Agreed. Yes, always knew we are running some of these models at the very limits of what they can possibly do. You see it when watching them track at very low speed.
One has to wonder how many of these things sit in the closet roundhouse for a layout that someone hopes to build, but in most cases never will get around to doing, or else how many just sit on a collector's shelf?
My long time friend is a train store sales manager. He knows that most people are accumulators and don't actually ever run the stuff, beyond perhaps a test run on some kind of tangent test track.
The brass PA-1 models were usually heavy enough (and had enough axle end-play) to be able to handle 30" and lesser curves. Plus the Overlands have individual wheel sprung equalization. That makes a big difference in performance. So when I go 2 decades without playing with a certain type of model, of course I forget that they can be picky.
John
17 scale inches.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL A big part of the problem here is the wheelbase of the GSC truck used on the PA, 15'-6" compared to 14'-1" for the EMD 6 wheel truck on E units. And DD40 truck, having four closer spaced axles is more able to steer itself through the curve, again, agreeing that it needs enough play. Rich had PA issues with Proto units 30" curves, but not with EMD E units. 17 scale inches can make the difference. No one wants to admit that often we are running these models on the hairy edge of the engineering. I chose a different path... Sheldon
A big part of the problem here is the wheelbase of the GSC truck used on the PA, 15'-6" compared to 14'-1" for the EMD 6 wheel truck on E units.
And DD40 truck, having four closer spaced axles is more able to steer itself through the curve, again, agreeing that it needs enough play.
Rich had PA issues with Proto units 30" curves, but not with EMD E units.
17 scale inches can make the difference.
No one wants to admit that often we are running these models on the hairy edge of the engineering.
I chose a different path...
Sheldon
But, the two pairs of Proto 2000 PA/PB locomotives gave me fits, particularly one of the PA locomotives. To my eye, the trucks on the PA and PB units look giant compared to the 6-axle trucks on my E-units. I finally sold off my PA/PB units after a lot of effort working on my track work to no avail.
Every other loco that I own would run without derailing except for that one PA. With a lot of help and advice, I finally solved the biggest problem. The right front truck was being pulled up a slight bit off the rail on one curve. Turned out, the power wire from the truck was wedged between two parts of the frame, lifting the truck off the rail in the curve with resulting derailments when it reached the next turnout.
Once that problem was fixed, most of the derailments disappeared, but at high speeds an occasional derailment would still occur on both PA/PB consists. I got fed up and dumped both consists vowing to never again own a PA or PB unit.
Rich
Alton Junction
And the DD40 truck, having four closer spaced axles is more able to steer itself through the curve, again, agreeing that it needs enough play.
Rich had PA issues with Proto units on 30" curves, but not with EMD E units.
My dad built the benchwork, but I chose the foam so that I could carve scenic features etc. into it. I was really impressed with some articles I had seen in Model Railroader where people just did a phenomenal job on scenery and said it was much easier to work with--and lighter--than the traditional plaster over some kind of framework method (which is also messier and more difficult and more time consuming). I opted, always, for ease of construction.
I was just down working on a slight adjustment to one curve. Still, even after additional work, the six axle rear truck of the PA-1 wants to ride out over the outside rail when backing up through the curve, just barely but enough to derail. Forwards, the curve is on a very slight downgrade (about 0.4%) and the Rapido PA-1 works fine.
I just tested the Athearn Genesis DDA40X on the same curve, both forward and reverse, with absolutely no issues whatsoever. Why? Because Athearn builds enough axle end-play into those giant 8-wheel trucks, and also Athearn allowed plenty of lateral and vertical truck motion. The big DDA40X is able to easily negotiate things that the Rapido 6-axle truck of the PA-1 just will not do quite as well. The difference is slight but noticeable. I'm not trashing the PA-1 to say it is just a little more finicky about the quality of the trackwork than the DDA40X monster loco.
PRR8259 Yes, well, I wish I had that kind of space and the carpentry expertise. Actually my Dad's carpentry was excellent, too, but when I relaid certain curves I maybe should have cut out and replaced foam sheets or portions of them. So if you cut corners on trackwork and space, you get what you get. I do thoroughly test things before ever gluing them down with the Liquid Nails, but as years went by, I ended up running some equipment I never designed for in the first place, and have made accommodations for that, but clearly not perfectly enough. So for prospective PA owners, either find lots of space or have truly excellent smooth trackwork.
Yes, well, I wish I had that kind of space and the carpentry expertise. Actually my Dad's carpentry was excellent, too, but when I relaid certain curves I maybe should have cut out and replaced foam sheets or portions of them.
So if you cut corners on trackwork and space, you get what you get. I do thoroughly test things before ever gluing them down with the Liquid Nails, but as years went by, I ended up running some equipment I never designed for in the first place, and have made accommodations for that, but clearly not perfectly enough.
So for prospective PA owners, either find lots of space or have truly excellent smooth trackwork.
Well, I know I'm an old school curmudgeon, but I would never build a model train layout on foam. Not because it does not work, but because I just hate working with it.
Liquid nails, I barely use that in my profession as a carpenter, I would never lay track of any kind with it.
AND, I have always built benchwork I can climb on if need be. I built one layout (shown above) with some sections as a "shelf layout". Never do that or the double deck thing again.
I was so unhappy with the "scenic views", I never finished the layout. Took it down and started on a new plan.
Only time in 50 years I was unhappy with a layout plan once I was into it.
But I'm old and set in ways that have proven to work.......
Here are a few examples of my trackwork:
These pictures were taken on my old layout, in a conversation about getting flex track straight - so only few curves shown.
The top picture is a 54"/56" radius curve with 18" long easements.
The bottom curve is a 36"/38" radius curve with 15" long easements.
The roadbed is homasote.
I know there are lots of fans of Unitrack out there, but I'm sorry, sticking a piece of larger radius sectional track at the end of a curve is not an easement.
So I looked up some stuff:
The superelevated Unitrack is roughly 31" radius and uses A 22.5 degree segment for the transition - about 12" long - KATO does not say how much the superelevation is, but for any noticable superelevation 12" of transition is not enough.
SeeYou190 I have heard that six wheeled trucks, like on a PA, have more trouble transitioning into super elevated trackage. -Kevin
I have heard that six wheeled trucks, like on a PA, have more trouble transitioning into super elevated trackage.
-Kevin
I would have to say Exactly Correct!
(Zix Heel) trucks have a tough time transitioning well into anything, unless a master of easements can prepare for that
TF
Good questions guys--
The one Kato superelevated track is 790 mm radius, a bit over 31" radius. The length of a track section (22.5 degrees of a 360 degree circle) is about 12" (I measured very nearly two 6" chords to get that approximation). The superelevation transition is approximately 1/16" over that 12" length.
If your trackwork has not been ripped up and relaid (like my curves were), and is pretty good, I think the Rapido PA will work fine. Since I didn't get the surface completely dead level prior to installing the Kato superelevated track that compromised the rate of change of cross slope (which is over one track section the way Kato makes the track). Also the one problem area is in a very slight vertical crest curve. This is what is making the long wheelbase, or limited in lateral and vertical motion, loco trucks have issues.
The PA-1 does work for me, so long as I don't try to back it through the one curve.
The BLI P70 coach totally does not work at any slow speed. It may be too light. The trucks ride up over the outside rail at certain slightly uneven spots.
The original Kato 26.375" radius, non-superelevated trackwork that was installed 15 years ago on brand new foam sheet insulation (ie flat) works just fine for the Rapido PA-1. It is the areas where I relaid track and went to larger radius, for various equipment I wanted to run, where I'm having issues.
I hope this is more helpful information that what I provided above.
I think for anyone who starts with a good smooth surface they will have less issues, but yes, long 6-wheel trucks would be the biggest challenge.
The BLI P70 coach only has 4-wheel trucks, but with the electrical pickups and by design they have more limited lateral and vertical motion. So that is why they are more fussy about the track.
My track is not as good as Sheldon's but does work for most equipment including big freight steam and 86' Tangent autoparts boxcars.
I'm pretty skeptical about using super elevation on curves only in the 30" radius range.
First thing I want to to know is how much super elevation and the length of the transition.
Living the dream.
I operated the shortened passenger cars in the past, many years ago, and simply can't or don't want to go back to anything like that again. In most cases I have made minor track adjustments to make everything else including the big 86' boxcars and long flat cars work. The superelevated curves are R=31"+; it is the rate of change of cross slope relative to allowable truck roll motion that causes some items to not work.
PRR8259Well, running passenger trains looks like an epic fail.
I have had good results with Athearn and Roundhouse "shortie" cars with Kadee wheels installed. Also with the full length IHC cars refitted with their own metal RP-25 31" wheels.
Newer super detailed full length passenger cars, not so much.
Anyway, it is saving me money!
PRR8259 Nice research their Sheldon. Yes, I know a larger number of PA-2's still apparently had the curved trim strip. I never was too concerned which PA had or did not have that trim strip. John
Nice research their Sheldon.
Yes, I know a larger number of PA-2's still apparently had the curved trim strip.
I never was too concerned which PA had or did not have that trim strip.
Yes, I only found it interesting because I can call mine PA2's, and no rivet counter can agrue orherwise.....
Just like the extensive research I did into the plausibility of my 69" driver LIMA heavy Mikados. They never built them, but they could have. They would have been right in between the DT&I 800's and the NKP Berks, in terms of weight, speed and power.
Despite my misgivings about the lack of plated finish, I was tempted to buy a single ATSF PA-1 or a D&H. Lombard Hobbies still has both with and without sound, in stock, or did as of yesterday.
However, having to break the truck cylinders loose, and not being able to get all to free up on my NKP, plus some other issues like the trim piece immediately adjacent to the front windshields not being quite the right width everywhere, and the grab irons...plus the fact that I just got a BLI PRR P70 coach in, and it derails on my superelevated curves...well I won't be modeling any passenger trains.
I had worked to improve my layout by adding superelevated curves, but have since found out that specifically BLI P70 coachs and Rapido B36-7's do not like my superelevated curves. Given that things are now glued into position, and I can't just tear up and relay track or the end result will be less level or smooth than what I have now, well running passenger trains looks like an epic fail despite the fact I can run big articulateds and any other diesels with no problems at all.
I am tempted to tear apart my layout and begin again but with something actually portable like a 5 x 9. All my original trackwork from 15 years ago that is Kato 26.38" radius curves, on flat or relatively flat pink foam insulation sheet, works just fine. It's the newer superelevated Kato track sections that are not working for me. (Yes did use their transition pieces but side to side leveling is the issue).
Leaving the unique Southern Pacific fleet of PA's out of the conversation, I can only find possibly 20 PA2's built after 8/52 that have the straight grill. Production ended in 12/53.
All earlier non SP PA2's appear to have been built with the curved grill.
The Missouri Pacific bought 8 PA1's, #8001 - 8008 and 28 PA2's #8009 - 8036.
EVERY picture I could find of the PA2 group of locos, in their as delivered paint schemes, has the curved grill, and matches all the other features of the earlier MP PA1's.
Interestingly I found one MP PA, newer dip blue scheme, renumbered 75, with non curved grill.
All other renumbered, new scheme units I could find have the curved grill.
So I think at least those 28 were built with the curved grills.
From what I have read, ALCO made good on the 244 engines and the turbos for those roads who "stuck it out", other roads just gave up and moved on.
Update: More pictures, more info - looks like the last 6 MP PA2's had the non curved grill.
And this info confirms the ALCO serial number issue. PA1's - 77503 - 77510.
Than 5 different groups of PA2's - all with 78XXX and 79XXX serial numbers.
The last six PA2's, 80045 -80050.
So, if that carries at all into other PA2 production, it might actually be that most PA2's had the curved grills and the straight grill did not appear until August 1952 production dates.
Imagine that.
Yes, so far as I know that is pretty correct. I personally do not know if the SP PA-2's were different in appearance at delivery, or if SP modifications changed the look very shortly thereafter. It seems as if SP was always modifying their PA's.
The PA-2 is not supposed to have the curved trim piece Sheldon alluded to, but some probably did. Also, all Santa Fe units were PA-1 models, but as years wore on some received Farr grill replacements.
I read the SP book on Alco PA's many years ago; it's been too long and I don't remember details about the appearance--except I always kinda wanted the Halloween PA unit, and the SSW or T&NO units with the silver roof actually looked even better than the regular SP ones.
The one striking thing I do remember is that SP generally speaking actually got pretty good use out of their Alco PA's. The book clearly stated that several SP PA's at retirement had accumulated 3 million miles each. That is actually quite impressive, especially for the 244 engines which were not so well regarded. (Obviously SP took advantage of the late 244-G and -H variants, possibly available through warranty, but definitely available from Alco who had fixed the late crankshafts and turbochargers).
Also, in the past there was considerable confusion--Some Alco PA-2's were in the press classified, possibly in error, as PA-3's, perhaps due to Alco specification numbers changing...there are both Overland Models and Key Imports boxes that identify some units as "PA-3" even though that particular model, today in hindsight, was supposed to have a 251 prime mover. They were the last PA-2's built in real life. (Southern, P&LE, probably some MP and SP units).
The PA-3 with the 251 engine was catalogued by Alco, but never actually built.
The Jim Boyd book on Alco PA's and the Romano book "PA Alco's Glamour Girl" are great reads and can now be costly.
Now I don't loose any sleep over this sort of stuff, but I got curious about spotting differences between the PA1 and the PA2.
Internally the PA1 is 2,000 HP, and the PA2 is 2,250 HP.
But as for exterior spotting differences, in some cases no difference at all.
Early PA1's seem to mostly have the small number boards. Later PA1's are mixed bag on various roads. All PA2's appear to have the large 45 degree number boards.
Early PA2's have the same distinctive curved grill behind the cab door as the PA1's.
Southern Pacific ordered a number of unique features, some of which ended up on a few other later PA2's, mainly the lack of the curved grill.
Missouri Pacific and Southern Pacific were the two biggest users of PA2's, but the MP PA2's look just like their PA1's, while SP PA2's have a number of distinct features.
So, the ATLANTIC CENTRAL PA's are offically PA2's now.......
Well, all this PA talk and I just got carried away. On Ebay today, another set of undecorated PA/PB, both powered, in my prefered version, 45 degree number boards and dynamic brakes, for the bargain price of $100 - for both.
So now I'm really over my quota for PA's. Maybe some of these passenger trains need a few more cars, so I can justify three units on a train.
Doughless riogrande5761 Semi interested. The PA's really fall outside of my primary interest time period but as often happens, it can be interesting to run a few trains from an earlier time period. Years ago I bought the Proto2000 D&RGW yellow 4 stripe PA, which wasn't a bad looking engine at the time. It looks like Rapido may be trying to make this D&RGW PA fit 50's and 60's with the late style grab iron details and toe creep way etc. but tossing in the side number boards as an option. But even though my disposable income is more than it used to be, the costs of engines and models in general are forcing many of us to make choices. I would think 1977 would be too late for a PA. Cool paint scheme for that loco though. You would want matching cars too, no?
riogrande5761 Semi interested. The PA's really fall outside of my primary interest time period but as often happens, it can be interesting to run a few trains from an earlier time period. Years ago I bought the Proto2000 D&RGW yellow 4 stripe PA, which wasn't a bad looking engine at the time. It looks like Rapido may be trying to make this D&RGW PA fit 50's and 60's with the late style grab iron details and toe creep way etc. but tossing in the side number boards as an option. But even though my disposable income is more than it used to be, the costs of engines and models in general are forcing many of us to make choices.
Semi interested. The PA's really fall outside of my primary interest time period but as often happens, it can be interesting to run a few trains from an earlier time period. Years ago I bought the Proto2000 D&RGW yellow 4 stripe PA, which wasn't a bad looking engine at the time. It looks like Rapido may be trying to make this D&RGW PA fit 50's and 60's with the late style grab iron details and toe creep way etc. but tossing in the side number boards as an option. But even though my disposable income is more than it used to be, the costs of engines and models in general are forcing many of us to make choices.
I would think 1977 would be too late for a PA. Cool paint scheme for that loco though.
You would want matching cars too, no?
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
In my 20's, I was a slobbering Alco PA fan. I read all the PA books that were out years ago, multiple times through, and I owned some of the Overland Models HO versions, which ran great for me. My issue was affording the custom paint work. When I got a real quote from my favorite professional painter to take a nickel plated ATSF Overland PA-1 and paint it and do the correct lighting, well, it was more than $500 per unit back then. You couldn't find the factory painted ATSF ones; they were impossible to find for a lot of years, at any price, or only showed up when I didn't have that kind of money. F/P is and was definitely worth the money.
I let go the two (EMD repowered version) PA's that I had to someone else...and the years went by and I played with a whole lot of other trains since. When I can't find something I want, I generally find some other train to want (that part isn't too hard for me).
Always wanted a good CB&Q E-5A, too, ever since Don Ball Jr.'s pan shot in the book America's Colorful Railroads all those years ago.
So after all these years, I finally got a nice NKP Bluebird...would've probably gotten some more PA's, but I'm more into freight railroading now. The SP PA-1 models really look great, too, but SP isn't my thing.
Doesn't mean I'm not a little bit torn by what might've been and passenger train consists I might've owned (PRR/many roads East Wind and South Wind, I know not pulled by PA's).
Still debating picking up just one LV PA-1...and remembering my friends who would've scarfed all 3 numbers of many roads, but are dead and gone, now.
Maybe if Rapido would do the NH orange and green scheme...
PRR8259I got the PA-1 running better on the layout and made a slight adjustment to a low track joint adjacent a Kato #8 turnout. Something is still making it hang up and pause for a split second every time it crosses that track joint, and I can't figure out what it is. It has improved, but is annoying.
My Athearn PA/PB set has no problem on Kato Unitrack. Since I just got two new sets of undecorated PA & PB body shells I can fix what I don't like about the way they are currently painted.
I do appreciate your objective statements.
richhotrain PRR8259 Some people have referred to me as being a "Rapido-hater". However I'm trying to be as objective as I can. If one has any illusions about the quality of one's trackwork, the long wheelbase trucks of the PA-1 will find any areas where there might be an issue. John It's not only Rapido. In my experience, it is the nature of the beast. Until recently, I had two pairs of Proto 2000 PA/PB locos. They found every flaw in my trackwork that might even baffle a forensic scientist. I've said it before. I will say it again. I will never owned another PA or PB locomotive. Rich
PRR8259 Some people have referred to me as being a "Rapido-hater". However I'm trying to be as objective as I can. If one has any illusions about the quality of one's trackwork, the long wheelbase trucks of the PA-1 will find any areas where there might be an issue. John
Some people have referred to me as being a "Rapido-hater". However I'm trying to be as objective as I can. If one has any illusions about the quality of one's trackwork, the long wheelbase trucks of the PA-1 will find any areas where there might be an issue.
It's not only Rapido. In my experience, it is the nature of the beast. Until recently, I had two pairs of Proto 2000 PA/PB locos. They found every flaw in my trackwork that might even baffle a forensic scientist. I've said it before. I will say it again. I will never owned another PA or PB locomotive.
No question, they like bigger curves. Never any problems here on 36" radius.
SeeYou190--
I got the PA-1 running better on the layout and made a slight adjustment to a low track joint adjacent a Kato #8 turnout. Something is still making it hang up and pause for a split second every time it crosses that track joint, and I can't figure out what it is. It has improved, but is annoying.
There still are areas of my layout on a superelevated horizontal curve where the PA-1 wants to derail when backing up.
PRR825924" radius curves are recommended. I have Kato 26.375" minimum radius with 28.75" radius effective easements into them. My trackwork easily accommodates any BLI or MTH steamer including 4-8-8-4's, 2-8-8-4's, and 4-8-4's, and even 4-12-2's. However, the PA-1 does not fully like my trackwork and in particular does not like to back up in some areas without derailing.
Thank you for this information. That gets me off the fence, and into the "no" column for this model.
My hidden curves will be Kato 22" Unitrack, and I don't want anything that turns up its nose at these curves.
My Rapido RDC does not like them either, but I think that one will be an easy fix.
John,
I noted from Ed's photos that a few things are better done than on the Proto model.
And few things I feel are neither better or worse, just done differently. One thing for sure, all six Proto's I have are smooth and quiet, and the diaphragms work well and meet my standards with the Kadee kit installed.
Had they made the undecorated models, I'm sure I would have been happy from what you and Ed have had to say, and from pictures I have seen. But that would not have resulting in the retirement of my Protos.
On the other hand, I'm not really disappointed in not getting them.
I found more NOS Proto models in my prefered version, dynamic brakes, big numberboards, as well as dynamic brake B units, so I'm set now, more PA's than I need, at bargain prices, just a little more work to convert the dummy B's to powered units, and a few spare parts.....