Re: Kadee Trucks
Andy Sperandeo <asperandeo@...>
I've tried a couple pair of the recent Kadee trucks, and I like them as much as Richard does. I've replaced the wheelsets, however, because I prefer a combination of metal axles and "code 88" wheels. - Andy
Andy Sperandeo Executive Editor Model Railroader magazine asperandeo@mrmag.com 262-796-8776, ext. 461 FAX 262-796-1142
|
|
Re: Necessary Freight cars (UNCLASSIFIED)
armprem2 <armprem2@...>
Hear hear.Well put.Armand Premo
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
----- Original Message -----
From: Gatwood, Elden SAW To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 7:57 AM Subject: RE: [STMFC] Necessary Freight cars (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Andy; > A solid data package will go a long way to advance the possibility of > a model being produced. >>No doubt, but ........I've already talk to Exactrail and Tangent, they didn't seem to be very interested. The larger manufacturers like Athearn, Walthers, Atlas, already have a lot of coal hoppers in their lines already... ditto Bowser. Intermountain I haven't talked to about it, oddly enough, it's kind of up their alley - they have done a bunch of covered hoppers (albeit only one steam/transition era), and not a single coal hopper. You bring up another good point, and I have talked to a number of manufacturers about it; what type of cars sell best and get the most interest. This is the inevitable answer: Box cars, box cars, box cars; Covered hoppers Gondolas and flat cars Open hoppers bringing up the rear. There is a lot of speculation on why, including: RTR open hoppers are extremely costly to assemble, don't sell as well as other car types, and have big differences between RRs that render them applicable to only a handful of roads. Open hopper kits are "hard to assemble", and other reasons above. So, the answer we get, repeatedly, on the "why don't we have an alternate standard twin offset hopper" is: a) many detail differences between RRs, b) not enough major roads for one version to warrant doing one, c) people don't really buy a lot of open hoppers compared to other projects we could do that would do better, and d)... Richard Hendrickson won't buy any of them. I don't buy all of this, even the part about Richard, and will continue to work with open-minded manufacturers on ANY project that might benefit us. I also have hope we will see an alternate standard twin offset hopper in HO, just probably not RTR. Elden Gatwood Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE ____________________________________________________________ Groupon™ Official Site 1 ridiculously huge coupon a day. Get 50-90% off your city's best! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4da6ff6a6b4ae70810st04duc
|
|
Re: Branchline kit 1500 or equvilant
Larry Sexton
Does anyone have a Branchline 40' Postwar AAR boxcar kit with an 8' door
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
they are willing to sell or have an idea where I might locate one? There may be a similar decorated BL kit with an 8' door that will work as well for creating the EJ&E 1941 10'06 boxcar if someone has a suggestion. The 8' door appears to be the key restriction. Larry Sexton From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim O'Connor Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 4:29 AM To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Kadee Trucks I usually use .088 Reboxx as well. But one thing I've noticed with Kadee/Proto/Branchline wheels is that they do not perform equally. I usually get better rolling performance with P2K wheels than with Kadee. The axles are not made exactly alike and may use different material. Kinda moot now... the HGC trucks are just so much better, than I hope I can eventually trade up to those and sell the metal Kadee trucks on Ebay. Tim O'
I have used Reboxx wheel sets successfully in Kadee trucks. Be aware they
|
|
Re: Necessary Freight cars
On Apr 13, 2011, at 11:36 PM, Andy Harman wrote:
At 10:53 PM 4/13/2011 -0500, you wrote:And yet, somehow, some of us still manage to put together informationA solid data package will go a long way to advance theNo doubt, but not all of us are employed in model RR R&D, nor for manufacturers, review their drawings and test shots AND get some modeling of our done too... It is, in reality, a matter of priorities that you set for yourself, and the efficient use of your time. Regards Bruce Bruce F. Smith Auburn, AL https://www5.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/ "Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield." __ / \ __<+--+>________________\__/___ ________________________________ |- ______/ O O \_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ | | / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 \ | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__|| |/_____________________________\|_|________________________________| | O--O \0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0
|
|
Re: Kadee Trucks
Rossiter, Mark W <Mark.Rossiter@...>
Reboxx wheelsets are by far the best I have used, in any type of
sideframe. I suspect that part of the reason for their success is the needle point axle has a much, much smaller surface area than a Kadee axle, meaning less opportunity for friction (resistance), as minute as it might be. I replaced the caboose trucks on a few of my older brass models with the swing-motion trucks Kadee now offers in their HCG material. I was concerned about using double insulated axles versus single-insulated axles, but it turns out I had nothing to worry about. The new HCG material is not conductive like Kadee's traditional metal sideframe trucks are. Single insulated axles work just fine. - - Mark
|
|
Re: Necessary Freight cars (UNCLASSIFIED)
Gatwood, Elden J SAD
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE Andy; A solid data package will go a long way to advance the possibility ofdidn't seem to be very interested. The larger manufacturers like Athearn, Walthers, Atlas, already have a lot of coal hoppers in their lines already... ditto Bowser. Intermountain I haven't talked to about it, oddly enough, it's kind of up their alley - they have done a bunch of covered hoppers (albeit only one steam/transition era), and not a single coal hopper. You bring up another good point, and I have talked to a number of manufacturers about it; what type of cars sell best and get the most interest. This is the inevitable answer: Box cars, box cars, box cars; Covered hoppers Gondolas and flat cars Open hoppers bringing up the rear. There is a lot of speculation on why, including: RTR open hoppers are extremely costly to assemble, don't sell as well as other car types, and have big differences between RRs that render them applicable to only a handful of roads. Open hopper kits are "hard to assemble", and other reasons above. So, the answer we get, repeatedly, on the "why don't we have an alternate standard twin offset hopper" is: a) many detail differences between RRs, b) not enough major roads for one version to warrant doing one, c) people don't really buy a lot of open hoppers compared to other projects we could do that would do better, and d)... Richard Hendrickson won't buy any of them. I don't buy all of this, even the part about Richard, and will continue to work with open-minded manufacturers on ANY project that might benefit us. I also have hope we will see an alternate standard twin offset hopper in HO, just probably not RTR. Elden Gatwood Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE
|
|
Re: Necessary Freight cars (UNCLASSIFIED)
Gatwood, Elden J SAD
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE Rob; I can tell you about a recent experience, but not who. A manufacturer told me that they had exceeded the 100k mark at the "draft final" stage of CADD development, and that was with largely gratis research on the unit and RR differences and details over time and such. The CADD had a lot of things incorporated to allow the parts to be assembled assembly-line fashion, so it was not a matter of doing general arrangement drawings, but an almost step-by-step guide from part to final assembly. Jack and Richard are absolutely correct; The best that I, a non-manufacturer can do, to encourage a product (and I have encouraged a lot of them), is supply the manufacturer with data on where to get plans (or provide them), details, appearance over time, painting and lettering diagrams, photos, RR usage, advice on detail parts, and all that stuff. Their level of knowledge is so far beyond mine from that point forth, it takes folks trained in CADD, kit manufacture and many other skills to realize the product. The hard part is convincing them to do it.... Elden Gatwood P.S. Be on the lookout for some new HO-scale kits you will like! ItI've been reading through this thread - resin kits, necessary cars, etc. makes me wonder about the breakdown of a manufacturer's costs. For a manufacturer of injection molded styrene cars, how much is spent developing CAD drawings in HO scale - would a manufacturer be appreciative of well done drawings if a hobbyist generated them and handed them over gratis? While I'm not claiming the ability to create such drawings, I wonder what it would take to be able to produce something useful? For a few months I've been messing around with scale 3D drawings of prototype cars I've measured. I've sent the drawings to Shapeways to generate HO parts. I'm not really keen on what I get back - still too course resolution for a lot of modelling needs, although there is potential. But it makes me wonder - if I have fun creating drawings for that limited purpose, would they be of value to a manufacturer? Or puting it another way - where would they have to be different to be useful to a manufacturer? For example, if I knew more about draft angles, I could build them in. I'm sure there are other technical requirements I've no competence to even assess. But it makes me wonder - would useful CAD drawings substantially reduce a manufacturer's costs and make some projects more viable? Rob Kirkham -------------------------------------------------- From: "Anthony Thompson" <thompson@signaturepress.com <mailto:thompson%40signaturepress.com> > Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 3:45 PM To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> > Subject: Re: [STMFC] Necessary Freight cars Jack Burgess wrote:<mailto:thompson%40signaturepress.com>But to make our requests more attractive, it might be helpful toJack (and Richard Hendrickson) make a good point: most Publishers of books on railroad history Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE
|
|
Re: Kadee Trucks
I usually use .088 Reboxx as well. But one thing I've noticed with
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Kadee/Proto/Branchline wheels is that they do not perform equally. I usually get better rolling performance with P2K wheels than with Kadee. The axles are not made exactly alike and may use different material. Kinda moot now... the HGC trucks are just so much better, than I hope I can eventually trade up to those and sell the metal Kadee trucks on Ebay. Tim O'
I have used Reboxx wheel sets successfully in Kadee trucks. Be aware they
|
|
CB&Q tank car
Rupert & Maureen <gamlenz@...>
I have posted a photo showing a CB&Q tank car oiling tracks west of Chicago to keep down the dust. The photo has been copied from the Railway Age Gazette of September 1911.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/photos/album/2022239872/pic/list A horizontal perforated pipe has been attached to the bottom outlet of the car to distribute the oil "which is heated by steam from the engine", but with baffles to prevent it being sprayed on the rail, and the flow rate is controlled by a lever attached to the outlet valve. Can anyone give me some clues about the car? Thanks Rupert Gamlen Auckland NZ
|
|
Re: Kadee Trucks
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Andy Harman wrote:
I have used Reboxx wheel sets successfully in Kadee trucks. Be aware they are insulated on only one side so you will need to make sure both axles are oriented the same direction.Actually, Andy, they make both one-side and two-side axle insulations. You choose when you buy. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroad history
|
|
Re: Kadee Trucks
Andy Harman
At 10:19 PM 4/13/2011 -0700, you wrote:
I have used Reboxx wheel sets successfully in Kadee trucks. Be aware they are insulated on only one side so you will need to make sure both axles are oriented the same direction. I just measured a Kadee axle at about 1.015" so a Reboxx axle of about that length should work nicely. I haven't had a lot of trouble with Kadee axles wearing out, but I have replaced them in open ended cars (tank cars, hoppers, etc) with code 88 wheels for better appearance, hence the Reboxx. Andy
|
|
Re: Kadee Trucks
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Jim Betz wrote:
Has any one found a non-Kadee wheelset that works well in a Kadee truck?I have put Reboxx 0.088 wheelsets in a couple pairs of Kadees and it works fine so far. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroad history
|
|
Re: Kadee Trucks
Hi,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
As long as we are talking about Kadee trucks ... Has any one found a non-Kadee wheelset that works well in a Kadee truck? - Tired of changing out worn out nylon axles - the point wears out and you have to change out the entire axle including the wheels ... Jim
________________________________________________________________________
|
|
Re: Necessary Freight cars
Robert kirkham
I've been reading through this thread - resin kits, necessary cars, etc. It makes me wonder about the breakdown of a manufacturer's costs. For a manufacturer of injection molded styrene cars, how much is spent developing CAD drawings in HO scale - would a manufacturer be appreciative of well done drawings if a hobbyist generated them and handed them over gratis?
While I'm not claiming the ability to create such drawings, I wonder what it would take to be able to produce something useful? For a few months I've been messing around with scale 3D drawings of prototype cars I've measured. I've sent the drawings to Shapeways to generate HO parts. I'm not really keen on what I get back - still too course resolution for a lot of modelling needs, although there is potential. But it makes me wonder - if I have fun creating drawings for that limited purpose, would they be of value to a manufacturer? Or puting it another way - where would they have to be different to be useful to a manufacturer? For example, if I knew more about draft angles, I could build them in. I'm sure there are other technical requirements I've no competence to even assess. But it makes me wonder - would useful CAD drawings substantially reduce a manufacturer's costs and make some projects more viable? Rob Kirkham -------------------------------------------------- From: "Anthony Thompson" <thompson@signaturepress.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 3:45 PM To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com> Subject: Re: [STMFC] Necessary Freight cars Jack Burgess wrote:But to make our requests more attractive, it might be helpful toJack (and Richard Hendrickson) make a good point: most
|
|
Re: N&W H10 hopper kit .. it's coming
Andy Harman
At 11:20 AM 4/13/2011 -0400, you wrote:
Roughly when were the H10 hoppers built?1956 (single prototype), production 1957 thru the unmentionable next zero-year. Total cars built = 8000. Less than I thought, but still a sizeable hunk of the fleet. N&W was still mostly a steam railroad at the time, so they qualify as steam era cars by any criteria, even though many were still in service by the time the space shuttle was flying. Andy
|
|
Re: Necessary Freight cars
Andy Harman
At 10:53 PM 4/13/2011 -0500, you wrote:
A solid data package will go a long way to advance the possibility of a model being produced.No doubt, but not all of us are employed in model RR R&D, nor retired and mobile to go travel to Roanoke and pull erection drawings, or chase down survivors in museums and measure them and photograph every detail. Suffice it to say, if I had such a data package on the N&W H10 hopper, I would have already scratchbuilt one. With the quality of materials and parts available today, this kind of data is the only thing that stops me. A car like I'm asking for shouldn't be that hard to chase down, but unless we want to wait another 20 years until I retire assuming I do and assuming I'm still able, somebody else is going to need to come up with it. Because that someone isn't me shouldn't prohibit me from requesting a model of this car. It probably isn't #1 on anybody's to-do list, but it does have some basic things going for it - it's a transition era car, built in large quantities, operated over a wide area, and it's not a particularly exotic car that will require new ground to be broken in the realm of tooling. If I were to assemble such a data package, I'd first build one car for myself, then build a second one to fix all the mistakes I made on the first one, and then perhaps pitch it to one of the good guys. I've already talk to Exactrail and Tangent, they didn't seem to be very interested. The larger manufacturers like Athearn, Walthers, Atlas, already have a lot of coal hoppers in their lines already... ditto Bowser. Intermountain I haven't talked to about it, oddly enough, it's kind of up their alley - they have done a bunch of covered hoppers (albeit only one steam/transition era), and not a single coal hopper. At any rate, I'm glad I brought the topic up even if it brings out the same old posturing about how we ought to think, act, and talk. I found out at least that there may be one coming in resin in the not too distant future, which means that someone may already have a data package, or a good start on it. Andy
|
|
Re: Kadee Trucks
Paul Lyons
Thanks Brian, I will now be forever confused as to weather I need a Proto 2000 Type B, or a Kadee Type B-1 under my models requiring that type truck!!
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Paul Lyons
-----Original Message-----
From: brianleppert@att.net <brianleppert@att.net> To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, Apr 13, 2011 5:27 pm Subject: [STMFC] Re: Kadee Trucks The P2K and Kadee trucks are two different prototypes. P2K's model represents the National Type B. This was introduced in the early 1930s and produced until about 1940. It was superceded by National's Type B-1. This change took place about 1940-1942. Santa Fe's Rr-29 reefers were built mid-1940 with B-1s, but I think that there were other cars delivered after that still with plain Type Bs. The major spotting difference is the bolster end. The later B-1 had the bottom of the bolster end parallel with the top. On the earlier Type B, the sides of the bolster end tapered up towards the top. Other differences included side frame shape, beading and, on the B-1, "Dual Control" features. In the CBCs, National calls their newer truck a "B-1", but the raised lettering on the prototype side frames can be "Type B-1". Athearn made a B-1. Kadee's new truck is the Unit Truck version of the B-1. So both P2K and Kadee trucks will be usable under the proper cars. Brian Leppert Tahoe Model Works Carson City, NV --- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, cobrapsl@... wrote:
|
|
Re: Necessary Freight cars
Charlie Vlk
Jacl. Richard, and Tony hit the nail on the head......
I just had similar comments in an editoria in the latest issue of N Scale Railroading. A solid data package will go a long way to advance the possibility of a model being produced. Most good projects happen because somebody has collected original railroad/builder drawings (general arrangement, detail and lettering & painting), detailed roster data, as-built photographs, detail photos of components, and in-service photos of all possible paint and lettering schemes. Often field measurements are made of surviving equipment and new hand drawn or CAD drawings are created. Sometimes it is the in-house R&D staff that has the material (often in their own personal collection) and sometimes it is aquired from one of a network of subject matter experts. Real railroad equipment drawings often are lacking as documentation for tooling people, who are not familiar with the prototype, to design models. "General Arrangement" drawings are often literally referred to as "cartoons" (in the original sense of basic unsophisticated sketches) that are more of a graphic index of reference drawing numbers to innumerable detail drawings of descrete parts. Some drawings are silent on major components because they were so commonly used that they required no further description (an example I am familiar with is Budd passenger car corrugated panels.... I imagine that details of stamped roof panels and ends are equally difficult to find drawings with detailed dimensions sufficient to tool from). Today we are even beginning to see research packages including drawings of equipment rendered in 3D CAD (Solidworks, etc..) and presented to manufacturers in very complete form ready to turn over to final design.....by Importer R&D Staff and by individuals interested in having specific favorite equipment made in production models. Charlie Vlk
|
|
Re: Kadee Trucks
Paul Lyons
Thanks Richard, Paul Lyons
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@opendoor.com> To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, Apr 13, 2011 4:42 pm Subject: Re: [STMFC] Kadee Trucks On Apr 13, 2011, at 3:57 PM, cobrapsl@aol.com wrote: Richard Hendrickson wrote:Much sharper and more precise detail on the side frames, Paul, plus complete brake rigging. The self-equalizing and self-tracking features are very nice, as well. And you're hearing this from one of the guys who persuaded Life-Like to do the Proto 2000 National B-1, which was a very nice truck by the standards of fifteen years ago. Of course, we now have the Athearn National B-1 as well, which isn't shabby either. Years ago, I had to solder together my first National B-1s from old Red Ball parts. In fact, the car I made them for still has them, though they are scheduled for replacement. I'm going through all of my older equipment a bit at a time replacing trucks where appropriate, changing wheelsets to code 88, and changing #5 couplers to #58s. Those who say the hobby is going to hell in a handcart are clueless; it's just changing, mostly for the better. Richard Hendrickson [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
|
Re: the OSS tries to reck a train
I saw this a few years ago... it is incredible!
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Folks, if you have not seen this video, you need to see it! John Degnan Scaler164@comcast.net
----- Original Message -----
From: Al and Patricia Westerfield To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 11:00 PM Subject: [STMFC] the OSS tries to reck a train Wartime experiments on the best way to wreck a train: http://www.realmilitaryvideos.com/wwii-allies/oss-training-film-derailment/ Not as easy as you might think. - Al Westerfield
|
|