Well assuming that Version 2.0 comes out as expected (hand rails intact, shell fits cleanly, etc.) then hopefully some time in the next few weeks. If things go horribly wrong then double that probably... Thanks for the feedback! Hmm, I hadn't thought about doing an interior. The Life-Like mechanism eats up a fair chuck of the front of the cab, but it might be possible to work around it - I'll keep that thought in mind. What does the Key interior look like? Nah, the rivets you mention should be there - that's another case of me being lazy (matching rivets to the curve of the roof will take a bit of work). That said I'll probably get around to adding them. If you couldn't already tell I'm still trying to get a feel for which details are worth adding, which are too insignificant/time consuming, which you guys (my potential customers) notice/particularly care about and which people are just going to file off and make themselves anyway. That said, keep the suggestions coming
The rivets are easy to add - just get some Archer Fine Details rivet decals in the appropriate size and go to town.
Hahaha! I WISH Archer rivets were easy to apply! My experience with them is that the decal film is so flimsy it's near impossible to position them correctly. I will admit that my third attempt applying them to my scratch-built UP bridge finally got me acceptable results (barely)...and these were HO scale rivets applied as bridge rivets on my N-scale bridge girders. However, at over $17 per teeny 3 X 4 1/2" sheet, you definitely do NOT want to be making too many "trial" efforts! Cheers! Bob Gilmore
Bob, I have to agree with Phillip, Archer rivets are a snap. I've never had any issues using them. I did pass on using them on a bridge for the reasons stated though, $100 in rivet decal sheets was a little cost prohibitive. I started, realized the cost, and time needed to cover a whole scratch built bridge and then decided against it.
Just another thought here. Have you checked out how the Atlas RS-1 handrails would work for this? Would it be feasible to seperate the sill from the shell and make the sill so that it would accept the Atlas Delrin handrails and walkway (the short hood section would have to be removed and spliced under the cab)? If this is not feasible, how brittle is FUD? Would it be easy enough for a person to remove the existing cast sill/walkway to use the Atlas RS-1 pieces (shortened and spliced to fit of course).
Tony, missed this before, but it would not be right, the shoe-box H12-44 that Minitrix used was not only shorter than the H1-44 and early H12-44's, it was taller as well.
A potential problem with this solution and using mechanisms from this or that commercially produced locomotive is what to do when you can't get them. An ideal way to do it would be to offer the complete locomotive kit for the benefit of those without boxes full of parts and mechanisms. A new mechanism could be made based on the Tomytec variable legth tram mechanism but narrower to suit US hood units. This way would give us independance from Atlas, Kato and other mainstream manufacturers.
The early long body H10-44 and H12-44 measured 14'6" roof to railhead. Wheel base is 25'6" the same as the VO-1000. The reason I said get a couple of Trix FM's is because you need to section two of them together to get the body length correct. http://prr.railfan.net/diagrams/PRRdiagrams.html?diag=fs-12.gif&sel=die&sz=sm&fr= The Trix body measures 14' even roof to bottom of steps. At most it may be a couple inches high when done but nothing objectionable. I've already done all the measurement, it will work just fine and snug down nicely on the trucks. The Trix body is actually pretty nice after you strip it. It is just a matter of deciding where to make the cuts to mate two shells together. Still working on that one.
Tony, here is a long H12-44 http://espee.railfan.net/nonindex/h12-44_photos/2352_sp-h12-44-bob_dengler.jpg and a short one http://espee.railfan.net/nonindex/h12-44_photos/2393b_sp-h12-44-bob_dengler.jpg the difference was in the frame, the hood height is the same
Yes, and how does that affect the fact that the height measures out correctly? The steps will be 6" off the rails, the overall heigth will be 14' 6" which is correct for the loco. The Trix body is pretty accurate.
As soon as I read this, I started looking on the Japanese modelling forum I frequent, then elsewhere to get an idea of what the Tomytec mechanism could do. Apparently, only one truck is powered, which makes its variable wheelbase trivial. I was assuming and hoping that they'd made something actually revolutionary, a commercial chassis with driveshafts that could change length without disassembly.
I have to chuckle a bit because this is exactly what I'm doing with the Whitcomb 65-tonner kit. It uses either the single-truck Tomytec mechanism or one truck of the double-truck mechanism, on a very simple replacement frame that imitates the Tomytec approach. This design allows you to produce your own frame easily to any wheelbase you want. If it is long enough you can drive both trucks, if not, you're only getting one, but there is a traction tire. I use the double-truck Tomytec drive with a replacement frame for my cheater express reefer kit. I've successfully transplanted Atlas slow-speed GP motors into that with the flywheels. Don't let the driveshaft thing hang you up. On my kits I supply a 3' drilled-out piece of 1/16" square brass tubing; you cut the driveshaft in half, shorten it, and push each end into this splice bar. Piece of cake. The Tomytec trucks are genius. They pivot on the universal. They have end-axle pickups. They equalize. You CAN turn them to reduce the flange depth. You can put on your own truck sideframes. Lots to love. The motors are a B+. Same motor as in the Bachmann 2-6-6-2; 12V finger brushes. I've had a couple go bad. But if you have a 7' wheelbase and 33" wheels, you're all set. Get to hacking. Seriously look at this as a mechanism concept for RP use.
I won't say that it would be impossible - and I'm sure with patience and a steady hand you could pull it off - but I'm thinking that it might be more trouble than it is worth... That said, I do think that Atlas RS-1 handrails might be easily substituted for the ones provided, I'll have to look into that... While I'm waiting for my next S-4 shell to arrive (should be any day now) I figured that I should post a quick preview of the next locomotive coming down the line. I somehow managed to put this together in a fraction of the time that I expected (it's an FM H-10-44 in case you couldn't tell). It still needs a "sprue treatment" as well as provisions for a mechanism - Atlas VO-1000 is the plan. Anyway, back on topic, I'll post pictures of the ALCO once it gets here
That's beautiful but don't stop there... please also consider the FM H20-44... http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=512434 http://www.thepwvhiline.com/DecemberHistoricUpdate/PWV50_2Web.html
I'd say never mind the drool , clean the cobwebs off your wallet but I know none of us MILW modelers have much dust on our wallets lately. Randy
Yes do consider the FM H20-44, PLEEZ?? The 10-44 is beautiful! Does flattery help? Jerry, what would you put under the H20? It's got almost Geep-like truck wheelbase and truck spacing... Regards, Otto in dire need of at least three H20-44's for UP helper service on my Cajon Pass layout...
Wow, what a beautiful (virtual) model of a beautiful prototype, IMHO the last switcher where design and aesthetics mattered... covered porch and all... After that came the onslaught of the Geeps and the like with nothing but utility driving the bottom line. Erghh... Matthew, you've captured the Loewy design very nicely. Just my humble opinion.... Regards, Otto
