Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

69 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yes, the railway ran across the top (literally - the line was built over a watershed boundary to cut construction costs) of the Ardennes which visually is the nicest part of Belgium. Alas I'll skip this one, I already have too many irons in the fire and not enough mojo to stir them. The only easy part is the G7.1; Keyser once did a kit for the "Ravachol" but a) find one and b) find one which runs well (the mere mention of Keyser to some French modellers of a certain generation usually brings forth a torrent of swear words...). Everything else would require either kitbashing or scratchbuilding
  2. I looked it up in the webs and found some pictures of Cie. de Chimay trains on the web. The locomotives were indeed Nord stock, however they carried CHIMAY rather than NORD on theirs sides. Motive power included some 0-8-0s of Nord design, "Ravachol" 4-4-0Ts and surprisingly, an ex-Prussian G7.1 (Chimay n°21). This last one is a very easy project in HO, take one Piko G7.1 and... One thing which was not Nord stock was a pair of Ganz railcars which later passed into SNCB stock. Cheers NB
  3. Hello, Some time ago I started paining a caboose for my HO US railroad. The idea was to paint the cupola and body mid-yellow with black roof and underframe. I started with the cupola, because I added grab irons to the roof I decided to give it a coat of primer to cover some gaps between the wire and the plastic which had been puttied. Once this was done I started painting, however after a few coats I noticed that I was a hard time obtaining an uniform covering - the white from the primer still shows up under the yellow. Because it's an old MDC caboose much of the planking detail is
  4. Rabbi Walter Rothschild punishes the "Harakevet" ("railway" or "the railway" in Hebrew) Magazine (http://www.harakevetmagazine.com/) about Israeli and Middle-Eastern railways and is an expert of sorts on them. Cheers Nicholas
  5. Also opens the possibility of using automatic couplings, when and if ever they are adopted. Two axle wagons simply don't run well without buffers. Cheers Nicholas
  6. You'll have to reopen the line to Dumfries first in the second case... Cheers NB
  7. Small anecdote: the present owner of Morning Sun Books (producer of those wonderful all-colour photo books of US railways) was for a while LV's 3rd largest shareholder... he recounted the story years ago on Trains magazine on how on a whim he purchased tens of thousands of shares for peanuts. When Penn Central went finally bust LV went with it (PC controlled something like 90% of LV's stock, a holdover from PRR control of LV) ; PC's (and LV's) rail assets were conveyed into Conrail while PC went into Chapter 11 reorganization as a real estate holdings company. He shrugged and held on to the sc
  8. The "Valley" was probably the only railway in the world that became visually better (at least in the eyes of enthusiasts) the more it sank into a financial mire... Cheers NB
  9. And arrived at many places after other, healthier, railways had already entrenched themselves... Cheers NB
  10. No - however either the conductor or one of the brakemen must have been on rear platform instructing the driver through the communication cord. Cheers Nicholas
  11. Makette makes a kit for "Grands Réseaux" vans, including the Midi version: http://www.makette.de/makette/kits.html (scroll down) Cheers NB
  12. No, because what makes track look American is sleeper size and spacing, not geometry. Yes, here are the AREA standards - but there were many places where track could or was not laid to AREA standards, especially because of space constraints. And even the Americans appreciate the PECO 75/100 offering exactly because of its compactness when compared with a standard 4/6/8 - a large steam loco traversing a PECO Small radius point looks less ridiculous than if it were traversing a #4, for example. So I do believe that if PECO had retained the S/M/L geometry in the code 83 and 70 it would have somet
  13. Oh yea, forgot to say - one advantage of Peco 75/100 switches is their geometry - the fact that you can join a small radius switch next to a large radius one while still retaining parallel tracks is nothing short of a stroke of genius. Plus the fact that they are more compact for a given radius (the Peco Small Radius is the equivalent of an US #5). I wish that PECO had transmitted these characteristics to the code 83 and the future code 70 switches (or has it?), rather than following the US 4-6-8 denomination. Cheers NB
  14. Well, it had been announced... then, silence. I have a bit of US HO which I would like to give a place to run. Most of it represents a pre-1929 shortline, so code 70 or 75 track is a must, code 83 is just too heavy for this. I'm not going to order Peco code 75 if Peco 70 becomes available. Cheers NB
  15. For the kind of US modelling that interests me code 83 is just too heavy. The alternative would be Walthers/Shinohara code 70 but it's unreliable (one rather grouchy US model shop owner called it "S***ohara"). Another alternative would be Micro Engineering... hard to find at times and their flex is a pain to bend. That leaves Peco 75 as the closest alternative - bullet-proof (almost), easy to work and readily available. Which leads to the question - what of PECO's code 70 line? Cheers Nicholas
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.