Sheldon,Well, I did say it was a slight disagreement.
BTW, AFAIK the Spectrum cars still have the swivel coupler boxes.I hear ya' about the Jay-Bee coupler pads. I haven't done as many as yourself, but I have done dozens of them both for me and my fellow club members: Spectrum, Con-Cor, Rivarossi, Athearn, etc.A friend of mine models the WM, and I give him the business about his lack of passenger trains. I don't think WM bought a new passenger car after 1930, right? All heavyweights, IIRC. Great railroad to model...but not if you're into passenger operations. Historically, yes, there were many sub-80' cars but by the 1950s they were increasingly rare. IMHO (other than coaches and head end cars), the 85' car represented a vast majority of the US/Canadian car fleet after 1930. Sure, there were exceptions, as you point out, but by no means were 72' cars common in your modeled era. For me, as a NH guy, I can't justify 72' cars. As a home road guy, you can! Yeah, the C&O GW set. A fellow club member has one. Not bad, really. The engine certainly looks nice. Modeling real places is difficult, tho' certainly Jason Shron is getting it done. His latest picture post on his FB Brockville Sub group is darn good. Others are also excelling at modeling real places like Tony Koester, Chris Adams, Randy Hammill, Joe Smith, etc.Joe Smith: http://signalstation199.blogspot.com/Chris Adams: http://blog.thevalleylocal.net/Randy Hammill: http://www.newbritainstation.com/(All NH modelers...sorry; excellent modeling, tho')Personally, real railfanning kinda bores me to tears. I have little interest in hopping in a car, driving for hundreds of miles to a remote location, sitting for hours to watch a freight train that may or may not ever go by while battling bugs, heat, cold, or rain. Sounds like fishing. I'd much rather be running a local freight or a yard switcher with a switch list and a fast clock than watch trains go by. Maybe that explains our different approaches to the hobby?John (PRR8259),The Overland PA's have zero details around the coupler pocket behind the pilot sheetmetal. They don't even have a coupler pocket in the first place, just the Kadee box with the ears on it. The coupler doors on the Overland models (if equipped) are very, very wrong, at least on the NH models. The real ones were double hinged that folded flat against the pilot but the model ones have a single hinge that opens like a clamshell. The Overland ones flop around so they hit grade crossings and can't stay level or stay shut. They are open at the top when they should be enclosed and they don't allow for most anything to couple to the nose of the PA without a long shank coupler. For a friend of mine, I actually cut them off his model and glued them "open" to either side of the coupler opening so at least they'd look right and allow coupling. IOW, the pilots of Overland NH PAs were pretty terrible. Not only didn't they look good, they inhibited the operation of the model.Overland NH PA-1 with the awful pilot doors flopping around (look at the 8th pic, taken head on; ugh!):https://www.brasstrains.com/BrassGuide/Pdg/Detail/12629/HO-Diesel-Electric-Overland-Models-5746-PA-PASSENGER-New-Haven-PA-1Actual NH PA-1 with the pilot doors open:https://rapidotrains.com/media/images/nh-pa.jpgThe "flaw" with the front coupler & coupler box is that it sticks out further than scale. This is, of course, to help out the guys that want to run it around sharp layout curves. If they put the coupler in the scale location, coupled passenger equipment would probably derail on curves and people would complain. The good news with this design is that one can remove the existing coupler pocket and either move it back an ~1/8" by drilling and tapping a new mounting hole or replace it with something more scale sized. It's an easy upgrade for those who want it.Here's a nice shot of an ATSF PA pilot:https://www.american-rails.com/images/2858717210876727000123001.jpgWhat appears to be missing from the Rapido model is the bottom operating cut lever & brackets right under the coupler box lid. I don't know of any other company that's made that. And keep in mind that putting in the cut lever would make it pretty difficult to get at the coupler box to remove it. For years, people have complained about Rapido putting too much detail under models that interfere with operation. Now people are complaining that they need more details that would interfere with operation. Sigh.Sure, some people have said the Rapido PA front windows "don't look right" but please note that none of them have offered any specifics as to why. When someone can't articulate what the issue is, I tend to suspect it's not really an issue.One thing I've noticed is that all the model photos show the angle looking down on the model while all the photos people have posted to show the "issue" are looking up from trackside.
Look at this "down on" D&RGW PA:https://digital.denverlibrary.org/digital/collection/p15330coll22/id/92676/Here's another, this time a ATSF unit:https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5c/c8/cd/5cc8cd7929ba13f7b8e0764dbba1f3ab.jpg
Compare that to the Rapido photos:https://files.constantcontact.com/b02e8bb6001/251851f5-0c75-4870-897c-9cc8030b5dd0.jpg
https://files.constantcontact.com/b02e8bb6001/71da8a0f-a601-4ca2-9b0a-9b296f4b354f.jpg
The windshields look like a match to me. They are arched at the top (not flat like Proto). The windows taper towards the center post (unlike the Overland). The brow over the windows is a good match to the real thing (unlike the Proto's heavy unibrow). And so on. What, specifically, is "off"?
At worst, the front window glass can look odd because of the draft angle of the glass part's "plug". I think people are seeing the inside of the glass "plug" at the bottom and sides. For example, look at the Rapido D&RGW model pic above and compare the near window with the glare (where you can't see the inside bottom and sides) to the far window without the glare (where you can see 'em). Personally, I think most of the problem is that people are used to the Overlands or the Proto PAs which are quite wrong. It's like how people complained about the Spectrum heavyweight passenger cars at first because they didn't look "right". In reality, were all got used to out-of-proportion Rivarossi cars which were always wrong.Yes, the NKP unit has been rebuilt, but I think you're confusing which one is which. The NKP was the loco in the best condition. The Smithsonian kept the one in bad condition, which they then donated to the Texas group which is slowly restoring it to ATSF. The Texas group just got the windshield and cab roof section from an FPA-4 that they are going to use to replace the crushed elements of the PA cab. The NKP, OTOH, didn't have any cab damage. Here's some history shots when the NKP project started; note how good the cab looks: http://www.trainweb.org/dhvm/history/history_pas-return_Doyle-Brooklyn.htmName the last plastic model in our hobby that has been plated. Walthers did the Amfleet & Metroliner cars in plated finish 8 years ago in 2014 and I can't think of a more recent product. From talking to Rapido and ScaleTrains employees (some of whom also used to work for Athearn) at the RPM show last week, plating as was done years ago on the Genesis ATSF F7 is unlikely to ever be done again due to the expense and toxic nature of the plating (China has really cracked down on pollution). Not to mention the high failure rate of the plating, which of course means more money to replace the bad ones. The factories hate it. Ask Lee English.Rapido has painted the ATSF & D&H PAs in both stainless and aluminum paint. You can see the difference clear as day when you hold one in your hand (like I did last week). The pilot and rear is aluminum, the sides and roof are stainless. Perhaps some who have seen the pics are expecting body panels to be different from the roof as on the ATSF F7s when in reality they are the same (all stainless) on the PA. The only place to really see the difference is at the rear where the two paint colors meet. The pilot is kinda too far away from the sides to really see the difference.
I also guess some people just want a mirror finish on their ATSF/D&H PA stainless steel sections and that's just not realistic (especially in use). All the Walthers plated cars are way too shiny for my taste (they look toy-like to me). Rapido used the same stainless steel paint on the ATSF/D&H PA as they have used on their stainless steel passenger cars (either their Canadian cars or their NH cars, I can't remember which) and no one has ever complained about those not being shiny enough.
Paul,
The Bachmann passenger cars have all been moved to the Silver Series line and now have a wide swing coupler box that no longer swivels with the truck.
The same upgrade is on the newer versions of the doodlebug, I can take a picture later.
The "rareness" of shorter cars by the 50's is likely true, but was very regional.
The B&O Cincinnation cars lasted to the end of passenger service on the B&O, built at MtClare in 1946 on old heavyweight frames, the longest cars where 79' over the pulling faces, so basically 75' cars.
I believe most of the SP daylight cars stayed in service a long time as well, mostly only 77' long.
Yes, the Western Maryland had simple roster of heavyweights and small roster of two classes of Pacifics - they had a few newer cars, and few 85' louge cars of various types. They too were big rebuilders of older equipment in their own shops.
Yes, I'n not a prototype railfan guy either, I have about zero interest in modern trains. My idea of railfaning is a 45 minute drive to Strasburg for the day, or a 45 minute drive to the B&O museum, or one of the several other tourist lines near here.
Alway good to here from you,
Sheldon
Reviewing all this, I'm sure glad I don't want a PA/PB...now if it was a FA/FB in LNE colors, it might be a different story. Amazing what you can do with black and white, with just a splash of color. Rather like a tuxedo with a boutonniere
I don't even model the LNE but I think I might just buy an FA/FB pair anyway
After my experience with two pairs of Proto 2000 PA/PB consists, I will never own another PA/PB from any manufacturer. The very mention of a PA or PB makes me shudder.
Rich
Alton Junction
Paul--
Overland did a better job on the non-New Haven PA's. It seems all you care about is the NH version. I understand you are first and foremost a NH fan, but there were other versions modeled, and with at least 3 different model runs, the last many years later than the first 2, some of them were decent models.
Yes, some pilot doors were poor, but there also were multiple different pilot doors and some actually fit pretty well (see MKT units, and Missouri Pacific the final run). Oh--and this New Haven unit from the final run:
HO Brass Train OMI NH 087010016.1 Overland Models (brasstrains.com)
However, it does appear that Overland's cab front windows were clearly not updated from before, and were indeed incorrect even on the very last run.
Some of the other Overland PA versions in addition to the regular air hoses HAD multiple hoses mounted to the front of the pilot on both sides of the coupler box (you had to bend them slightly out of the way in order get enough coupler swing for a Kadee coupler--but being brass, one could do that). So they weren't all "plain jane" pilots, and some had more details on them than what Rapido is currently showing. I do not know what they were for, be it for mu or not, but they were there.
I looked at some of the before? or early restoration photos of Doyle's PA at the link you cited, and it appears the width of the front windows on Rapido's model seems to be decreasing too much as the window approaches the center of the nose. Is that specific enough for you? The window thickness of the model may be off-putting for some. Is there any way they can make the front window section a little bit thinner? It appears too thick.
John
John (PRR8259),I only personally know about the OMI PAs in NH. We all have our areas of expertise in this hobby of ours, and in my experience with the half dozen OMI NH PAs I've worked on, they all had the stupid floppy coupler doors. The other OMI PAs that my fellow club members own had no coupler doors, just open pilots.Being a Rapido worker, of course I care about getting all the railroad models we do correct, not just NH. In fact, it's literally my job to point out any errors, but I am not and have never claimed to be an expert on all railroads. Give me good photos to compare with and I'll find a model's flaws, but who on earth could possibly be an expert on everything that Rapido (or Athearn or Atlas or BLI, etc.) has made or plans to make? In the past 18 months, I've worked on everything from British goods wagons to U25Bs to Turboliners to buses to Impalas (and so much more). The NH OMI pictures you linked to are interesting in that I've never seen one of these in person before. The brass collectors I know never bought any of these, just the earlier ones. Still, you have to admit that coupler doors aren't really "doors" as much as a plug that screws into the front coupler post. And there is still zero detail behind the pilot that some are complaining about. At least the Rapido model has the full Barco piping (steam line) and crash bars.AFAIK, every Rapido PA model is fully equipped with all appropriate external nose and pilot details that match the paint scheme and era modeled. Look at the Rapido sample photo for ATSF vs. the prototype photo:Rapido:https://files.constantcontact.com/b02e8bb6001/03667d5a-2511-438d-9266-39665e9cd3c7.jpgPrototype:https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5c/c8/cd/5cc8cd7929ba13f7b8e0764dbba1f3ab.jpgI see 5 air hoses on either side of the coupler, I see the cut lever handles and a grab above each, and there's a Barco (steam pipe) under the coupler. About the only pilot differences between the above pics I see is that the sheetmetal pilot cover plate over the Barco is not present on the model. What else is missing from the Rapido model's pilot compared to the real ATSF unit? I'm not quite sure I understand your comment on the window "width" getting narrower towards the center post. Did you mean to say window height instead? If so, I disagree. I think the window openings are close to if not actually dead on; it's the glass that's throwing it off visually for some people. And again, the glass is not really thick, but it can look like it. The glass is really only 0.032" thick. However, the stepped section of glass around it is an additional 0.032".One other issue to keep in mind is that the prototype rebuilding photos we're comparing the model to don't have the windows installed, nor have the aluminum & rubber window gaskets, which may throw off some proportions.
Yes, the window height. I said width you said height. The window height on the model seems to be decreasing too quickly relative to the prototype photos, to my eye. If it's actually correct then that's different, but it just doesn't look right.
Yes the gasket and window thickness may be contributing to the appearance and causing objections from some of the people.
Hopefully they will fix the trucks and get the cylinders to be horizontal instead of the way they look on the pilot models.
I never said I was an expert on models either; I go search out and find photos as or when needed to illustrate details.
I always wanted a good PA but my modeling era has kinda moved on from that era. Once I was going to build a layout with the (Overland) PA's hauling trains of reefers out of the citrus area--because they did factually run out their last miles doing that and there are photos out there to document the reefer extras. However, finding Overland Santa Fe PA's with correct paint jobs (some bad custom work was done) was very difficult, and you could usually only find the EMD repowered 51LAC units available to buy (51B became 51C during rebuilding). To this day it seems the EMD repowered ATSF units are still the easiest to find. Then to paint them correctly with all the stainless versus aluminum areas...well my painter who was and still is fantastic wanted more money than I thought it was worth to do the correct paint job with the illuminated number boards, etc. so I gave up on that and sold the models.
Since I own Rapido FL9's, FA-2's, FP7's, RS-11's and RDC's I can't wait until I get my PRR PA's.
Rick Jesionowski
Rule 1: This is my railroad.
Rule 2: I make the rules.
Rule 3: Illuminating discussion of prototype history, equipment and operating practices is always welcome, but in the event of visitor-perceived anacronisms, detail descrepancies or operating errors, consult RULE 1!
dti406Since I own Rapido FL9's, FA-2's, FP7's, RS-11's and RDC's I can't wait until I get my PRR PA's.
I was looking at my present roster of 10 L-L PAs just last night. Two each of Erie, New York Central and Nickel Plate and four Pennsy. I probably won't replace all of these with the new Rapidos but I'll start off with a pair of Nickel Plate "Bluebirds" and if they look and run well, which I imagine they will, I'll add a few more.
PE Tower was about eight miles from where I live now:
NKP_PE6 by Edmund, on Flickr
Off the top of my head I believe my present Rapido loco roster pretty much matches Rick's with the addition of two Turbotrains (Yes, I'll be in for a Turbotrain II) a New Haven EP-5 and a C-P Royal Hudson.
So the two RS-11s had to go back for motor replacement and the Hudson had a bad eccentric crank which were repaired by Rapido, I've had nothing but fun and enjoyment from my Rapido models.
I'm glad they have the ability to bring new models to market.
NH_EP5_Jet-FL9 by Edmund, on Flickr
IMG_7998_edited-1 by Edmund, on Flickr
BnO_4011-FA-aba by Edmund, on Flickr
Turbo_PC52-Amtrak50 by Edmund, on Flickr
Cheers, Ed
I am weak with this topic...
My entire Rapido roster is an RDC, three boxcars, and a mather meat reefer.
So sad.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
SeeYou190 My entire Rapido roster is an RDC, three boxcars, and a mather meat reefer.
richhotrain SeeYou190 My entire Rapido roster is an RDC, three boxcars, and a mather meat reefer. I have no Rapido locomotives, but I do have 15 passenger cars because Rapido did cover a lot of my railroads with their Super Continental line. I have 5 each of Erie, GTW, and C&EI. I would have had 5 more - - Monon coaches, but I procrastinated a bit too long and now they are not to be found anywhere. Rich
I have no Rapido locomotives, but I do have 15 passenger cars because Rapido did cover a lot of my railroads with their Super Continental line. I have 5 each of Erie, GTW, and C&EI. I would have had 5 more - - Monon coaches, but I procrastinated a bit too long and now they are not to be found anywhere.
I'm really weak here, 3 piggyback flat car kits..... It was hard to justify any more than that, I already have more than 100 piggyback flat cars.....
I have one B36-7 Conrail unit that is beautiful.
I'm pondering the C30-7, would ponder the U25B if it was in yellowbonnet, and the jury for me is out on getting a PA-1. It was one of the engines I always loved and wanted...but I don't quite know what I'd do with it if I had one right now, and might even lean toward a Rio Grande version.
Rapido freight cars: I have two of the SP B-100-40 (riding on Athearn trucks) and one of the early version Trailer Train flat cars (riding on Moloco Code 88 wheelsets). I do not like Rapido's wheelsets and simply replace them or the entire truck.
The tank cars were very neat, but not really a great fit on ATSF for me, and kinda the same with the covered hoppers--not too many made it to the Southwest. I do have 8 of the late paint scheme (Circle Cross herald) ATSF mechanical reefers on pre-order which is a significant purchase for me. The Rapido gondolas are pretty nice, but I've opted for the Tangent PRR/PC/CR G43 series gons which also went everywhere for my not-home-road gons.
SeeYou190I am weak with this topic...
Me too...my Rapido acquisitions are comprised of this reefer...
....an undecorated kit which I bought at a nearby hobbyshop (now long gone), at a fairly decent price...I think that it was discounted because most folks were more interested in r-t-r.Later, just prior to the shop's closing, I picked-up four of Rapido's motor-driven turnout controls, at a very good price. Here's one of them...
...and another...
...and these two...
...which I wired to a single switch on the layout's fascia. A flip of the switch moves both sets of points either as through tracks, or as a crossover.I did take a look at their doublesheathed boxcars, but the ones I had from Accurail were almost as nice, and after adding a few details, pretty much as nice as the Rapido ones, but much more affordable.
Were I modelling a more modern era, I might have picked-up some of their diesels (especially the SW1200RS, versions, probably my favourite EMD/GMD prototypes), but the PA would not be on my buyers list - I wasn't a big fan of the prototype, but was much more enamoured of FAs and FBs...I have 7 or 8 of them from Model Power...but also not much use on a late '30s-era layout.
Wayne
Here is my Rapido family portrait with a few more passenger cars out of the frame.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
John (PRR8259),One other issue with the front cab windows might be that the dashboard of the PA cab is visible from the front of the cab when looking down. And since it's painted a very light gray, it shows up rather well in flash photography. It appears in that NKP shot in the Rapido newsletter.I think the truck air cylinders will be able to be bent level by the consumer if desired but I won't know 'til I try mine when I get them. I doubt that Rapido is going to have all new sideframes made for this issue but I've been wrong before.gmpullman,Oh boy, do I really want to add up all my Rapido products? I think I might have a problem...7 x FL9 (5 NH, 1 ConnDOT, 1 Maine Eastern)4 x EP-5 (NH)2 x RS-11 (NH)2 x FB-2 (NH)4 x RDC-1 (NH)2 x RDC-2 (NH)3 x RDC-3 (NH)2 x SW1200 (NH)1 x M-420 (CN)1 x F40PH (MBTA)13 x 8600 Coach (NH)3 x Parlor-Lounge (NH)8 x Parlor (NH)10 x Diner (NH)14 x Osgood Bradley Coach (12 NH, 2 B&M)8 x Comet Coach (MBTA)6 x GLa Hopper (2 NYO&W, 1 Berwick, 2 PRR, 1 Westmoreland) w/ loads12 x F30 Flatcar (6 PRR, 6 TTX)16 x X31 Boxcar (PRR)3 x Boxes of 50 Wheelsets= 122 Total items...plus a few Rapido T-shirts and a coffee mug.Good grief! I got my first Rapido model in 2010 (the Osgood Bradley coaches). Hard to believe it's been 12 years now.Now, to be fair, all my Rapido freight cars, MBTA stuff, and EP-5s all arrived after I started working for Rapido (yes, we get a discount). Others were gifts from friends or family, and some were barter for helping out Rapido before I officially started working for them. Some were discounted because of my NHRHTA membership and volunteering for that organization. So I haven't spent as much money as it looks like. I've just never sat back and counted them all before. Yikes. They still keep making NH models and I still keep getting them. On the way are NH PA-1s, NH 35' trailers, NH H16-44s, NH U25Bs, and NH FA-1/FB-1s. And I'm probably going to pick up more trailers in non-New Haven paint schemes plus some X-3 tanks. I might get a UAC TurboTrain in demo colors (hey, it ran on the NH!), maybe an P&W M-420Rs or two. But no buses! I gotta draw the line somewhere...
Paul3gmpullman, Oh boy, do I really want to add up all my Rapido products?
Well, I know what you mean there. I left out the rolling stock but I have enough 8600 coaches plus more than a dozen other Budd domes and such.
Diner_patrons7 by Edmund, on Flickr
My wife noticed the string of 36 PRR GLa hoppers and pointed out that they look pretty new. Good eye, I say. And do you know those things are over TEN dollars apice! Wow, she says. (how MUCH over $10 I neglected to say — knowing that string of hoppers was a tad north of $1250!) She smiled and repeated "Ten Dollars each" knowing full well what I paid for them.
All for fun!
Hey, as long as I have the ear of a Rapido "insider" how about dropping a hint for the much desired PRR E44 GE electric?
Also, why not some Helium cars? Afterall they did the PD cars which were sort of a specialty. I think the helium cars would be a hit. Somehow the AHM ones are looking a little dated.
4368003 by John W. Barriger III National Railroad Library, on Flickr
I sent a "suggestion" form in but it was during the web transition and I'm not sure they got it.
Regards, Ed
gmpullman,Heh. "Over $10 each!" That's right up there with one of my fellow club members who used to buy new trains at the hobby shop, take them to the club, and put them in his locker or on the layout. After a year or so, he'd bring them home. His wife would say, "Are those new?" And he'd reply, "No, honey, I've had them for over a year." Hey, he was being honest!E44s? I dunno. [looks at E44 pictures] I mean, there is a problem: the pantographs are right over the cab. There's no way they could be made to operate up and down like the EP-5 because the pan motor mechanisms would fill the cab interior. Would you be okay with that? Rapido has kinda raised expectations with the EP-5 pans. It's one thing to do that with a carbody unit, but with the hood-type electrics like the E44, it's probably not possible to do operating pans. That being said, I'd like to see one even if I don't want any. I'll bring it up if anyone asks for ideas.I'd be up for helium cars because they operated to NAS South Weymouth (Mass.) into at least 1957 to the blimp squadron there. But how big a seller do you think they'd be? Jason loves fleet cars like the AutoFlood III hoppers. You know, the type of car someone wants a trainload of. Oddball freight cars? Well, maybe. I guess it depends.BTW, make another suggestion on the Rapido website. AFAIK, there's no cap. Just be very careful on spelling and using the right nomenclature. You can imagine how many hundreds of entries they get. They compile the suggested list of products to judge popularity, but E44 and E-44 would sort differently because of the hyphen.
Surely the pans could be motored with pushrods and bell cranks, or some form of Bowden cable?
Overmod Surely the pans could be motored with pushrods and bell cranks, or some form of Bowden cable?
Marklin had a first attempt at working (raising/lowering) pantographs in 2003. Their mechanism could work if the space directly below the pantograph is restricted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bd9Ky_mqrc
Paul3There's no way they could be made to operate up and down like the EP-5 because the pan motor mechanisms would fill the cab interior. Would you be okay with that?
Yes!
I'm sure glad the "automatic" pans arrive disabled on the EP-5 Jets. The last thing I would want to do is mistakenly press the "pan raise" function button while passing under a signal bridge or overpass!
Sometimes that gimmicky stuff edges too close to "toy train" features. Depleting coal, finnicky operating couplers, "smoke" billowing out the whistle when it is blown... you get the idea.
The pans on the Broadway GG1s and P5a look just fine and they simply clip over a little stud to keep them lowered. Works for me. How long was the EP5 delayed by the motorized pan thing?
Paul3I'd be up for helium cars because they operated to NAS South Weymouth (Mass.) into at least 1957 to the blimp squadron there. But how big a seller do you think they'd be?
I wonder if any made their way to the Cleveland area NASA Lewis Research center. Either way I'm sure they have made their way across eastern states on their route from, mostly Texas and Oklahoma IIRC.
https://www.amarillorailmuseum.com/helium-car-history
I mentioned the Pressure Differential car as an example of a "not too common" example. I bought a few since I model parts of the New York Central and they had a big Flexi-Flo terminal near me.
Paul3BTW, make another suggestion on the Rapido website. AFAIK, there's no cap.
Thanks, I'll do that.
Overmod,I don't think pushrods, bell cranks or choke cables would work to make operating pans on an E44. The mechanism in the EP-5 is quite clever. It makes the pan go up and down and yet still allows for vertical movement of the pan to the point where it can fold flat to to the roof. Putting in any kind of mechanical connection would probably prevent that free movement...which would not be good.Not to mention that the 2nd pan's motor would interfere with the 1st pan's mechanical connection.Any kind of complicated arrangement would almost certainly delay production. The EP-5 took years longer to release because of the operating pans. Inventing something even more complicated than the EP-5 mechanism would probably mean it would get canceled.The way I see it, the only way to make operating pans on an E44 is to not have a see-through cab interior. Oh, sure, the engineer's and fireman's seats would be there and all, but imagine the walls of the hoods going straight through the cab interior (just like the old MDC RS-3). That's what it would take.
gmpullman,Over and over again, we made sure that the pans would arrive deactivated because of damaged pan fears.FYI: all the EP-5 pans can be programmed to go up to a certain height and stop. Rapido has set the CV setting so that they should clear an NMRA clearance gauge (about 3" above the rails). So if you can run double stacks on your layout, you should be able run an EP-5 with the pan up without hitting anything.As I said to Overmod, the operating pan delayed the EP-5 for a couple years at least.
gmpullman Paul3 I'd be up for helium cars because they operated to NAS South Weymouth (Mass.) into at least 1957 to the blimp squadron there. But how big a seller do you think they'd be? I wonder if any made their way to the Cleveland area NASA Lewis Research center. Either way I'm sure they have made their way across eastern states on their route from, mostly Texas and Oklahoma IIRC. https://www.amarillorailmuseum.com/helium-car-history Regards, Ed
Paul3 I'd be up for helium cars because they operated to NAS South Weymouth (Mass.) into at least 1957 to the blimp squadron there. But how big a seller do you think they'd be?
Yes, Ed the Helium Tank Cars made it to Cleveland, The Lewis Research Center had a two car spur at 130th and Brook Park where the cars were spotted, their were connections at track level and a shed where the gas was pumped from the cars to Tank Trucks that delivered the gas to Lewis. One of my club members was a conductor in that area and remembers spotting the cars, I don't know if he has any photos or not.
Thanks for that, Rick . I knew Lewis was a user of some industrial gases as they bought trailer loads of hydrogen from the GE plant I was employed in (Euclid). NASA had a few of their own tube trailers and sometimes used some of our GE ones as well.
Here are some Linde trailers we were filling toward the end of production:
GE Shutdown Saturday 109 by Edmund, on Flickr
I've found a nose down image of a Mopac PA-1 and compared it to the photo posted of the ATSF model. I circled areas I feel are not consistent with the model when compared to the prototype. Also, I agree that the thick "glass" of the window compounds the shape/size issues. Also, an unpainted model may show the detail better in the comparisons and the perceived issues are not actually issues.
My observations:
comparison1 by obermeyern, on Flickr
The green circle highlights the window side post. On the model the side post appears thinner and cut/rounded away giving the impression the window is wider. On the prototype the top sheet or "brow" of the cab curves down the side, but the post still appears thicker on the prototype.
The purple circle highlights the "angry brow" on the prototype appears not as angry as the model. The model appears to be more curved in this location.
The pink circle illustrates the model's top outside corner appears to be thinner and closer to the roof sheet as compared to the prototype.
It would be interesting if the model "glass" had a gasket applied or the outside edge of the "glass" painted black if the perceived errors would not be as noticeable?
comparison by obermeyern, on Flickr
Another topic that was discussed is the pilot - the issue I see is that the draft gear could be improved from an obvious model coupler box to something more prototypical. High level underbody detail, but same coupler box/draft gear as a 1990s model.
Nate
obermeyernI've found a nose down image of a Mopac PA-1 and compared it to the photo posted of the ATSF model. I circled areas I feel are not consistent with the model when compared to the prototype.
Great comparisson work Nate. Your eye for detail is much better than mine.
Hey Nate--
Very nice work. I have to agree with your conclusions. Also, the center post on the prototype appears to be a little bit wider than the model. Thank you for documenting and articulating what some others of us thought we were seeing.
Paul3What else is missing from the Rapido model's pilot compared to the real ATSF unit?
Is it possible Rapido could make these "configurable" by the purchaser?
But neither do I want a $1000 model product.
PRR8259 Hey Nate-- Very nice work. I have to agree with your conclusions. Also, the center post on the prototype appears to be a little bit wider than the model. Thank you for documenting and articulating what some others of us thought we were seeing. John
You know Nate is comparing one of many PA-1's which were not built to exacting standards so there were differences between units due to the semi-hand built nature of the early diesels. And you are comparing it with a scan from a rebuilt wreck that had rolled over and was heavily damaged. Of course the scanned unit will be correct every time the dies are used to make another body.