Lionel DD35A Videos and a few more pictures

Wow Chris,

You made my messy layout look better than it actually is.

Thanks for posting.
Jim

Thanks Chris,

I'm in the same boat as Don.


Doug

Thanks Chris for posting the pics and video. I like the engine a lot, hopefully one will still be waiting for me at the April York TCA show.

And thanks Jim for hosting the photo shoot.

Hope you guys have a good New Year.

Donald

Chris.....fantastic pics video and Happy New Year!

Peter

Any any any chance of this on 0-54?

Chris (LVR) - Lionel says requires O42 but O54 recommended. Your good to go.

The video was shot on O72.

Thanks for the video and pictures Chris. Nice sound.

Chris your killing me with the video and pics. The Milwaukee version is calling to me

Chris and Jim, you missed the other DD35 thread, it will run and pull a train on 036 fastrack with no issues other than a lot of overhang.

OK, Stupid Question time...

Why no working Marker lights? MTH included many models with Working Marker lights. for the price you would tend to think Lionel would have done the same....





also for those that have the 'dummy' are there any roller pick ups for lights or potential to add lights?

Just comments...not criticism...its a great looking model. For my tastes...it seems a little "plain" and I am surprised no one has really commented on how far the front truck sits back from the front pilot. That could be the same for the rear...I just can't tell.

Otherwise, it looks great...about like an original MTH DD40AX when they first came out.

quote:

Why no working Marker lights? MTH included many models with Working Marker lights. for the price you would tend to think Lionel would have done the same

As I explained in one of the other "DD35A Threads", Lionel has mixed the eras/time frame on this model. Considering the "as delivered" front hand rail on the Engineer's side, there should indeed be "working class lights".

However, in the early to mid 1970s, use of class lights & flags where "eliminated" throughout U.S. railroads, and the class lights where removed from their housings with round blanking plates being inserted in the rubber weather strip molding. Some railroads simply just painted over the whole class light assembly (UP?), after removing the appropriate electric control swithes in the cab.

So, Lionel's DD35A model should either have working class lights to go with the "as delivered right front hand rail arrangement", or the right front hand rail should have been "corrected as modified by UP" to reflect later years of service. Either way, I still think Lionel did an excellent job overall, on this model.

quote:

about like an original MTH DD40AX when they first came out.

You mean a DDA40X?

quote:

Originally posted by SD60M:
Just comments...not criticism...its a great looking model. For my tastes...it seems a little "plain" and I am surprised no one has really commented on how far the front truck sits back from the front pilot. That could be the same for the rear...I just can't tell.

Otherwise, it looks great...about like an original MTH DD40AX when they first came out.

The prototype itself actually has noticeable gaps between the trucks and pilot steps. This is one of those rare exceptions when it comes to more contemporary diesel-electric motive power.

The Lionel truck sideframes themselves seem to look a little too "flat" to me, meaning not quite enough relief detailing, especially between the upper and lower halves of the sideframes. You'll notice on the prototype pics that the upper part of the sideframes seem to protrude out more than what's depicted on Lionel's model. That, and the handrails and MU hoses seem a little too thick. But other than that I think Lionel made a pretty sharp-looking model.

quote:

You mean a DDA40X?

My apologies Mr. Water...I did mean that! It's good to know you're "out there" keeping us rookies in check.

I ASSume all these guys typing "DD35A" also incorrect???

That photo posted by "the shoe curve" makes it appear that the front truck side frame comes right up to the pilot...whereas that photo posted by of Lionel's #70 makes it appear there is a 3/4 to 1 inch gap between the pilot and frame. That would "scale out" to a lot of distance. Additionally, as all manufacturers do, the gap between the fuel tank is tastefully closed by extending the side frame to cover it up. I understand...that's how it works.

I would agree completely on the flatness of those aforementioned side frames.

quote:

I ASSume all these guys typing "DD35A" also incorrect???

Nope! They are correct on that model designation.

Mr. Water...I am sure it has been asked and answered almost as much as "who makes the best track cleaning car?" but, please enlighten me with the inconsistency in that locomotive designation...DD35A is correct...but, not DD40AX?

Aging minds want to remember.

Thanks!

quote:

please enlighten me with the inconsistency in that locomotive designation...DD35A is correct...but, not DD40AX?

First and foremost, try to NEVER use the term "consistent" when discussing ANYTHING related to EMD product designations!!!

Now, the DD35 model came out first (1964), designed specifically for the UP. Later on (1965) the UP liked the DD35 so much, the requested EMD furnish DD35s with cabs, thus EMD simply added a GP35 type cab to an EXISTING MODEL, and the DD35A was built and delivered.

By 1967/68, the UP still wanted/needed bigger and higher HP units, and EMD Engineering Department was developing what would become the "Dash 2" line of locomotives. Therefor a completely new model unit was developed for the UP with the new "experimental Modular Control System". Thus the DDA40X was born as a "new model", i.e. the new full width nose & cab arrangement, 645F series prime mover at 3300HP for traction, and the experimental modular electrical control system; accounting for the "X" designation at the end of the model DDA40 designation.

Thanks...I see the question "which track cleaning car is better?" has been posted for this week.

I don't feel so bad about asking this question again.

Happy New Year.

quote:

Originally posted by SD60M:
That photo posted by "the shoe curve" makes it appear that the front truck side frame comes right up to the pilot...whereas that photo posted by of Lionel's #70 makes it appear there is a 3/4 to 1 inch gap between the pilot and frame. That would "scale out" to a lot of distance.

It appears that they come right up to the pilot because of the angle that picture was taken. If you go to google images and put in the prototype you'll find some better side pictures and you'll see the gap.

Great info John.

It seems to me that Lionel got skimpy on the trucks. I find the trucks of this engine to be really really plain. Although the pictures of the actual prototype show otherwise, that they were indeed just that way.

John,

what do you think about the trucks overall? Good or bad? Why?

Thanks!

The trucks do look flat but you just know too much protrusion and someone would say they are out of scale.

See my critque on the trucks on the other DD35 thread. The silver hides a lot of detail.