AlfaZagato

Bolt Action is fun. If you have the inclination, you should give it a spin. If you can find time to build an army among filling Tidmouth shed.

Updates will be thin for a while. Well, thinner than normal. I have other, more pressing or older projects that do not involve model railways in the slightest. Still, a shortlist of relevancy. Firstly, I am officially abandoning the 56XX kitbuild. The Grafar chassis under it made a circuit and a half on my loop, and quite. I am already $150 into the build, and I do not fancy trying for another donor chassis. Also, I had just found the announcement from RevolutioN about their plans on producing a RTR 56XX, so I will hold off until that is available. Secondly, I just this morning received some second-hand N Gauge Society kits of the SR 12-ton vans. I always try to bid on any N Gauge Society kits or RTR that crosses eBay, having not joined yet and only recently being in any sort of position to join. I like their kits that I've had before. I hadn't realized when I was bidding that these kits will build two wagons each. Made the purchase a much better deal than I had originally thought. For the era I aim for, though, even the 2+2 plank option is questionable, much less the plywood option. I may try scribing the plywood sides with 6" planking, to try to eke a little more value out of the kit. I have need of Peco chassis kits for other projects anyways, and I try to settle on lots to maximise the value of shipping when I order new from the UK. I may build these vans sooner than I intend to, as these are simple, fun little kits. I just need transfers for them.

I see this topic not a month after I finish a dud kit of one. I suppose I will order one when available, and not bother painting mine. Any word on spec? I don't think I saw motor or compatiblity in the thread here.

I never said it couldn't run. Depending on the railroad, we do have vintage equipment running. It's a matter of high-speed running. The USA's infrastructure is disintegrating as a whole, and our signaling is woefully underwhelming. I don't think the Mexican system, or any of the South American systems, can handle a locomotive as long as the T1. My knowledge is such that the Latin-American systems are very mountainous in general.

I, sadly, highly doubt either the DOT or the FRA would even consider such an occurance. Even with the forced acceptance of PTC, the DOT does not relax the 70mph speed limit in place on 90% or so of the US network. The Texas HSR is being built to appropiate standards, and there is the Northeast Corridor, but the days of 100mph timings are long dead in the US. If the new T1 is actually finished, the only chance I see of it being pushed to the limit would be if the Germans extended the same invite that they did to Tornado to the T1. Or if the UP tells the DOT to shove it, and stages some race between 844 and the T1.

All this discussion of bearing surfaces. I think, somewhere, someone needs to introduce the, as certain Gundam series term it, magnetic-coated axle. What you do is involve electro-ferrous materials on bearing surfaces. When you add power to the device, some is diverted to these bearing surfaces, which should be arranged to oppose each other. With the addition of an electrical current, the bearing surfaces repel each other, theoretically reducing friction to almost nil. Sort-of reducing Mag-Lev track technology into an otherwise conventional locomotive.

Compounds did not last much longer here in the US than they did in Europe. Other than the C&O, almost none were built after 1920. Our articulated types were mostly simple after that time.

I would tend to dispute that steam was brought to the ultimate here. Yes, we had massive, extremely powerful locomotives, but you in the UK, and France & Germany at least, could match many of those achievements in power with half the size of locomotive. Nothing much original or innovative was really done in here in the US, other than in making things quick & cheap, with brutal application of force to solve any problem. Hudsons, which are the general outline I believe managed the 100mph scheduled timing you mentioned, just simply increased the size of everything involved to manage such feats. Also, you don't see American phantoms because American modelers are by-and-large lazy, and have no desire to do more than show off how cavalierly they can spend money.

Thank you, almost exactly what I needed to see.

For about two years now, I have been planning on a modest T-trak layout. If you are not aware, T-Trak is a system based around Kato's Unitrak system, taking advantage of the strength of the joiners used. The modules are also based largely on Unitrak's standard lengths, with the normal straight module being 2mm shorter in length than a Kato double crossover, the largest single piece of track in the Unitrak catalog. Part of my goal with this layout is to run...whatever I damn well please! Rule 1 and the like. Still, I do want to strive for some realism. Part of my idea, therefore, was to build the scenic modules as generic as possible. Green rolling hills, which I've seen evidence of in the US, UK, Japan, basically anywhere I could think except Australia. No obvious signaling, no roads, nothing obvious to place the layout save for the train running through. I run into a dilemma here. I also would like a nice, longish bridge as a centerpiece. Nothing too grand, as the T-Trak standards don't allow for much height or depth to the modules, but a triple or quad (928mm and 1238mm, respectively) cutaway module for a good length or several lengths of span. I question, though, the suitability of Kato's bridges they have made available for Unitrak. There is a through-truss, and a box girder. The only country I have not seen evidence of such bridges being used in is the UK. So I pose a question; Does anyone who might pay attention to these have any knowledge or evidence of either bridge supplied by Kato being similar to a real bridge in the UK? Particularly Wales? Please let me know!

Also about the paint; green in the first-half of the 20th Centruy, especially olive, was known for wild variety in both fresh tone, and how it weathered. Read up on paint guides for Sherman Tanks, there is a lot of discussion there. These seem real attractive locomotives. Do they come reccommended?

Sorry I've been quiet. I've mostly been lazy lately, but I've had other business as well. Firstly, the 5600 was built and tested. Can't complete a circuit of the loop I have set up at work. Shame. I don't think I'll pursue it further; any money I saved buying the kit secondhand has been spent trying to get a decent 94XX donor. Secondly, found a couple of gentlemen with some bring-backs at the local model train show/swap meet. I picked up a Langley yard crane. A lot of flash, but the castings cleaned up well. I just before mentioned a loop I have set up at work. Our office is in a storefront, so for the Christmas season I set up some Kato and run as prototypical trains as I can. This also means that my locomotives are pulling long shifts, about four hours a day. I try to change out locomotives every other day or so, but I have had two casualties so far. My Dapol 14XX, which I bought second-hand, and a Dapol Terrier, which I found new. The 14XX just quit, but the Terrier started smoking at one point. I'll need to investigate at some point; if the Terrier is only afflicted with a fused wire, I may be able to fix it myself. I have a shot of the loop below; Finally, I picked up a nice Micro-Ace set of a Japanese DD51, a rake of side-dump ballast hoppers, and a Japanese brake van/caboose. I'm not sure if Japanese practice relied on the van for train braking, ala UK practice, or if it was more of a crew office, ala US practice.

I'm already derailing your thread here, but do you know the consist behind your first image, of 5472 with the Daimler/Lancaster headboard?

Is that Bagnall the Hornby or the Bachmann? I was thinking of kitbashing the Bachmann version into a box-tank Neilson, much like Neil.

If you can get a knife blade down the joint between the side plate and the shot, you may be able to prise it apart. Do you use superglue or something else for the shot?

These are looking very good. Regarding the figures, I've seen a lot of NG vans where the guard is forced to stoop.

How is the layout shrinkage going?

Don't let Gresley near that, or we'll have a 50% increase in cylinders.

I think I actually meant smokebox, but who needs maintenance access anyways!

Stretching the water tanks to the firebox would net a useful increase in water capacity.

Will it still have n-scale NEM pockets, though? I'd hate to have to cut a $250 locomotive to fit Micro-Trains.

Call it preservation. Damn the history books.

Stop spending my money before I make it. I'll have to see what number my OO unit is, to see if I can get a match without renumbering. Interesting about going the route of single-end power. Coreless motors couldn't fit in the lead tank?

Is that an 8F boiler on an ROD footplate?

The single looks damnably like the classic Hornby train-pack tank. Feasable, too.