- Harry
R. T. POTEET wrote:dinwitty; whenever anybody puts up "favorite locomotive' in a topic title I usually hide under my bed for 24 hours or more until I can be reasonably certain that it has disappeared off of page one of the index. Yours didn't seem to want to go away so I finally broke down and took a look at it.I want to sincerely thank you for this post because it really does give credence to that old Chinese maxim, "A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words"; in fact the very next time someone asks "Can I run my Big Boy on 18 inch radius curves?" all I am going to do is link to this post because it gives such a dynamic representation of exactly how stupid an articulated locomotive looks on a 52 and 5/8ths degree curve - which, by the way, is over two and a half times as tight as a Big Boy was engineered for.And why, if I may ask, should I - or any serious model railroader, for that matter - find the results of this devolution into sottise surprising.
I don't care how this thread ends up, enjoy it.
There was a question about locos on 15" radius so I laid it out what could and couldnt...
Still mad about my 2-8-0 not able to...8-D
Post yer fav locos, 611 looks fab, I own the Bachmann but its not that good, so I am in the market for a good one.
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
tatans wrote: 5 sets of photos, that means only 5 people sent in photos, some sent one, others sent more, but only 5 out of 21 sent photos, not very many for a post that requested photos.
5 sets of photos, that means only 5 people sent in photos, some sent one, others sent more, but only 5 out of 21 sent photos, not very many for a post that requested photos.
Tatans--
I suppose I misunderstood it, too. Here's a photo of my two Yellowstones, but I just didn't want the post to become inundated with 2-8-8-4's and upset the "Big Boy" fans, LOL!
Actually, I have three, but the third one is one I bought at a train show last month and still in the process of being rebuilt
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
N&W 611. Just got this one, HO by BLI.
Modeling the N&W freelanced at the height of their steam era in HO.
Daniel G.
tatans wrote:Did I misread the subject?? pic intensive, which I take to send in some photos, and 21 replies and 5 photos, (where are the "pics???)
twhite wrote:Dinwitty---Yup. DM&IR was a relatively small line, but small line+heavy tonnage (ore)=BIG locos! Actually, the M3/4 Yellowstones were based on the big Western Pacific 251-class 2-8-8-2's, previously built by Baldwin for heavy freight service in the California Feather River Canyon. Missabe wanted an elongated all-weather cab, which resulted in a four-wheel trailing truck to support the extra length under a slightly larger and evidently more efficient firebox. Which also increased the tractive effort to something like 148,000 pounds. As far as sheer pulling power, the Missabe's were a little more powerful than UP's famous Big Boys, but they were used initially for only one purpose, handling heavy ore trains in Minnesota. However during WWII, when the Missabe line was generally shut down for the winter, the road loaned out their big M3/4's to other roads, most notably Rio Grande, Northern Pacific and Great Northern (there are rumors that they even worked the Western Pacific, but I've never seen any photos of them doing so). On the Rio Grande, they worked the Moffat Tunnel route, and from what I've heard, Rio Grande engineers said that they were the best steam locos they'd ever operated. They were clean-running, smooth, and from what I've seen in a video I've got--they could race along pretty darned well. They've been called the best articulateds Baldwin ever built, and I think had they been better 'advertised', they'd probably be right up there with Alco's Big Boy, the N&W A-2-6-6-4 and the Lima C&O 2-6-6-6 Alleghenies as the absolute epitome of smooth, powerful 'modern' articulated steam power.For my money, they're the most spectacularly handsome articulated ever built. Just LOVE 'em, I do. And they seem to be high on the list of locos that current HO modelers want to be produced. Which I think means that those old brass Akanes that are floating around just might be getting pretty popular. Lord knows that with a little work, they can certainly be turned into good running locos. Again, congrats on yours. Just wait until you hook it up to every freight car you own, LOL! Tom
Dinwitty---
Yup. DM&IR was a relatively small line, but small line+heavy tonnage (ore)=BIG locos! Actually, the M3/4 Yellowstones were based on the big Western Pacific 251-class 2-8-8-2's, previously built by Baldwin for heavy freight service in the California Feather River Canyon. Missabe wanted an elongated all-weather cab, which resulted in a four-wheel trailing truck to support the extra length under a slightly larger and evidently more efficient firebox. Which also increased the tractive effort to something like 148,000 pounds. As far as sheer pulling power, the Missabe's were a little more powerful than UP's famous Big Boys, but they were used initially for only one purpose, handling heavy ore trains in Minnesota. However during WWII, when the Missabe line was generally shut down for the winter, the road loaned out their big M3/4's to other roads, most notably Rio Grande, Northern Pacific and Great Northern (there are rumors that they even worked the Western Pacific, but I've never seen any photos of them doing so). On the Rio Grande, they worked the Moffat Tunnel route, and from what I've heard, Rio Grande engineers said that they were the best steam locos they'd ever operated. They were clean-running, smooth, and from what I've seen in a video I've got--they could race along pretty darned well. They've been called the best articulateds Baldwin ever built, and I think had they been better 'advertised', they'd probably be right up there with Alco's Big Boy, the N&W A-2-6-6-4 and the Lima C&O 2-6-6-6 Alleghenies as the absolute epitome of smooth, powerful 'modern' articulated steam power.
For my money, they're the most spectacularly handsome articulated ever built. Just LOVE 'em, I do. And they seem to be high on the list of locos that current HO modelers want to be produced. Which I think means that those old brass Akanes that are floating around just might be getting pretty popular. Lord knows that with a little work, they can certainly be turned into good running locos.
Again, congrats on yours. Just wait until you hook it up to every freight car you own, LOL!
Working on that now, a figure 8 test across my Michigan City module, I have this feeling I'm gonna get...
"Your Train's too long when you meet your own train at the junction".
I have an LP of these engines, the only recording I know, which impressed me completely. I'll try to post up a sound byte of it.
If anyone wants to dig it out, its on "Fast Freight on the Nickel Plate"
Its a North Jersey recording
twhite wrote:Dinwitty--Holy cow, that Yellowstone on a 15"? Almost dropped my glasses when I saw the photo, LOL! I KNOW Akane built a lot of lateral motion into the loco and tender to enable it to take about a minimum 24" radius, but you've really pressed her, my friend. But at least you know that if you decide on 24" minimum, you'll have a brass articulated that can do it. However, if you haven't done it yet, I'd really suggest putting in a NWSL universal joint between the 1st and 2nd set of drivers. The rubber tubing that Akane uses can cause enough lateral stress around curves to burn out the motor. Found that out with my first one. But boy, I NEVER figured the Yellowstone for THAT small a radius, LOL!Tom
Dinwitty--
Holy cow, that Yellowstone on a 15"? Almost dropped my glasses when I saw the photo, LOL! I KNOW Akane built a lot of lateral motion into the loco and tender to enable it to take about a minimum 24" radius, but you've really pressed her, my friend. But at least you know that if you decide on 24" minimum, you'll have a brass articulated that can do it. However, if you haven't done it yet, I'd really suggest putting in a NWSL universal joint between the 1st and 2nd set of drivers. The rubber tubing that Akane uses can cause enough lateral stress around curves to burn out the motor. Found that out with my first one.
But boy, I NEVER figured the Yellowstone for THAT small a radius, LOL!
Neither did I. It almost could, tho I don't reccomend it. I just ran it into the curve to see what, boy I was surprised.
I have been running it on 22" radius loop from time to time to break it in sporadically as its mechanics are tight. Its technichally a brand new engine as it sat in a hobbyshop virtually untouched. I'm guessing the motor magnet could be weakened. But its running like a champ for now. I have the NWSL linkage laying around and I want to change the motor to a NWSL. I will prolly take it apart in the future and re-go over the mechanics, make the changes then it'll be a ripping engine.
I looked up the DM&IR line, its a small line, really, never knew that, needed these huge engines.
Real layout minimum, 24" minimum, been in my plans all along except for the South Shore portion, 26" minimum where the Lil Joe runs and passenger cars, 15 or 18" radius where the 700's can run.
Here is the one I salivate over...if only I had the $800 or so for her...
Ahhhh what a beaut!
Brian
Dave Vollmer wrote:Here's my kitbashed PRR M1 4-8-2 on a 15" radius curve:Of course, that's N scale. The inside curve is about 13.75" radius. Both engines still look awkward even through the HO scale equivalent is about 27-29" for these curves.Big steam + tiny curves = awkward look at best / poor operation at worst.I think mine looks awkward too. Moreover, even on the 15" radius curve, my M1 slips with a heavy load... On my next layout, 18" will be my minimum N scale radius (nearly 36" in HO).
Here's my kitbashed PRR M1 4-8-2 on a 15" radius curve:
Of course, that's N scale. The inside curve is about 13.75" radius. Both engines still look awkward even through the HO scale equivalent is about 27-29" for these curves.
Big steam + tiny curves = awkward look at best / poor operation at worst.
I think mine looks awkward too. Moreover, even on the 15" radius curve, my M1 slips with a heavy load... On my next layout, 18" will be my minimum N scale radius (nearly 36" in HO).
Model railroading has always had compromises, my layout to be has planned 24" radius minimum and wider whenever I can do it. This will be going up/down serious grades on curves for the N&W Y6b's, I don't have the room for wider. I was in a club where 36" is minimum. Luckily for the time period cars are 30'-50' and planning a lot of coal drags with 36' hoppers, I will be dumping/selling my quad hoppers.
I may have some long scenicked curves to break up straight monotony. Doing multi-level envision your picture then add a few stepped levels maybe crossing over/under/tunneled in it, thats how it would look.
Raised on the Erie Lackawanna Mainline- Supt. of the Black River Transfer & Terminal R.R.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
jktrains wrote:Except there's a BIG difference between a SD9 and a SDP40. They look nothing similar. it should take a spotter's guide to know that there's a difference between them. Typically when then were minor changes in a design they have been referred to as phases such as Phase I, Pahse II etc. not new model designations.
SD9
SDP40
I yam corrected
Look what the BNSF did to an SD9...
Mass Man wrote:Thanks for the uncomfortable horror show. All of those engines were scary on that tight track. Should have just put those engines on a straight piece of track to show us your engines
I tend to push the edge, must be my music background or sumpthin...
I needed to test engines and equipment for performance in my layout development, I'm dissapointed my 2-8-0 has a hard time, that might be solveable but I don't need it where I am modeling. I'm studying the 2-8-0's designs if it can be modded into a N&W 4-8-0, needs a new chassis and smaller drivers but the boiler looks big like the N&W M2's.
I finally tested my LL 0-8-0 it loves it all. Thats what I needed, my Belt Railway of Chicago line is my little cheater interchange line winding thru everything else popping up where you least expect it. It HAS to move cars between the South Shore and North Shore via C&NW because those lines have no direct connection to the modeled east lines.
I'm glad the South Shore 700 takes 15" because there is a small industrial area (was) on the west side of South Bend its a great switching puzzle, 15" radius will help pack the track in and take less room. Selective compression you know.
aloco wrote: dinwitty wrote:Older Athearn SD9, 6 wheel trucks, OK, wobbly on the curves thoThis is an SDP40, not an SD9.
dinwitty wrote:Older Athearn SD9, 6 wheel trucks, OK, wobbly on the curves tho
Older Athearn SD9, 6 wheel trucks, OK, wobbly on the curves tho
This is an SDP40, not an SD9.
Thanks for the correction, I am running on memory, I don't have my diesel spotters guide open.
I think there was an SDP40a when they added a rivet to hold the right rear electrical cable under the engine, nobody could see it but it was a definate alteration to require a change in the designation. 8-D ...jking...
Theres a lot of design differences between model versions that only involve changes in vents or fan design areas, etc, thats can be a discussion for a long thread elsewhere...
jep1267 wrote: Capt. Grimek wrote:Could you explain what you meant by "rough track"? Did you mean something besides the tight radius? Very nice test there. Yes, I'd like to know what "rough track" is too.J.P.
Capt. Grimek wrote:Could you explain what you meant by "rough track"? Did you mean something besides the tight radius?
Very nice test there. Yes, I'd like to know what "rough track" is too.
J.P.
Rivarrossi's locos could all handle 18" radius, by design. Both front and rear drivers pivot. Plus there is enought lateral sloppiness in the drivers that lets it do this. The 2-8-8-4 however is prototypically designed, rigid rear drivers and front pivot. Because of this I was surprised the 2-8-8-4 made it into the 15" curve, huge overhang. Kudos to Akane and their design, it almost could do it.
My rough track area, I sloppy laid down these boards and theres about a 1/4" dip/rise at one section and I simply laid the snap track down on it making whatever hazard it made, this one is on a 15" radius curve, spiked down secure tho. The train behind makes it thru fine and some of the engines. I'm working on a different section of my layout thats being built CORRECTLY so no rough areas and will rebuild test tracks on it, this stuff is going to dissappear when thats done and correct construction done for the modules. Then I will have a long test dogbone to have fun with, testing my Michigan City module at the same time. Watch for more fun tests sometime. 8-D