|
|
 Posted - March 06 2012 : 5:46:37 PM
|
Hey guys:
While doing laundry today and reading a book on Neuroplasticity (you'll see where I'm going with this in a minute) my mind got a little too plastic itself and I was thinking about an article Tony (GIC) has on his website
http://goingincirclez.com/RRmodels/FlexiFlow
where he took what was little more than a "toy" rail car (AHM Flexi-Flow) and made it into a very convincing scale representation of a very specific car.
So as I sat there I was thinking what criteria could be used to decide on whether something is worth the time and effort.
Warning: If you don't like talking about model trains looking a great deal like their prototypical counterparts don't waste your time on this thread, it's not for you.
Having said that I have come up with two elements:
1) the profile; does it look at least modestly like something real and approaching an attempt at scale.
2) Stirrup steps. they are often modelled way too large for the scale intended. They can be replaced, but good scale replacement ones are not cheap. Some original "heavy" ones or even "filled in" ones can be improved by judicious handiwork such as drilling and filing...
Anyway go have a look at Tony's hopper and if you have something to contribute C'mon back and share your idea....
Oh and the Neuroplasticity; well thats about the brain retraining itself, making parts over as it were,,,, 
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
Edited by - romcat on March 06 2012 7:35:25 PM
|
Country:  Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 06 2012 : 8:58:25 PM
|
Gareth-
I took a look at the article you cited and found that it was the kind of research and careful attention to detail that I aspire to! What we hands-on modelers should do is start a sub-forum here on this fine website dedicated to projects that involve serious R&D, as Tony accomplished.
I would think that even the inexpensive Model Power cars have potential, not to mention the BBs and others many of us have picked up at flea markets/shows. Every time I consider a new project, I am comforted by the knowledge that there are others like me who view this type of activity as an integral part of the hobby.
The unfortunate reality these days is that the prevalence of RTR cars, however well-detailed, represents a turn-key approach that makes hands-on modelers a diminishing breed.
If for no other reason than the intellectual satisfaction of learning about the prototype origins of such cars as Tony built, stuff like this is great for the mind and hand.
I don't want to diminish those that collect for the sake of collecting, or who buy RTR and feel they lack the skill sets required to improve or restore old stuff, but building is the soul of the hobby (also applied to structure, scenery as well), and keeps us on the original track from which model railroading began.
Just some random(ized) thoughts in reaction to your post.
And as for neuroplasticity, anything that staves off "old-timers" disease in the future (such as car building/restoration) just HAS to be healthy!!!!!
Siouxlake/Ron
|
Country:  USA ~
Posts: 510 ~
Member Since: September 21 2011 ~
Last Visit: December 21 2014
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
 Posted - March 06 2012 : 9:11:47 PM
|
Hey Ron:
There is endless research that beyond good diet, some moderate excercise that "crafting" or "building" in fact halts metal deterioration as we age. If it's challenging that is what causes our brains to use new neurons and synapses. I say "Live forever, Or die trying!"
Anyway, what I was going to suggest it might be fun to pick a car like Tony used, hopefully one most of us have and do a "Reality Project" on them. We can age them, enhance them etc.... We already have the Kitbashing section so all we need to do is pick a common car to work on. One of the Pennsy Yahoo Modelling groups does this...
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 06 2012 : 9:17:46 PM
|
What fun is seeing a loco, car or other equipment at a museum or a park & try to find that exact loco Model it & run it
That Flexi-Flo car is pretty neat how it was detailed 
Tho I'm not one for true to life stuff I'd rather do fantasy stuff Like BnL on the side of a boxcar (Think Wall-E  ) or some long gone railroad on a modern loco a "what-if" type
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 14697 ~
Member Since: February 23 2009 ~
Last Visit: May 18 2024
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 06 2012 : 9:28:21 PM
|
Then Ben, don't worry about this thread.
Lot's of threads here for you to comment on.
This is about modelling, not collecting.
Have fun.
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 06 2012 : 9:31:17 PM
|
Then there is the need to counter the ruinous effects of teaching high school hormones, I mean, students... Thankfully, spring break starts 9 March for a week, and then it's choo choo city for me!
Seriously, are you thinking of a group effort, where several of us contribute research, parts, paint scheme concepts to a common finished item,
Or...a competitive effort individually, revolving around a mutually agreed-to item, such as a bay window caboose or a tank car?
Ron
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 510 ~
Member Since: September 21 2011 ~
Last Visit: December 21 2014
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 06 2012 : 9:33:47 PM
|
First off, if you ask me, any effort to kitbash is more fun and beneficial , maybe even therapeutic than buying a RTR. Getting the ol' noggin working with the hands is a significant part of this hobby. Maybe any hobby.
Second, is the project unique. In other words, not available from a retail source. Finishing up with a unique car and/or roadname is icing on the cake.
Another element could be molded on railings. By sanding off molded on handrails and bending and installing your own, provides an inexpensive and remarkable effect on appearance.
That's my contribution to this brainstorming. What you think?
Unspoken expectations are premeditated failures.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 825 ~
Member Since: December 22 2008 ~
Last Visit: March 16 2015
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 06 2012 : 9:36:20 PM
|
I was thinking we'd choose a car, like the three dome Tyco Tank car, and see what we could each do to make it look more realistic.
Or,
a 40' BB Box car and see what each of us could do. A kind of round table. We could use a poll to determine the car or category say any basic manufacturers 4-' BC and then we'd go to work... compare, round table it etc. ....
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 06 2012 : 9:42:27 PM
|
Hey NCS,
I think you are getting in the sprit of things!
You can also "shadow" the cast on handhols on the side of a box car and make them appear to be offset from the side....
On Tony's Hopper, the walkways stand out because they are see through...
I remember reading just recently that the typical model RR operator stands three feet from what they are operating and that is 261 SCALE feet. So what detail on the real thing can be seen at 261'? I think detail at that level seems a good practical standard to me, unless it's a "special effort" project...
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
Edited by - romcat on March 06 2012 9:46:07 PM
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 06 2012 : 9:44:52 PM
|
I just happen to have a three dome tank car, I do believe!!!!!
And, it came from a flea-bitten flea market visit a few years ago!
I have one of those "The Railroad Press" subscription postcards inserts from a Walthers monthly sales brochure. Let me scan it and upload it onto this thread. See what you think!
Give me 10 minutes...
Ron
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 510 ~
Member Since: September 21 2011 ~
Last Visit: December 21 2014
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 06 2012 : 9:58:01 PM
|
Here is a DUPX fuel tank car image that I mentioned a few minutes ago. I think I also found some aditional ones on Railroad Pictures.net as well, as I have this on my back burner of idea projects.
(whew- first I tried uploading it as it's original file size of 1.16Mb )
Interesting features are the all around railing, the dual-color scheme, the see-thru dome treadway, and the fittings fore and aft near the edges of the platform and near the base ends of the tank.
When I saw this one, I thought that it looked quite unique apart from other tank cars.
It's getting to bedtime for me, I will check back tomorrow....
Ron
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 510 ~
Member Since: September 21 2011 ~
Last Visit: December 21 2014
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 06 2012 : 10:04:48 PM
|
Hey Ron:
BT for me too. I have that exact Tank car in HO.
Dupont Chemical car.... slight differences.
It's a Yugoslavian AHM model.
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
Edited by - romcat on March 06 2012 11:50:14 PM
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 07 2012 : 12:41:51 PM
|
Better Yet- I went searching for additional images of the DUPX tank car from the earlier post and found this! An 8-wheel DUPX anti-freeze tank car:
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 510 ~
Member Since: September 21 2011 ~
Last Visit: December 21 2014
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 07 2012 : 12:51:15 PM
|
This would require either two larger or three smaller tank cars, modification of the frame to accept additional trucks, but looks very do-able. Not to mention, large-radius track curves!
Ron
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 510 ~
Member Since: September 21 2011 ~
Last Visit: December 21 2014
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 07 2012 : 8:11:21 PM
|
You could just use one tank car. Cut it in half and install a plug to make up the total length.
The plug or center extension can be made on a lathe out of a PVC pipe or some other material.
I'll have to mull it over on the material. I'd be willing to turn the piece on the lathe.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 825 ~
Member Since: December 22 2008 ~
Last Visit: March 16 2015
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 07 2012 : 8:23:29 PM
|
I had more of a detaiing and weathering thing in mind for an existing Tyco/Mantua etc. Car.....
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 07 2012 : 8:40:30 PM
|
| That may be more practical. Have you got a photo of the candidate.? That is of the actual HO model.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 825 ~
Member Since: December 22 2008 ~
Last Visit: March 16 2015
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 07 2012 : 9:14:31 PM
|
Hey NCS:
I was hoping that people would vote for a 'car" something common, like a 40' Box Car by AHM/Bachmann/Tyco/Mantua/Athearn ones that clearly need some work.
so people do nomination's then I'll put up a poll question so people can vote and then each week we post progress or each month, we can discuss that... That's it. Not wildly grand but fun....
Many of us have scanned articles we can send to anyone involved who requests them...
Anyway thats the Idea.....
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
Edited by - romcat on March 07 2012 9:51:46 PM
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 07 2012 : 11:13:02 PM
|
I personally like the idea...
and on the boxar subject does anyone know if branchline still makes roofs and ends?
just me Ray... and just because I have Tyco doesn't mean I am not a model railroader
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 506 ~
Member Since: April 03 2011 ~
Last Visit: April 20 2023
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 08 2012 : 03:26:29 AM
|
The Four-Trucked Tanker...
Get an estimate of it's length, use two 62' Athearn tank cars for length, centering the mid-top valve assembly, and get an Athearn 'Heavy-Duty' flatcar with the double tangent trucks...
Violen, er, voila... VWALA! You now own the big DUPY Tankcar.
Kadees... P2K 36" wheels... on... and on...
John
p.s. About the Flexi-Flo car...
"...Only a couple hundred Flexi-Flos were built, in two different batches, all for the New York Central RR. Since they were so specialized and only owned by one ..."
"...The car number on the end does not match the one on the side (which incidentally makes the photo a rare piece of evidence of a major shop goof)..."
My observation... noting the end number and quote about "the shop goof"...
In the first picture, there is also a different number from that which is on the side.
# 3*7 and # 359... I am guessing that the end numbers identified the batch sequence and not the official Road or Car numbers.
I don't have a one track mind. It depends on the turn-out.
"I love your catenary!"
Is that a power-trip or just another pick-up line?
Edited by - zebrails on March 08 2012 04:06:02 AM
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 1124 ~
Member Since: December 15 2006 ~
Last Visit: January 30 2023
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 08 2012 : 2:07:01 PM
|
Most of the earlier Tyco/Mantua stuff was fairly accurate (if aggregate) compared to prototypes of the day. That said, I'm sure there are specific prototypes out there that were "close, but different".
The AHM Flexi-Flo was a obvious candidate because it suffered from some serious errors - arguably worse than anything Tyco ever did. I'd say their Tri-dome tanker, 60' High Cube, and Center Flow hoppers have the biggest problems. But with the exception of the tri-dome, the other two are represented by better models one could start with.
It might be fun to see who could upgrade the Tri-dome into a more convincing and plausible model. Tyco themselves had planned a better one originally.
Maybe take the old Life-Like "Linde Gases" boxcar, and make it into the tank car (yes, indeed) it actually was. There were fittings and such on the ends, a tank was inside the box.
Take the Bachmann "Humane Livestock Car" and upgrade the details to something more realistic?
I'm seriously thinking of making a Liquid Argon tanker out of some Athearn 62' donors.... once (if) time allows...
Possibilities are endless...
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 2798 ~
Member Since: September 17 2010 ~
Last Visit: July 22 2015
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 08 2012 : 10:38:57 PM
|
/tyco/forum/uploaded/romcat/20120308223842_9353e0ef0c165fa5_large.jpg
LAPX is a GATX reporting mark for Linde Air Products, Lessee
"....there were 283 "XT" type cars, nos. 101-499, listed under General American. (The "XT" designation stood for a tank inside a box car, used to carry liquified gases.) This green and white scheme was adopted later in the '50's.
Hendrickson said Linde had a sizable fleet of box tank cars - box cars with liquid oxygen tanks inside - and this is one of them. They leased cars both from General American and AC&F/Shippers Car Line. The LAPX cars like this one were owned and operated by General American, while the cars leased from Shippers Car Line carried SERX reporting marks. Though these cars were of AAR standard design (1932 specs with 9 ft. 4 in. IH in the case of the LAPX cars, 1937 specs. with 10 ft. 0 ins. IH in the case of the SERX cars), they were "beefed up" to 70 tons nominal capacity (note the full length side sill reinforcements on LAPX 273) because the tanks they carried were very heavy, especially when loaded.
Also, Linde's box cars had small doors in the lower sections of the ends to provide access to internal valves and piping, as well as small round filler plugs in the roof near the centre of the car.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=348533&nseq=14
Love it!
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
Edited by - romcat on March 08 2012 11:01:09 PM
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 08 2012 : 11:33:57 PM
|
so why would they put a tank car in a boxcar???
just me Ray... and just because I have Tyco doesn't mean I am not a model railroader
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 506 ~
Member Since: April 03 2011 ~
Last Visit: April 20 2023
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 09 2012 : 01:23:48 AM
|
Couple of side notes Tony,
You didn't mention what details/criteria you think make for a crucial basis for an ugradeable piece of rolling stock.....
As mentioned; for me te stirrup steps, but also the Talgo draft/coupler box has to go....
That three domer Tank we discussed so long ago, I've always though that the tank car should be finished in a way that explained it configuration by the kind of loading/unloading station it would have???
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
Edited by - romcat on March 09 2012 3:18:03 PM
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 09 2012 : 4:26:43 PM
|
quote:| You didn't mention what details/criteria you think make for a crucial basis for an ugradeable piece of rolling stock..... Originally posted by romcat - March 09 2012 : 01:23:48 AM
|
There's no stock criteria; it really depends on what you want and what you're starting with.
The Flexi-Flow was comprehensive because of several factors. The original deficiencies included horrible roofwalks, incorrect hatches, and unrecognizable grabs: fixing any one of those (let alone all three) would make a kitbash, and that's not even all that was wrong. Yet, I suppose leaving those problems while adding enhanced details and paint would still constitute an improvement. Doubtlessly, many have been repainted as-is for the NYC, et al over the years. Gotta start somewhere.
I kitbashed a Chessie Canstock car using the Athearn PS5344 as a base. Are there better cars to start from? Are there extra details I could have added? Yes, possibly. There's even an old Ambroid kit. But after hacking up the side panels and leaving most of the original details alone, mine is dang close enough do do the job. Is it as impressive overall as the Flexi-Flo? That's subjective. It required less work, but of an entirely different nature. The paint and weathering was not as intense. But the "end result", in a manner of speaking, is the same - it looks like a photo to a degree not available in the mass market.
Atlas and Intermountain and Athean covered hoppers used nice plastic roofwalks for years. Now etched-metal is the price of admission: yesterday's Plano parts kitbash is the new RTR. I kitbashed an SD45, almost scratchbuilt in some ways. But I bet many modelers would be hard-pressed to notice the difference from other high-end RTR models. Some have even said my STC locos look factory painted - the name is the only clue they aren't. Point being: sometimes quality work, even extensive work, isn't so obvious.
Personally, enhanced stirrups and bodymounted couplers are just a start. But if that's all it takes to make a nice model, sometimes having the eye that knows when to stop is its own talent. Still, when it comes to skill and bragging rights, "the more the merrier". Replace roofwalks, correct deficiencies, or make an entirely new/different but similar car using a close base... that's a kitbash to sink one's teeth into.
For instance, your DUPX tanker at a glance looks very very similar to the standard Tyco model. Not much needs to be changed. Maybe just paint and a bent ladder - many would be satisfied there. But the dome is different - after fixing stirrups, grabs, and couplers, there's your key enhancement.
It all starts and depends on finding a car / prototype / photo that makes you say "Hey! I want that! But nobody makes it, so I better do it myself!" Ergo, you now have a problem - kitbashing is the solution. The degree required is entirely subjective.
That's probably not the quick answer you wanted.... 
Edited by - spiderj76 on March 09 2012 4:30:38 PM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 2798 ~
Member Since: September 17 2010 ~
Last Visit: July 22 2015
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 09 2012 : 4:59:12 PM
|
Hey Tony:
This is me, Gareth remember. When's the last time you heard me ask for an abridged answer?
quote:
I kitbashed a Chessie Canstock car using the Athearn PS5344 as a base. Are there better cars to start from? Are there extra details I could have added? Yes, possibly. There's even an old Ambroid kit. But after hacking up the side panels and leaving most of the original details alone, mine is dang close enough do do the job. Is it as impressive overall as the Flexi-Flo? That's subjective. It required less work, but of an entirely different nature. The paint and weathering was no |
Do you have a pic of this?
I see KBing on two levels. One is the 3ft model where you want to eliminate glaring shortcomings like solid walkways on tankcars & covered hopper roofs, and then there is the RPM level where you are trying to model a specific car seriously close to the prototype...
On the tanker, I think replacing the dome with a larger one and a larger platform would definitely be an enhancement.
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
Edited by - romcat on March 13 2012 09:31:46 AM
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 13 2012 : 3:33:30 PM
|
quote:
quote:
I kitbashed a Chessie Canstock car... |
Do you have a pic of this?
|
Several (but old):
I photographed the CSX one in Cumberland in 2002, then found out what it was and kitbashed it a year later.
Essentially the bash boils down to cutting the sides of the boxcar into thirds and swapping the panels, but there's some quirks owing to the door being offset to the "B" end, which means the panels aren't identical and you have to scratch build some ribs, as well as relocate the door latch hardware to the other edge of the door on one side of the car. Not too difficult... but not as easy as it appears. Especially to cut the panels without destroying the roof. I took some progress shots back in the day but they were terrible.
quote:I see KBing on two levels. One is the 3ft model where you want to eliminate glaring shortcomings like solid walkways on tankcars & covered hopper roofs, and then there is the RPM level where you are trying to model a specific car seriously close to the prototype...
On the tanker, I think replacing the dome with a larger one and a larger platform would definitely be an enhancement.
Originally posted by romcat - March 09 2012 : 4:59:12 PM |
I see what you're saying, but I would argue that if one is going to change the shortcomings, why not take it all the way to the "RPM" level? On the other hand, one has to start somewhere. Like I said, the Canstock project was nowhere near as difficult as the Flexi-flow, but either one is a respectable model in its own right. You just have to know what you're looking at.
Edited by - spiderj76 on March 13 2012 3:39:26 PM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 2798 ~
Member Since: September 17 2010 ~
Last Visit: July 22 2015
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 13 2012 : 3:39:14 PM
|
Hey Tony:
Thanks for your reply.... Curious door configuration? Any idea why?
I have a couple of "Volunteers" I'll photo and put up here for you to see and others to discuss what might make them better generally....
As noted. I see two levels; the RPM idea, a specific car or class and also the, "it's a nice enough thing to upgrade some...
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
Edited by - romcat on March 13 2012 3:39:53 PM
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - May 22 2012 : 11:37:11 PM
|
Reawaken Thread....
-Gareth
"A is A"
-Aristotle
Law of Identification
|
|
Country: Canada ~
Posts: 4200 ~
Member Since: January 08 2006 ~
Last Visit: November 09 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
Home
Forums
Events Calendar
Forum Admins & Mods
Register
