Jump to content
 

AlfaZagato

Members
  • Posts

    1,334
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AlfaZagato

  1. Looking at the pics of the real things you posted above, it looks like there isn't any large fitting on the jackshaft flycranks. Could you swap the bushing that looks to be outside the fly on the model? That might bring it flush.
  2. I'll pass on the insulated handrails, thanks. I don't fancy working near pneumatics at all inside metal boxes. Our air compressor used to wake the dead.
  3. I'd imagine you're aware of this, but a lot of very old electrics I've been inside will have surprisingly exposed machinery. One preserved dump motor I've seen had a bank of rectifiers (I think) right behind the driver's stand, protected by chicken wire.
  4. Yeah, how you send power to the cleaner is trash. Alligator clips, either to the track or to the outputs straight off of your power. Then you get thin metal strips to actually transfer power to the locomotive. No good for deep cleaning. I see OK results after use on well-maintained loco in N. N is a lot more sensitive to continuity than OO or HO, though.
  5. I have the N scale version of the Tidy Track. It works alright. The loco kind of needs to work in the first place. Very much scaled for common American diesels. It's been so long since I had an idea of your roster, I couldn't say if you have anything that it might not accommodate.
  6. Y'all got to quit with those negative vibes, man.
  7. Split the first set with a pilot, to make a 2-6-6-0, and I think you'd have it. I'd personally make it a tender loco, as well. I know the locomen didn't want a tender flopping around downhill. For practical reasons, I don't think a tank would really work in the conditions. Admittedly, on very basic math (assuming a Standard 12 boiler from a King, and the same number of cylinders split onto both drive sets,) the suggested artic would be around 15 tons/axle
  8. Depends heavily on the line. The Santa Fe, for example, built mostly, well, Santa Fe's, 2-10-4's, in significant quantities for freight hauling. Tenders on the things were nearly as long as the loco. The ATSF crossed some of the bleakest terrain in the US, though.
  9. Even here in the US, where we have had bogie & braked freight since the 19th century, we still had distinct locomotives for freight service. I do imagine, given more advanced freight wagons in the UK, that the mixed-traffic types would have been built in even greater numbers. More notably, we would have likely seen the end of the 0-6-0 type not long after introduction of bogie freight. I'm happy to be corrected, but having neither pilot nor trailing wheels limits the theoretical speed of the type.
  10. No, the DE that ran on the former LMS. You're thinking 18000. Though I will contend any turbine needs Armor Yellow at the end of the day.
  11. In a slightly sillier tone, how would 10800, or a class 15 or 16, look in ATSF 'Bookend' blue? Or a BR approximation thereof? I bet you couldn't make one for a geep at a glance.
  12. For going by Ruston, you sure do end up with a lot of Barclays. Since I stalk his threads, I know Barclay doesn't have your Rustons, either.
  13. Then what of Pacifics? Same issues present there, yet they're one of the most common types worldwide. I do know that one issue with Prairies is that they like to hunt a bit, having a nominally balanced wheelbase. Especially if the center was driven, as was common.
  14. Tendered 2-6-2 'Prairies' were only rare in the UK. They were fairly common in the US around turn of the century. They lasted forever here, too. Looks like Russia & the USSR both favored the type for passenger work.
  15. Yeah, it's sometimes hard to fathom how a bogie hopper with bottom chutes was harder to accommodate than a 7-planker. Or the big LMS side-dumps. I'd imagine that those could even be emptied (messily) in to a normal staithe, or the chutes I've seen for unloading the 4-wheel planked wagons. Here's an imaginary loco for the thread. LMS Garratt with 8F axleboxes, improved brakes, and a Westinghouse air pump for working automatic hopper doors. Could manage MGR working some 30 years early.
  16. Makes me think of some of my fellow countrymen...
  17. That little blue one on the right is going to start everything. I just know it.
  18. Hate to say so, but that's not it. Not much to do with N20's either way.
  19. Are y'all sure you're not conflating the Bachman Bill/Ben here? Is it possible that one or the other sold the one tooling?
  20. Now we're entering the realm of madness. @Londontram, were you the gentlemen who had a trolleybus layout featured in the publications a number of years ago? Or were you inspired by the same articles? I was always impressed with the layout, though I forget which magazine, and what the name of the layout was.
  21. If I remember my reading correctly, 10000 didn't have a traditional 'firebox,' per se. More of a continuous furnace for direct heat on the watertubes. Though you would lose efficiency, and probably exceed the loading gauge, you could have the rear couple of axles run between the lower drums and the furnace. Can't imagine the wheels would do well, surrounded by that much heat. The rest of the locomotive didn't work, so I doubt too much difference would matter.
  22. For the ultimate in compactness, I think you could get a Feldbahn on a 4x6 notecard.
  23. I think an 'N20' to the front axle would be the order of the day on the square tanks.
  24. Thanks for linking that. Looking back on the EP and deco samples, both issues being brought up now look fairly evident. We've had time to say something sooner. Doesn't look like anybody did, not at least here.
×
×
  • Create New...