Folks I like researching the web, and I have collected some fascinating photos of real locomotives and rolling stock. I'd like to show my most interesting ones and of course, everyone is welcome to post their own interesting photos.
Replies sorted oldest to newest
In a word,,,,,,,,NO! In fact, not only no, but he)) NO!!!!!!!
It makes the Selkirk front end of late NYC look good.
I understand your sentiments.
On the other hand, it would certainly add variety to your lay-out.
Just paint it Hiawatha colors. It would be a lot closer than that Northern.
Pete
The tender is especially hideous...
MELGAR
Vincent Massi posted:I understand your sentiments.
On the other hand, it would certainly add variety to your lay-out.
Not really, as it is European.
OK, how about this American engine?
BTW, Vincent's post depicts Dutch Railways locomotive# 3804 circa 1936.
Farmer_Bill posted:OK, how about this American engine?
No problem! I would have loved to of owned a model of that Southern Pacific "Shop Switcher", i.e. "Taylor Round House", in Los Angeles, or ANY of the other SP "Shop Switchers". Note that it is working among all the big SP cab forward locomotives.
Farmer_Bill posted:OK, how about this American engine?
SP Shop Switcher. Yes. I have two others already.
Pete
None of the above......they did build some ugly streamliners, didn't they? Of course, maybe like VW bugs, '34 Hupmobiles, and Chrysler Airflows, they might "grow" on you.
Here you see the Dutch 3804 on a contemporary poster advertising. Not that bad I think.
Regards
Fred
Yes to both.
There is not one thing posted here that I would even think about owning, European or not.
Dave
I'd love one of those armored German trains in O; locomotive, passenger/troop cars, and big gun cars. Bonus if the gun is Legacy controlled and I can shoot foam darts from it.
Farmer Bill believes "BTW, Vincent's post depicts Dutch Railways locomotive# 3804 circa 1936." I have also seen it identified as an early German armored locomotive.
I think both locos are pretty cool but I'm not sure I would want either on my layout. Neither loco fits in with my layout scheme but both would be fun to run. The Dutch loco would, IMHO, look good pulling some passenger cars.
Vincent that looks like something the Germans did during WWII to protect the locos from Allied air attacks. If you were modeling Europe during that time frame it would be perfect.
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NO
When referring to the original posted photo, I've seen better bricks for door stops than that!
Attachments
Charlie, that one I have! And it's a faithful reproduction of the prototype!
Here's full frontal view of 3804, whew!
Didn’t I see that in Forbidden Planet??? 😁
dkdkrd posted:
Hmmm.....I know there's some sort of a fish/dolphin/whale/whatever I've seen that surely inspired that design. And look!....it's even smiling!
mercy.
This locomotive was called "Potvis" in Dutch; Google will translate this for you.
Regards
Fred
Vincent Massi posted:
Given a choice between the above engine and these, YES:
There's a saying...Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes all the way to the bone!!!
Attachments
If it had a decent paint scheme, it might look better. Perhaps a herald of some sort on the front with stripes going back towards the cab.
Attachments
In valley girlese: "Gag me with a spoon!" LOL! Another expression comes to mind: "A face that only a mother could love!" And I am not so sure about that! LOL!
Here she is at Arnhem in 1936. The entire area would be cratered during the failed Allied drive through the Netherlands in the fall of 1944.
Having spent time in Europe chasing and riding trains (in the Netherlands and other countries across the pond), I have a soft spot for European equipment., especially German and Dutch stuff
No, I wouldn't buy a model of that as I don't model standard gauge and my layout concept would never explain its presence.
But that said, if I did model wartime Europe, yeah, I might want one pf these streamlined 4-6-0s!
I wouldn't even want to look at a model of that first engine!
TM Terry posted:dkdkrd posted:If this is a GG1,
Wouldn't this, then, be a G1??
Maybe more correctly, a G1/2 (G one half).
Since the "G" classification in PRR terminology stood for a 4-6-0 wheel arrangement, that photo of half of a GG1, would then indeed be a "G1". One "G" being half of a "GG1".
This armored monster was built by the Soviet Communists during the Russian Revolution. It could be pulled by a locomotive, could pull a few cars itself and of course was self-propelled. Its "day of glory" occurred when it crashed through the White Russian lines and captured two of their locomotives.
Later it was captured by the Czech Legion, which had gotten trapped in Russia. They used it in eastern Russia to help the White Russians. Somehow Chinese warlords captured it and the Chinese Communists captured it from them. They returned it to the Russian Communists, but Poland captured it in a border war. When WW2 started, the Germans captured it and scrapped it.
Attachments
Hot Water posted:TM Terry posted:dkdkrd posted:If this is a GG1,
Wouldn't this, then, be a G1??
Maybe more correctly, a G1/2 (G one half).
Since the "G" classification in PRR terminology stood for a 4-6-0 wheel arrangement, that photo of half of a GG1, would then indeed be a "G1". One "G" being half of a "GG1".
Not so fast there, Hot Water. We agree that “GG” stands for 4-6-0 back to back. But knowing that the “1” stands for the first design, CLEARLY the sawed in half GG1 is “half” of the first design. Therefore, appropriately called a G1/2.
Vincent Massi posted:
In my never-ending quest for knowledge, I did some more research on this crane car. Another fan of the car built a G scale model, based only on the photograph! He admits that it is partly guesswork, but it shows why the cranes could swing sideways while the counterweight stayed stationary.
Attachments
TM Terry posted:Not so fast there, Hot Water. We agree that “GG” stands for 4-6-0 back to back. But knowing that the “1” stands for the first design, CLEARLY the sawed in half GG1 is “half” of the first design. Therefore, appropriately called a G1/2.
I beg to differ! the One does stand for first design of that wheel arrangement, hence the GG1, first and only class of back-to-back 4-6-0s. But cut it in half, and you have just a 4-6-0 again. But PRR had five classes of 4-6-0, culminating in the G5s. Therefore, this beast, born in a later day, must be a G6.
nickaix posted:TM Terry posted:Not so fast there, Hot Water. We agree that “GG” stands for 4-6-0 back to back. But knowing that the “1” stands for the first design, CLEARLY the sawed in half GG1 is “half” of the first design. Therefore, appropriately called a G1/2.
I beg to differ! the One does stand for first design of that wheel arrangement, hence the GG1, first and only class of back-to-back 4-6-0s. But cut it in half, and you have just a 4-6-0 again. But PRR had five classes of 4-6-0, culminating in the G5s. Therefore, this beast, born in a later day, must be a G6.
Yet mathematically: (GG1)/2, as in cut in half, equals G1/2
Sorry, but my math is sorely wrong. I have embarrassed myself.
I am not a big fan of streamlined steam locomotives, EXCEPT for SP GS4 and GS5s. But the one at the start of this thread is about the worst of streamlined steam.
Attachments
TM Terry posted:nickaix posted:TM Terry posted:Not so fast there, Hot Water. We agree that “GG” stands for 4-6-0 back to back. But knowing that the “1” stands for the first design, CLEARLY the sawed in half GG1 is “half” of the first design. Therefore, appropriately called a G1/2.
I beg to differ! the One does stand for first design of that wheel arrangement, hence the GG1, first and only class of back-to-back 4-6-0s. But cut it in half, and you have just a 4-6-0 again. But PRR had five classes of 4-6-0, culminating in the G5s. Therefore, this beast, born in a later day, must be a G6.
Yet mathematically: (GG1)/2, as in cut in half, equals G1/2
Sorry, but my math is sorely wrong. I have embarrassed myself.
Except it's no longer a locomotive as such, it's an over-glorified snow blower...
Rusty
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Vincent Massi posted:
I believe it's Swiss. I chose the first picture because it's clearer. I have seen a few pictures of it through the years.
Attachments
One of SP's shops built a cab-forward 0-6-0 yard goat. It was a saddle-tanker and was THE coolest switcher I had seen. It was similar to these two, but was actually cab-forward and had a fully-shrouded boiler with the water and fuel tanks. I believe it was built in the San Francisco shops. That would be a cool little locomotive to have in the roster.
>>Not so fast there, Hot Water. We agree that “GG” stands for 4-6-0 back to back. But knowing that the “1” stands for the first design, CLEARLY the sawed in half GG1 is “half” of the first design. Therefore, appropriately called a G1/2.<<
Wouldn't be more appropriate to call it a 1/2GG ?... or a GG0.5 ?
Designed to fire 300 times before wearing out, these cannon needed 1/2 hour per shot, but their all-Navy crews averaged over 150 shots per cannon. So effective that they were used until the end of the war, one of them fired one of the last shots of WW1.
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Looks like a PRR "coast-to-coast" tender without the "doghouse" on the top of the rear deck.
Vincent Massi posted:
Vincent, that's deffo not what happened. The LNER was one of the "Big Four" formed in 1923, and all 4 were nationalised in 1948 to form British Railways.
Cheers, Mark
That PRR long distance tender looks like the one to be used on the upcoming PRR T1 remake. Doug
Man, we have a lot of smart railroaders here! The "coast to coast" tenders didn't literally go from the Atlantic to the Pacific, but they doubled the distance a train could travel without refueling. The Pennsylvania Railroad often used them to move trains quickly over the Appalachian Mountains of the eastern US.
This specific coast to coast tender is the tender for the Pennsylvania Railroad's controversial T1 steam locomotive.
The PRR built 52 of these monsters, none or which lasted more than 10 years. Designed to easily run at 100mph, they were often run faster, causing excessive wear. Their excessive maintenance costs doomed them.
Defenders point out that if the PRR had used them properly, they would have remained as some of the greatest locomotives ever built. However, even if held down to 100 mph, engineers had a hard time controlling the excess power, which produced wheel slippage.
The tenders were sometimes used for other large steam locomotives.
Attachments
I wouldn't buy a model of Japan's D51, but it is an impressive machine. The last one was built in 1945, and some were still in service in the sixties. One is still in service for special trips.
The Russians captured two and kept one in service until 1979.
With over 1,000 built, it is Japan's most mass-produced steam locomotive, and over 100 of them are preserved at various museums and railroad displays.
Attachments
Kent Loudon posted:>>Not so fast there, Hot Water. We agree that “GG” stands for 4-6-0 back to back. But knowing that the “1” stands for the first design, CLEARLY the sawed in half GG1 is “half” of the first design. Therefore, appropriately called a G1/2.<<
Wouldn't be more appropriate to call it a 1/2GG ?... or a GG0.5 ?
I'd call it broken........
Guitarmike posted:Kent Loudon posted:>>Not so fast there, Hot Water. We agree that “GG” stands for 4-6-0 back to back. But knowing that the “1” stands for the first design, CLEARLY the sawed in half GG1 is “half” of the first design. Therefore, appropriately called a G1/2.<<
Wouldn't be more appropriate to call it a 1/2GG ?... or a GG0.5 ?
I'd call it broken........
I'd call it cute.
In fact, there are a lot of engines out there that are "cute"
Pioneer was a cute one, a pleasure to see with my own eyes.
C.P. Huntington is also cute, and is almost a "big brother" to pioneer, at least in my eyes.
Also a pleasure to see with my own eyes.
Vincent Massi posted:Japan used armored trains and railcars during its invasion of China. How many of these would you buy a model of?
Now, THERE are some targets for those PW cannon and missile cars! Kinda silly to shoot at harmless exploding boxcars: make some exploding models of these puppies, and save the world from the nefarious Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere!
I'm not making this up.
During the Japanese invasion of China, a battle took place between an armored Japanese train and an armored Chinese train. Three different versions of the battle emerged.
1) Japanese--We were proceeding peacefully through China when the Chinese launched an unprovoked attack on us, killing the train commander. We fought back courageously, driving the Chinese train into retreat.
2) Nationalist Chinese--We were guarding a railroad station when a Japanese armored train approached, ordering us to leave. We opened fire, killing their commander, but we were outnumbered and forced to retreat.
3) Communist Chinese--Our heroic People's Army ambushed a Japanese train but did not have the equipment to penetrate its armor. Running to the train station, we recruited a Nationalist armored train to join us in the People's struggle. We inflicted a glorious amount of damage to the Imperialists before we chose to withdraw.
Below is a photograph of the Chinese armored train:
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Not exactly. I am supposed to buy a Grand Trunk Western 4-8-4 steam locomotive built by LIMA Locomotive Works, if I were to buy a streamlined steam loco.
Andrew
Attachments
Andrew, I would definitely buy a model of that beauty!
And now:
This became a popular thread on another forum. The guy wanted $4,500 US for it. It is a limited edition Lionel caboose honoring a toys buff convention. There never was a real caboose lettered like this.
Someone joked that he had bought some for $1 apiece and repainted them because they were so ugly. Another person pointed out that counterfeiting the original is not impossible.
So, would you buy it for $1? If you could, would you repaint it? If you could get it at a reasonable price (maybe $10?), would you buy it?
Attachments
Vincent Massi posted:Yes! This magnificent monstrosity is one of four Mercury steam locomotives operated by the New York Central Railroad. Starting in 1936, the last one was retired in the 1970's,
What??????? You mean that a New York Central 4-6-2 steam locomotive lasted into the 1970s???? Please clarify THAT statement.
nope
a face only a mother could love
who was its designer?
I posted an explanation but it didn't "take," so here goes a second try:
"The Mercury train sets were designed by the noted industrial designer Henry Dreyfuss, and are considered a prime example of Art Deco design. "
"A fourth train, the James Whitcomb Riley between Chicago and Cincinnati, used the same design for its train sets and is considered part of the Mercury family, although it did not bear the Mercury name. The Riley debuted in 1941 and lasted into the Amtrak era, though no longer a streamliner" "
Amtrak was "Founded in 1971..."
"The Riley was retained, although it was no longer a streamliner. In 1971, Amtrak combined the Riley with the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway's George Washington."
"Amtrak took over intercity passenger rail service on May 1, 1971. Amtrak kept the George Washington, including both the Washington and Newport News sections. It was combined with the James Whitcomb Riley on July 12, 1971 to provide through service to Chicago"
All quotes are from Wikipedia.
But Hot Water, you might be right. Carefully re-reading these statements, I wonder if the author of these articles didn't accidentally blend the literal locomotive named "James Whitcomb Riley" with the passenger service of the same name. I had understood the original statement to mean that the locomotive itself was removed from streamliner service but was still used for other duties. I cannot find any information on when the locomotive itself was retired.
Meanwhile, I had to add some photos of this magnificent steam locomotive:
Attachments
Dreyfuss? I was afraid you were going to say that. Oh well, I guess after hitting it out of the park with my all time fav the the 20th Century Ltd. there was nowhere to go but down. To me that's one fine example of fugly.
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
I think this is the same train engine that I posted a picture of in the "photo section" asking if it might be an armoured train. Someone identified it as a "Borsig Streamliner". I'm late to the party on this thread, yet I thought the identification of the engine hasn't been yet made.
Red, it's good to hear from you. If you're talking about the loco I think you mean, the consensus is that it is probably a Dutch streamliner from the 1930's. The #2 opinion is that it is a WW2 armored German train.
Dutch streamliner; one of six streamlined locomotives of the Dutch 3700 series:
German streamliner (i.e. not armored), 60 of these were build. Baureihe 03.10:
And a model of the Baureihe 03.10:
There were different types of German streamliners: Baureihe 01.10, 03.10, 05, 61 and more.
I do not have a model of the Dutch streamliner (no-one made a commercially available model).
Regards
Fred
Attachments
Just when I thought you can't make a German steam locomotive more ugly . . . .
I do not know what a Winnebago is, but this is a much modelled SNCF CC 40100 locomotive that was used for the luxury TEE trains in Europe. Models are available in a number of scales by a number of manufacturers. I took this picture when I travelled behind it from Paris to Amsterdam in the seventies:
Regards
Fred
Attachments
>>I do not know what a Winnebago is...
It is a large motor coach designed for camping. Its' front end resembles that of the locomotive.
Attachments
Vincent Massi posted:
Well, they really weren't "stainless steel locomotives", simply CB&Q 4-6-4 Hudsons, with stainless steel shrouds over the boiler & tender, just like the NYC, and many other railroads that had streamlined "shrouded" steam locomotives.
A large caravan brand. It has become as iconic as Kleenex tissues or Q-tip cotton swaps here in the US. This one is kinds small, but has the right nose.(might not be an actual "Winni" either.
A "Winni-llac"? I couldn't ever resist this as a daily driver .... so yea, really...😋 First thing, I'd paint the white turquoise 😱 ...😎
You literally beat me too the Æolus by a day.
While Automobiles and bright metal thoughts are flowing.....
Attachments
Yes !
Spirit of Progress Victorian Railways ...
1948 Maurlyn , made in Sydney Australia , full aluminium body as steel was still expensive due to the war ..
Clockwork 0-6-0 ( in fact I have a few ) also came in electric , but clockwork is mah thang
The DT&I electrics were made in-house with Westinghouse components when Ford owned that, and maybe a few purpose built things that never left the properties. They didn't produce anything that went up for sale to other railroads; that is correct. I never really looked into early DT&I roster, but I doubt they built anything; they barely maintained their track.
Take a look at the whole of the River Rouge Complex on an old Detroit map sometime. It is the prototype for some others that dwarf it today.
Nothing too visually unusual, but these carried their sub-station electricals on board. About 5000hp start, 3500hp at speed.
Yep.
Is there anything "Sassy Grass Green" out there so I can say no? 🤣
Attachments
A switcher built by Ford in 1937 where the grills are similar to the '37 Ford front end.
Scotie posted:A switcher built by Ford in 1937 where the grills are similar to the '37 Ford front end.
Except it was built by GE.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Diese...32ton_ge_center_cab/
Rusty
Rusty Traque posted:Scotie posted:A switcher built by Ford in 1937 where the grills are similar to the '37 Ford front end.
Except it was built by GE.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Diese...32ton_ge_center_cab/
Rusty
Right you are, Rusty. GE redesigned these beauties, with ideas they got from Ford's own 1938 Crown Victoria.
Ford Motor Company owned and operated locomotives, but they never built any.
Hot Water posted:Vincent Massi posted:Well, they really weren't "stainless steel locomotives", simply CB&Q 4-6-4 Hudsons, with stainless steel shrouds over the boiler & tender, just like the NYC, and many other railroads that had streamlined "shrouded" steam locomotives.
Lots of kids had models of these: Flyer made cast versions prewar.
Hey Vincent......if you'd like to see a Model Engine of the same type which started this thread, see the topic of "did you buy/make anything cool lately"....on page 20. Scroll almost to the bottom of the page. Looks like the exact same loco, and it seems the owner posted a few short videos of it running!
Just FYI!!!
RE:Spirit of Progress Victorian Railways ...
A very handsome loco in my opinion. The sloped front end avoids the ugly "inverted bathtub" look and the completely visible spoked drivers give it an image of speed!
Attachments
Nope, not bright green enough to say no ... I could push that around all day too.
I'd actually prefer it over an "identical", yet "pretty".... "modern box". No stories told there. 😕
Plus I can see the insides that are still left.
Attachments
Vincent Massi posted:
Please recheck your math! There is absolutely NO WAY that the Reading Crusader train, let alone that streamlined pacific, operated from 1937 to 1982 (45 years). The Reading Railroad didn't even exists in 1982.
Wikipedia (not always the best source) says “Introduced in 1937, the Crusader service declined during the 1960s. The southern part of the route was cut in 1981, followed by the northern part in 1982.”
Farmer_Bill posted:Wikipedia (not always the best source) says “Introduced in 1937, the Crusader service declined during the 1960s. The southern part of the route was cut in 1981, followed by the northern part in 1982.”
Since the train only operated from the CNJ Jersey City Terminal to Philadelphia, I wonder what they mean by the "southern Part" vs. the "northern part". Also, the Reading Railroad became part of CONRAIL on April 1, 1976, thus ceased to exist.
Adriatic posted:Better question, How long did the Crusader streamliners head the Crusader route vs diesel?Being raised in Cranford, New Jersey, I do remember seeing the steam powered Reading Crusader pass thru on the main line, through the yard area just set of the main passenger station. Since the Crusader did not stop in Cranford, it was going really, REALLY fast, when I, and my dad, first saw it in 1944 and/or 1945. In the early 1950s, long after my dad had passed away, I remember seeing the Crusader with nice looking diesels powering the train. I learned later that those nice looking diesels were EMD FP7s in an A-A MU'ed consist.It seems that is being overlooked at the least, and who ran how much of the train by title , where and when, is another thread for after the day the streamliner ended is accounted for I'd think...that is the subject once settled is most on topic imo.
Adriatic posted:Better question, How long did the Crusader streamliners head the Crusader route vs diesel? It seems that is being overlooked at the least, and who ran how much of the train by title , where and when, is another thread for after the day the streamliner ended is accounted for I'd think...that is the subject once settled is most on topic imo.
From the American Rails website:
"Locomotives No. 117 and No.118 were both kept at the Reading's facilities in Philadelphia. One engine would pull the morning Philadelphia to Jersey City round trip and the other engine would later pull the afternoon round trip.
In 1948, two EMD FP7A diesel-electric engines replaced the two streamlined steam locomotives. Both steam engines had their streamlining removed and were placed on other assignments. In 1950 the two Pacifics were retired and replaced by more EMD FP7A diesels."
Rusty
We're learning. This is the second or third time that I have blended the name of a locomotive with the name of the rail service.
I stated, correctly, that "...the Crusader had streamlined locomotives..." and then showed three pictures of streamlined Crusader steam engines. I meant that the Crusader train service had streamlined locomotives, but failed to explain that they eventually replaced their Steam locos with others.
The EMD-FP7A was a streamlined diesel locomotive that replaced the streamlined steam locomotives. A photo is below, but there were slightly different versions. This is a 1968 diesel-electric Crusader.
Attachments
In their final years during the 1960's, the trains bearing the names Crusader and Wall Street were RDC's that ran through from Newark (via the Aldene connection) to Reading Terminal.
Kent Loudon posted:In their final years during the 1960's, the trains bearing the names Crusader and Wall Street were RDC's that ran through from Newark (via the Aldene connection) to Reading Terminal.
Thus,,,,,,,,,,they were no longer "streamlined".
Attachments
Hot Water posted:
Hot Water, you could be right. Two sites have posted this photo as a "Pennsylvania Railroad. Streamlined 4-6-4, Hudson type (PRR Class P6), along the lines of the P5a electrics." But it does not resemble the P5s at all. Nor does it resemble the Hudsons. And I cannot find any listing of a PRR Class P6.
I'm impressed.
Vincent Massi posted:Hot Water posted:Hot Water you are correct.
Two sites have posted this photo as a "Pennsylvania Railroad. Streamlined 4-6-4, Hudson type (PRR Class P6), along the lines of the P5a electrics." But it does not resemble the P5s at all. Nor does it resemble the Hudsons. And I cannot find any listing of a PRR Class P6.
Researching farther, a fellow on Deviant Art claims to have invented it. It seems that the PRR didn't like the 4-6-4 arrangement because it did not provide enough traction for the mountainous sections of Pennsylvania. So this fellow designed (on paper) a steam locomotive using the 4-6-4 arrangement that could succeed in those areas.
Hot Water, I'm impressed.
Aeolus AEOLUS
Vincent Massi posted:Vincent Massi posted:Hot Water posted:Hot Water you are correct.
Two sites have posted this photo as a "Pennsylvania Railroad. Streamlined 4-6-4, Hudson type (PRR Class P6), along the lines of the P5a electrics." But it does not resemble the P5s at all. Nor does it resemble the Hudsons. And I cannot find any listing of a PRR Class P6.
Researching farther, a fellow on Deviant Art claims to have invented it. It seems that the PRR didn't like the 4-6-4 arrangement because it did not provide enough traction for the mountainous sections of Pennsylvania. So this fellow designed (on paper) a steam locomotive using the 4-6-4 arrangement that could succeed in those areas.
Hot Water, I'm impressed.
For what it's worth, the PRR never had any 4-6-4 nor 4-8-4 wheel arrangements in their steam locomotive fleet. The electric locomotive fleet consisted of the P5 class of 4-6-4s and only one R class 4-8-4, which the PRR deemed "un-successful" also, and subsequently had the GG-1 developed/built.
Attachments
There was no Pennsylvania Power & Light railroad per se. Someone decided that it was dangerous to have coal-burning locomotives in power plants, so they used "fireless locomotives" powered by compressed air or compressed super-heated water. They were safer and actually cheaper to operate if you were near a large stationary boiler to keep supplying compressed air or water to the switchyard.
The largest fireless locomotive ever built, this magnificent machine served for thirty years before being retired in 1969.
Although replaced by diesel or electric locomotives, fireless locomotives are making a small comeback. Diesel switchers are idle 90% of the time, but must keep their engines running, so sometimes a fireless locomotive is cheaper to operate.
Attachments
I've done a lot of pneumatic work. 4 trades worth 😶
And blue, is my favorite color... no wait! 😱.. ahhhhhhh ...
"not green"
In fact, I'd like to see that made for sure. I'm pretty sure it even gets requested by somebody every once in a while "wish" threads.
Attachments
Too funny the actual "ahhhh" of the Monty Python movie quote sounds like "yellow" if you listen close.
For winters in PA without a firebox I'd like the closed cab; but the open cab is always more elegant imo.
"not green enough"
Attachments
The Märklin version only costs Euro 12.000: https://www.ebay.de/itm/Clix-3...rksid=p2047675.l2557
Regards
Fred
UNAmerican Type ?
Attachments
In my opinion, Lionel's 1957 decision to issue a girls' train set was an intelligent risk that didn't work out.
Made with excellent quality, the set was an attempt to get more girls (more customers) into model trains. And Lionel learned from its failure: girls who like trains like realistic trains.
Unsold sets were repainted, cutting Lionel's losses. The original sets are collectors' items.
Attachments
Japan's 9600 series of locomotives were manufactured from 1913 to 1939, according to contradictory sources. Japan's first mass-produced locomotive, they were heavily exported to Taiwan and China. During WW2, some of them were seized and then re-seized. About 770 were made, not counting the ones rebuilt from scrap and spare parts.
Attachments
Ok, the pink and purple sections of the train would be shelf queens; you finally got me... The yellow, blue, green is actually suitable; it reminds me of sun faded cars.
But I might use a trojan for Slinky weiner dog pulling 🙄🤔😣🤣
The Japanese classics are a unique bit of N. Amer. & Euro flavor combo I've always liked.
There are clubs for the real MOW putt-putt speeders. I always wanted to do that or velocipede around for a bit.
I used to put weedwacker motors as friction drive cruising motors on my old bicycles; Solex style. About 25-30mph & about 70mpg.
...and a guy I rent a room to has 3-70mph mini-bikes (a few original "slow" ones) and a half dozen hopped up motors kicking around 3hp B&S to 6hp-Honda's with headwork, race clutch, race carbs/exhuast, etc
....I'll be needing a railcart with wheelie bars too as my choice of air cooled motors would be a 1200 to 1500cc "Beetle-ee" engine from VW
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Ok, you got me. Too "stealthy" 😝
...and not enough people😐
..on the roof 🤣
Then again.. it would make a great head end on a train of milk cars.🤔
"Got Any?"
I'll just leave this here.
TheRWBYRailfan posted:I'll just leave this here.
Well...
Rusty
Attachments
Attachments
Rusty Traque posted:Well...
Rusty
"The Earl-y Train"?
( Squid-billy.... Anyone? )
Adriatic posted:TheRWBYRailfan posted:I'll just leave this here.
Why not bring it here? Ol' Casey Jr would be a very welcome extra.
Where did you find that shot?
@p51 I figured that one was comin' 😐
So I added more yellows under it's jacket to get it to pop some more 😳
...🤣
Some friends of mine found it on the Casey Jr page on the Disney Fandom wiki. They're not the clearest pictures but until the movie hits DVD/Blu-Ray this is th best we got of Tim Burton's take on our childhood anthropomorphic steamer.
Attachments
Any preserved?
Kent Loudon posted:Any preserved?
Kent, this photo was taken in 1984. https://commons.wikimedia.org/...h_Australia-1984.jpg
Locomotive.wiki reports that both this and another one still exist but are not running: https://locomotive.fandom.com/...n_Railways_520_Class
So what is it's current status?
Kent Loudon posted:So what is it's current status?
Kent, after it spent years in storage, a group started working on restoring it. The other one is a permanent static display at a museum.
Attachments
Doctors Who's arch enemy the Dereliks...derlocks...
Dalek me thinks.
der something... funny looking things
This bizarre Russian "mallet" locomotive is actually a good idea. After high-pressure steam turns the driving wheels, some of it is still not liquefied. This re-cycled steam is then used to drive a second set of drive wheels. The second set could be in front of or behind the main drive wheels. Sometimes, the second set was on the tender.
After WW2, trying to compete with diesel, some US railroads built powerful mallet locomotives.
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Vincent Massi posted:In my opinion, Lionel's 1957 decision to issue a girls' train set was an intelligent risk that didn't work out.
Made with excellent quality, the set was an attempt to get more girls (more customers) into model trains. And Lionel learned from its failure: girls who like trains like realistic trains.
Unsold sets were repainted, cutting Lionel's losses. The original sets are collectors' items.
Remember well a local "bicycle shop" that also carried Lionel Trains had one of these. My father took me in to look at this for possible gift from "Santa" needless to say I pitched a fit and Santa delivered a 2046 freight set instead!! I have wondered more than once as to who ended up with it as it was gone after Christmas that year!
Attachments
No idea where this is, but an Americanized version would look at home on a whimsical layout:
p51 posted:No idea where this is, but an Americanized version would look at home on a whimsical layout:
That beast is a Kitson-Meyer articulated, once popular in South America. FOTC is a Peruvian railroad, and forum member David Argent has built an O gauge version of this type.
Vincent Massi posted:
I think those New Zealand tramways had some interesting Frankenstein lokeys running! They would make some eyecatcher models.
Firewood, that is an excellent video of a fantastic locomotive! I was also impressed by the interesting layout.