreightcars.com/images/gallery/boxauto/rdg102751.jpg

Composite:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/6f/16/da/6f16da9182c4309747a4744ae05bcc86.jpg

The tank cars in the game are simply tanks on flats. These car types had been phased out by the start of WW1 in favor of all steel construction tanks. These had an open construction with the tank itself resting on a center sill.

Example:

http://c8.alamy.com/comp/AAN06K/1940s-railroad-train-bulk-freight-oil-tank-car-AAN06K.jpg

Flatcars are a touch too short. The ones in game look to be 30 foot cars, but by WW2, the standard size was a 50 foot long car.

Example:

https://cdn1.legacystation.com/media/extendware/ewimageopt/media/inline/71/3/bachmann-17314-ho-52-flatcar-prr-0ea.jpg

The little freight train that passes with three cars lacks a caboose. Even inter plant movements like this would have had one, even if it was just a transfer caboose.

Transfer Caboose example:

http://frisco.org/mainline/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Transfer-Caboose-73-date-and-location-unknown.jpg

On one flat car, boxes are stacked higher than the adjacent boxcar. This was not done due to safety regulations. At least not as high as that car's loads are.

The lumber on one car is stacked wrong, and braced improperly.

Flatcar with lumber examples:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2tyi9MBjcUQ/VXhzxdwN2oI/AAAAAAAAJJ8/31OWx0HFcA4/s1600/GN%2B69534.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jqU8hkk8o6E/VXh1-0RIZvI/AAAAAAAAJKY/rMHpDsCv_S4/s1600/SL-SF%2B95470.jpg

Note: One car actually gets pretty close to accurate. The cars carrying steel are, for the most part, fine. However the bracing on one car is well outside the width of the car itself. This was not possible due to loading gauges.

One flatcar has a smokestack on it. Wrong type of flatcar for such a load. (IE it's too heavy for that.)

Proper flatcar:

http://wwwantiquesnavigatorcom-kokomqtakkhroyq3v6vj.stackpathdns.com/ebay/images/2015/371490858765.jpg

or

http://www.carrtracks.com/spcar10.jpg

The above is carrying a ship part. These had to be moved in special movements due to clearance restrictions.

The little switching engine is just CUTE! No problems with it.

Other non train related errors:

Forklift with no driver, driving around.

Sparks are a bit much.

Overhead traveling crane probably would topple the first time it tries to raise anything due to its footings being too close together.

Actual overhead crane:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/a5/3f/0d/a53f0d71e25502837199de54f51b3979.jpg

(Note the crane forms a traveling bridge over the ship, with supports on either side of the dry dock.)

All Boxcars are labeled for the same railroad. You'd expect to see at least two, if not three or four roads such as the Pennsylvania, New York Central, Virginian, Southern, or some other road.

There are no military trucks of any kind present.

Cute switcher does not come to a complete stop before reversing. (I'll ignore the fact it doesn't make the proper whistle blasts for changing directions or movement.) Also, all have the same number (12).

Edit: Since some are saying the links aren't working, here's what to google for:

1.) Steel 1940's Boxcar, Composite Boxcar.

2.) 1940 PRR tank car.

3.) 1940 52' flatcar.

4.) 1940's flatcar lumber loads

5.) Depressed center flatcar.

6.) Heavy Duty Flatcar

7.) 1940's ship construction, bridge crane

8.) Frisco Transfer Caboose.

 

(Note: This was originally posted on Reddit.)

 

Forum Edit:

 

In case you were curious, the Port seems to be based off of this: http://www.usgwarchives.net/va/portsmouth/shipyard/pa249/pa249b.html

 

In particular, check the image that says "Norfolk Naval Shipyard Aerial View."  

 

Edited by Magick
  • Cool 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,848
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts

Nice work Magick but does it really matter? This is a game the ascetics are something to look at thats all. Nuff said

LR5ocui.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
23 posts

Eh, from a model railroader point of view? Yeah.

 

Though it doesn't hurt that for the stuff present to actually make sense, we'd be talking about a period about 25 years prior to WW1.  So a port in the late 1880's...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,848
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts

Well from a World of Warships Players Point of view. I wouldn't care if the trains in the new port were from 2525 just the fact that it is something pleasing to look at and watch in action other than that. If the discrepancies are that profane, use the other ports. 

LR5ocui.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,113
[FOXEH]
Banned
14,364 posts
23,318 battles

Bloody History Nerds!

Bloody issm!

Bloody Kitsunelegend and his new avatar.

(looks good too!)

Bloody Umikami and his damn troll posts!


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
991
[HELLS]
Members
2,969 posts
39,904 battles

Don't give a hoot! And even at age 70, I still am doing live railroad stuff as a consultant. After all, it was my bread and butter for 38 years!

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
23 posts

Don't give a hoot! And even at age 70, I still am doing live railroad stuff as a consultant. After all, it was my bread and butter for 38 years!

 

Glad to see there's a couple of us that know railroads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,428 posts
38,366 battles

Really interesting info actually.

Never gave it much thought until now.  If you're going to do a pixel model, may as well do it right.

Betcha the guys who did the RR stuff just didn't really think about the period and trains.

But they may now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
374
[WOLFB]
Members
1,110 posts
45,160 battles

 

Model Railroader, and Railfan actually.

 

Having lived in a town with a roundhouse, (and a Grandfather and Uncle Railroaders civil and WWII our high school team were called "RAILROADERS") I've seen my share of "more than 3 cars" being moved without a caboose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
746
[LEAK]
Beta Testers
1,686 posts
209 battles

Modelers/Texture artists like to get things right, so the stuff in OP is not useless info. They try to do as much research as possible but when you have lots of things on your plate (i.e. all the other elements that aren't RR related in the port and other projects they might working on in parallel) you can't spend too much time researching RR stuff. If they could see all the info collated by the OP I'm sure they'd be glad of it. Hopefully it gets passed along and the port could be improved in future updates.

 

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
23 posts

Modelers/Texture artists like to get things right, so the stuff in OP is not useless info. They try to do as much research as possible but when you have lots of things on your plate (i.e. all the other elements that aren't RR related in the port and other projects they might working on in parallel) you can't spend too much time researching RR stuff. If they could see all the info collated by the OP I'm sure they'd be glad of it. Hopefully it gets passed along and the port could be improved in future updates.

 

 

 

I was looking at some other photos when searching through, and I think what's likely happened is they found some very early photos from before WW1 and based off of that. There's one photo, in particular, from Alaska that shows a ship at port with the same cars (boxcar wise) beside it.  Problem is, the Alaskan railway the White Pass and Yukon was a narrow gauge.  Being that it's a Russian development team, it's understandable then that if their source materials don't specifically say "Ok, this isn't how everything looks" that they'd run with that assumption.  There were other smaller details that I left out, simply because you could let them 'pass' to some degree.

 

For example, all the cars have "archbar trucks".  (http://www.spookshow.net/trucks/archbar.jpg.  If the link doesn't work, just google "archbar trucks".)  

 

Arch bars had largely been phased out in favor of cast coil spring trucks (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Railroad_truck%2CFM55-20.Fig8-8.png), due to the latter being safer than the former.  However you did still see archbars floating around on older cars, or tenders of locomotives.  They weren't common, no, but they did exist.

 

The other minor detail that comes to mind, is the position of the ladder on the tank car. They have it going down on one side, but not both.  Ironically, this is somewhat correct.   Early European and Russian tank cars featured this design, with the ladder only present on one side of the car, and located off to one side of the platform to open the top.

 

Also: For what it's worth, I've actually modeled these cars before in 3d.  Completed them as part of a DLC pack for Trainz 2012 a few years back.  I believe I have the original low poly models, and texture maps somewhere. If I can't find them off hand, I can rebuild them.  I use 3ds Max for my designs.  Not sure if the devs would want the models or not, but eh I can do it in about a week.

Edited by Magick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,335 posts
10,761 battles

Well done, I discovered the F&CC RR trivia today and posted it without seeing yours first. Interesting extensive info and +1. :)

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
746
[LEAK]
Beta Testers
1,686 posts
209 battles

 

Also: For what it's worth, I've actually modeled these cars before in 3d.  Completed them as part of a DLC pack for Trainz 2012 a few years back.  I believe I have the original low poly models, and texture maps somewhere. If I can't find them off hand, I can rebuild them.  I use 3ds Max for my designs.  Not sure if the devs would want the models or not, but eh I can do it in about a week.

 

WG won't use them if it's not made exclusively for them. There's a lot of legal issues involved. It's also why many good mods don't appear in vanilla until WG makes their own version and implements it in-game. You have to make everything from scratch and jump through some hoops to get them to accept it. Apart from legal stuff, there would be stricter requirements e.g. for polycount, LOD, normal mapping, etc. It's more restrictive compared to 2D assets like the global reticle contest we had ages ago which simply required a certain resolution and file format. After that, they still might end up having to make various adjustments to it that they might as well model and texture it themselves. It would be a lot easier to just make sure they have the right information and references and their in-house guys / contractors can work on it.

 

If you want to do the work gratis, just make sure you reach out with someone from Lesta first to see if they're willing to accept submissions and give you the necessary details about their requirements so you don't end up wasting time and effort making something they can't/won't accept. I have my doubts they would ever agree to it, but who knows, it might work out :-P

 

A much more achievable way of getting your models in-game is to include them as part of custom port mods. WG is a lot more receptive about including player mods in their WG Mod Pack, failing that it still can be distributed on its own or in other mod makers' mod packs.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×