On “Making the Switch”
To “Thinking of DCC” John Sipple:
I am very interested in what you wrote about in “The Switch” (December 2006). Yes, like you, I have lots of old DC locos and I haven’t yet tried DCC. You write about how simple it is to have the flexibility to switch from one to the other. However, my DCC friends talk about turnout frogs that need to be specially insulated when operating DCC. And there may be other issues required for DCC operation that DC operation doesn’t provide.
Hopefully I’m wrong about this, because being able to operate several DCC-equipped engines in the future sure would be nice. Let me have your comments, please. Keep up the good work.
Peter M. Maitland
Bainbridge Island, WA
Good question, Peter. The more complex the layout and its wiring, the less likely it is that you can change it all with just a switch. My advice is for guys with smallish layouts and limited budgets who want a quick and simple method to go back and forth. The problem with switch wiring is restricted to specific brands and designs. I use ordinary Atlas turnouts with insulated frogs and have no switch-over problems. It is entirely possible that the switches your friends have rewired would still work fine under DC; you don’t know until you try it. — John
Big Articulateds and 18-inch Radii
In your editorial in the December issue you touched on the fact that models of articulated locomotives are being built, unlike the prototype, with both engines pivoted. This was not always so — I have [an HO-scale] Bowser Challenger articulated that is over fifty years old with the rear engine rigid on the frame. The locomotive also had an excellent mechanical drive. I know for a fact that it ran well on radii as tight as 24 inches, but I cannot be sure of anything less than that.
Are the manufacturers hung up on operation on an 18-inch radius curve? I can’t imagine having a large locomotive like that and expecting it to run on those curves. To me it would look ridiculous and toy like.
Bob Guinter
Rockford, IL
Hi, Bob. We’re aware that old Bowsers and most brass used a true Mallet design in their engine swing. The practice of using a “diesel truck” approach may go back to the old AHM articulateds that were built in Eastern Europe. I think two issues led to this design concept. One was probably the desire to get them to run on tighter 18-inch radius and the other was to create a standard and less expensive drive design. Momentum will continue the process unless interrupted. The new Intermountain HO-scale SP AC12 cab forward has a fixed engine under the firebox just as the prototype had, and extra kudos go to them for their hard work on this improvement. The old but recently rereleased Mantua Logger 2-6-6-2 also has always sported a fixed firebox engine, and the new Model Power release still does. — John
Espee GS 4-8-4 Definition Error
In the March issue rear cover page, Bachmann listed four GS series locos in their latest ad. Just to clear the air: #4449 and #4446 are GS-4s, #4459 is a GS-5, and #4464 is a GS-6. I hope you can publish this information to clear the air.
Pall R. Clifton
Citrus Heights, CA
Thanks for the tip, Paul. You are correct; to be accurate, #4459 should have roller bearings and #4464 should have the smaller 73.5-inch drivers and less streamlining. Also, the GS-6 versions reverted to the single light housing nose cone. It should be noted that this information comes in Bachmann’s advertisement, and they are responsible for the content of the ad. — John & Bill
Keep S Gauge Coverage Coming
I like your magazine and although I take all the train magazines (Model Railroader, Model Railroad Craftsman, and Classic Toy Trains), your magazine is the only one that has a column just for S gauge. I think it is high time somebody recognized that there are other scales besides HO. Thanks for letting Mr. Roy Hoffman write in your magazine just for us S Gaugers. I look for the “S-Curves” first thing when I receive your magazine but was sorry to see that this month’s issue (March 07) had no article. However, keep up the work and keep those articles on 3/16-inch trains coming.
I wish someone who manufactures S gauge trains would come up with a nice-looking engine like the one shown on the inside cover of the March issue. That Big Boy is really a neat looking engine and I wish I had one for my model railroad. If you have any way to pass my suggestion along to those people who are in the business of building engines in S, please feel free to do so, as I would sure buy one.
Once again, I enjoy your magazine and I’m glad I subscribed. I’ll look forward to seeing more of Mr. Hoffman’s articles in the near future. Perhaps Mr. Hoffman could investigate the possibility of more building kits in S gauge from Walthers.
Bill Jones
Salem, IL
Hi, Bill, We’re glad you enjoy the coverage of S scale. We try to cover news and products in all the major scales from Z to G. Roy Hoffman’s “S-Curves” column appears every other month in Model Railroad News but he will also be doing some S-scale product reviews beginning in the near future. — Bill
Mysterious GG1
I have enclosed some photos of a “mysterious GG1” that I recently acquired from an elderly train collector turned dealer from New Hampshire. I purchased this as an example of my personal favorite locomotive: the Pennsy GG1. Growing up in New Brunswick, NJ, I sometimes was lucky enough to ride GG1 consists to New York to visit relatives, and as a train-watching youngster, marveled at these wonderful towers of steel as they thundered through New Brunswick pulling Pullmans, freight or passengers, on their way to who knows where.
The Mystery 4935 is 3-rail standard gauge (54mm), 19-1/2 inches long, with what I thought was a wood body, but on closer examination it is “bondo” or some similar material. It was bolted to handmade track on a display piece. It does have two motors, one on each 6-wheel truck with roller pickups; both work. The inner workings are very crude by today’s standards, mounting is a home-made-appearing piece of stainless steel, wiring is through a direction toggle switch... forward, neutral, reverse, and both lights are always on. The pantographs are not functional. The lettering is in Clarendon, the PRR monogram is correct, but the nose monograms are absent.
This may be a very well done fabrication, but the detail and fineness of the body gives me pause. It appears to be cast, but there are no casting lines. Its symmetry and detail are difficult to do freehand. It was painted Brunswick green and the decals are perfect…or are they decals? I don’t see any decal lines.
Could this have been a commemorative kit? Maybe you or your readers have a clue. I don’t.
Bohdan Malyk, MD
Wilmington, NC
Got me, Doctor Malyk. Perhaps someone in our readership has some insight. — John
I have complimented you guys before, but I’ll do it again.
1. The Athearn Big Boy review blew me away. No question, with your 17 x 22 inch format, the visual impact of the product is awesome. It really makes me want that locomotive even though I don’t model the UP.
2. The Lewis Polk article was terrific. I’ve been in the business world for 48 years and Mr. Polk really sums up the manufacturers’ side of the hobby for the consumer. I don’t recall reading such a detailed description of model train production ever before. The model press tends to play down this aspect, perhaps thinking that it is of no interest to the hobbyist. This may be so, however, one can’t help but respect the tremendous effort and financial investment needed to bring a topflight model to market these days.
3. Bill has done a great job with the Preiser Figure and “At the Grade Crossing” stories. Again, your large format allows for photos bigger than those normally shown in typical manufacturers’ catalogs. I hope Mr. Preiser recognizes the need for some 1920s – 1930s little people to go with those new Athearn Model A cars and trucks that are expected soon. MRN realizes the overlapping interest the model railroader has in 1/87th scale vehicles and again, provides background industry information about them. It’s good to see another pre-1940 automobile coming to market with the 1936 Ford Fodor sedan from Classic Metal Works.
Keep up the good work.
Joe Bux
Bayside, NY
When I started model railroading in 1951, I was delighted to discover that the Santa Fe Railroad was giving away a large plan book of their cars and locomotives to model railroaders. All I had to do was stop by their office in Los Angeles. The president of the company was interested in model railroading and was promoting sales and goodwill. He certainly was successful. About two years later, I received a form letter from the Santa Fe (I believe they used the NMRA mailing list) asking modelers to write to their congressman to support legislation to help the railroads. I was still in the Navy and gave the letter to my father and asked him if he knew of someone to write to. He had just helped elect a young man to the House of Representatives and heard that he was returning home. My father gave him the letter and asked for his support. He had just been appointed to the committee that was handling the legislation. His vote got the stalled legislation out of committee and to the full house and it eventually became law.
It is now over a half-century later, and I do not remember the name of the congressman or what the legislation was for. I should have sent a letter to the Santa Fe letting them know what happened, but I was totally absorbed with model railroading and the Navy and gave it nary a thought. However, the railroads did receive solid support from the model railroad fraternity though probably the lobbyists took the credit.
The railroads have a fan club that is already in place, similar to Apple Computer and Saturn automobiles. The management doesn’t seem to understand that we are their friends. I have heard they are hamstrung by legislation that was enacted when their great grandfathers were high-handedly running the railroads. If legislation needs to be changed to safely ease up their operations, possibly we can help. Isn’t there anyone left in public relations or do they only hire lawyers? There is a better way to run a railroad.
Russ Clover
Sebastopol, CA
I am writing to you in the hope you can help me. The problem I have is that I am trying to buy a couple of miniature flags for a model railroad layout that a young friend of mine is working on, but I have no idea who might be able to supply them (if possible, I would like to purchase a U.S. flag and a U.K. flag). Can you help please?
Cheryl Tachon
Houston, TX
(Formerly of London, England)
www.tomarindustries.com/sp.htm — Bill
Although by the reviews I have seen the Heljan crane is a magnificent achievement, somehow I relate the purchase and use of one to the purchase and use of a health club membership. Stage 1 - Initial enthusiasm and frequent usage. Stage 2 - Occasional usage when the spirit (or conscience) moves you. Stage 3 - Very infrequent use. Why? Let’s think about an operational session.
A loaded stack train arrives. Let’s say two 5-unit articulateds with 20 containers. You move the crane and possibly also the train to unload all 20, which are then sitting on the pavement. Do you then: 1) reload all the containers back on the empty train, 2) pull the train and replace with another empty set, 3) manually remove all the containers and replace with a new set of 20, 4) place the containers on chassis when unloading and manually move the container/chassis combos to a storage area, or 5) just move out the empty stack cars, move all the containers, and bring in another loaded train. Plus, the thrill may wear off after handling the 500th container. Now if we could unload the containers to trucks that move on their own power out of the yard, and also bring in new loaded trucks with containers for the outbound cycle, we would have a full transportation system. But the crane, nice as it is, only handles part of the total traffic flow.
I am sure that some modelers will develop ways to use the crane effectively over long-term usage, but they may be a minority. Given the superb design and engineering that went into the product, I hope my scenario is wrong, but time will tell as to whether sales of the crane are as expected and usage patterns continue over the years of the product’s life.
Roger Thomas
West Windsor, NJ
Furthermore, it may not be that long before those HO trucks start bringing in or picking up the containers. Wiking showed the prototypes of some new HO R/C trucks at the recent Nuremberg Toy Fair and there are some German modelers who have managed to cram the necessary hardware into an HO model of the Smart minicar. An Athearn White/Freightliner COE should have enough room for the electronics and sufficient batteries for the relatively limited movements that would be required. You would have one busy intermodal yard with one operator working the train, another operating the crane, and a third driving the truck.
Come to think of it, that might be a great way to grow the hobby: we could start co-opting our friends who are R/C fans to come drive trucks during operating sessions. — Bill
The Great Northern Empire Builder was a great train. The Walthers model of the train is very good. The Empire Builder was a long train usually 15 or more cars. Walthers cars allow several versions of the post-1955 train. The Empire Builder consist I’m using is as follows:
RPO-Baggage, Coach, Dome Coach (3), Ranch Car, Pass Sleeper, River Sleeper, Dining Car, Great Dome, Pass Sleeper, River Sleeper, Coulee Sleeper-Obs.
Baggage cars and the Glacier Sleepers were used at times. About half of the Empire Builder cars were repainted in the “Big Sky Blue” scheme starting in 1967. The RPO-Baggage cars were probably not repainted, as RPO service ended at about the same time. The Coulee series Sleeper-Obs cars were withdrawn at that time and rebuilt as 68-seat coaches.
Cliff W. West
Rainier, OR
When we have the locomotives (Proto 2000 products), we’ll cap the series as we did with the Super Chief series with a photo of all the samples we have received plus a listing of the consist. This is a very complex undertaking, because GN changed the consist to meet the traffic expectations, adding or removing cars as it saw fit. If you go to:
GreatNorthernEmpire.net
navigate through the passenger menu to the Empire Builder, you can have access to each season’s assigned consist (whether or not that’s what actually ran on a given day). This would be for the summer and winter seasons from 1955 to 1969. Don’t forget to put on a Baggage-Dorm car in your consist or your passenger service crew won’t have a place to sleep! — John
e-mail us at: letters
or send us a letter to:
LETTERS c/o Model Railroad News
P.O. Box 1080 • Merlin, OR 97532-1080
Fax: 541-955-0346