FA's Arrive! (Was: Who's Pic Is This?)

Andre,
Thank you for your kind words. I apologize for the dusty locos...you can see more of the layout in the MAY & NOV 2011 issues of CTT.

Inner curve is basically O-72, outer varies to keep constant separation. Hand laid, super elevated Gargraves. O-72 is the min radius on the layout's mainlines.

I think it's the Super Elevation of the track that creates the specially nice effect. Great job Pete.

Thanks for the answers, Pete!

I think the super-elevation does add to quite a bit of the "look" that I find so nice, but it's mainly the broad curves and nice scenery/ballast/etc. I recall when first seeing this pic, that I thought "Whoa!! I didn't realize Postwar could look that good!"

Thanks again!

Andre

That is nice work. I would love to see more pix of that layout.

The fact that those are not very long engines, and the freight cars are small allows the 072 track to appear a bit wider. Current scale size diesels could make the same curve look undersized, although the super elevation may still save the picture.

IMHO

Andre! Walk away from the ozone! You're on the dangerous path into 3-rail land... A land that many enter, but few return!

Actually, Pete's photo shows that you don't have to all your rivets in a row to make a convincing railroad or train. Thanks for digging up Pete's photo for a refresher.

Rusty

Pete, Are photos of your layout available to view somewhere besides CTT?

Pete, How did you do the super elevation if I may ask?
I've tried that with sectional track and end up with a series of arched 'bumps'...

You can't do it easily with sectional track, because when you lift the outer edge, you are creating a different radius. The geometry of the next section just doesn't match. You have to use continuous rail, that adjusts as you go along, like GG flexible track.

quote:

Originally posted by Arthur P. Bloom:
You can't do it easily with sectional track, because when you lift the outer edge, you are creating a different radius. The geometry of the next section just doesn't match. You have to use continuous rail, that adjusts as you go along, like GG flexible track.

I've done this successfully with tubular track. Is this what you mean by sectional? Or am I just not understanding the term?

When I started our layout I tried elevating the curves which were sectional Scaletrax in 080 and 072 concentric curves. It didn't achieve what I wanted so I redid it shortly afterward.

Where did you obtain that great looking ballast?

Rusty:

Too late.

Bought this a couple weeks or so ago...



Already have a set of Baby Madison cars on the way to go behind it. Gotta' start early on a Christmas trains collection, right?

Not to fear, though. Over the past several years, I've learned there's three basics I can depend on in regards to the train hobby:

* V scale: For my 1880's - 1900's sickness.

* S scale: For when I want to do the "scale" thing.

* Traditional 3 rail: When I want to kick back and "play".

I indulge in one of the above as mood/energy allows. If hobby finances are tight: V scale gets the nod. V scale is dirt cheap.

Andre

I think the super elevation is a big factor too. Very few 3 railers super elevate their curves so when you see it it stands out. Its very easy to do and not only adds to the realism, but helps keep the trains on the track, just like in real life.

quote:

Originally posted by c.sam:
When I started our layout I tried elevating the curves which were sectional Scaletrax in 080 and 072 concentric curves. It didn't achieve what I wanted so I redid it shortly afterward.

I use tubular, so I place a shim under each tie. A method for more realistic track is to place a length of solid copper wire (not stripped) under the outside curve of the ties all the way around the curve. The height is consistent from section to section and you can manipulate the wire for a perfect curve to match the track. It's hidden by the ballast and you have a nice smooth curve.

quote:

Originally posted by laming:
Not to fear, though. Over the past several years, I've learned there's three basics I can depend on in regards to the train hobby:

* V scale: For my 1880's - 1900's sickness.

* S scale: For when I want to do the "scale" thing.

* Traditional 3 rail: When I want to kick back and "play".

I indulge in one of the above as mood/energy allows. If hobby finances are tight: V scale gets the nod. V scale is dirt cheap.

Andre

Andre, welcome to the wild and wooly world of "rubber gauging!" In my Case it's s Scale, S HiRail, O Gauge, ON30 and gusts into HO.

My doctor still hasn't found a successful treatment, but there's plenty of room in the assylum.

Rusty

Sorry for delay in responding - we were out most of yesterday.

Harry Doyle basically described how to superelevate track: I used both wire and balsa stripwood shims. I used a 1" long balsa shim about every three inches to prevent "Sag". You do not need a lot of shim height to get the proper effect. Too much doesn't look right and can induce stringlining.

As soon as the track was in place, the ties and rails were painted using a cheap flat interior Latex paint. Eliminating the black ties and all three shiny rails greatly improves the track and overall layout appearance.

My ballast comes from roofing shingle granules: three 50# buckets worth are on the layout - Gargraves ties are thick and it takes a lot to cover them.

CTT is the only way to see photos of the layout. Sorry.

TAG is correct; scale stuff does not look good on O-72 curves. My large steam and diesel locos are Lionmaster or RailKing and I use "6464" size (Lionel, K-Line, Indust. Rail, etc.) freight cars and 16" MTH RailKing pax cars. 99% of the layout visitors have no clue, nor do they care, whether the trains are scale or not, all they see are trains that "look good" rounding the layout's many curves. I don't run any MTH RailKing freight cars, they just don't look right on my layout - too large.

This is a Lionmaster Challenger leading a modified MTH "6464" sized boxcar and MTH 16" Railking pax cars around a curve:

Seeing as I am essentially "starting over" in 3 rail (perhaps for the long-haul), this time I decided to make thought-out decisions and TRY to stick with them. (Instead of just buying this n' that as I did previously.)

Pete's photos are convincing me I'm on the right track. (Oooooo!! I'm a punny son-of-a-gun this morning!)

My thinking, based on past experiences and pics I view here, indicate that my most fun could be found by:

* Sticking with "Traditional" sized trains, mainly PW Lionel.
* Going with 072 for a minimum mainline diameter.
* Use 072, or larger, switches.
* GarGraves track products.
* A nice "plausible" scenic approach, but not a "super detailed" layout.

Yesterday, I priced portable buildings in my area. Seems I can get a 12' x 24' in place (and in the dry) for about $2700. I would take it from there with the electricals, finishing, etc. Suspect I would have about $6000 in the finished building. This MAY be a route I'll go in a few years IF my interest holds and my collection continues to grow to the point I can supply a layout.

Into this would go around-the-wall flat-top benchwork (30" deep) at about 48" height with a hinged drop-down section, ala my successful attempt at same on a smaller 3 rail layout. The benchwork would be completely covered with Homasote or Quiet Brace. I would use the above to build/experiment with different track arrangements. When I come up with a section I like... then I would make that section permanent, scenic it, and continue experiementing on the "floating" sections until eventually, the layout would be "sort-of" finished.

I would stick with my urban theme that I enjoy a lot. Same with sticking with my Kansas City region/locale, this time though, set in the early-mid 50's.

In all, I think such an approach would be a very fun and relaxing way to enjoy the hobby of 3 rail... AND... I think it would be something to really look forward to as I near retirement.

HOWEVER...

As with all things concerning this hobby and me: WE SHALL SEE!!!

Andre

quote:

Originally posted by c.sam:
Pete, How did you do the super elevation if I may ask?
I've tried that with sectional track and end up with a series of arched 'bumps'...

Sam I put down the heavy-duty clothesline on my plywood base then put down the homeasote roadbed. Gargraves track.

clem

Wish I had thought of doing it this way.
I painstakingly placed wire on top of the homosote, under the track, holding it with pins while the glue dried.
Turned out okay, but a real PIA.
Your method is much easier and cleaner.

quote:

Originally posted by Clem:

quote:

Originally posted by c.sam:
Pete, How did you do the super elevation if I may ask?
I've tried that with sectional track and end up with a series of arched 'bumps'...

Sam I put down the heavy-duty clothesline on my plywood base then put down the homeasote roadbed. Gargraves track.

clem

Well...

I went and did it. Found/purchased a set of "fixer upper" Erie 2032's on Flee Bay. I intend to get them mechanically/electrically sound first. If the shells don't clean up, it's a no brainer: They'll be stripped and repainted Frisco black/yellow.

However, if the shells DO clean up nicely, then I have a decision: Keep the set original or repaint anyway????

Here's a pic of the set "as is":



Andre

quote:

Originally posted by laming:
Well...

I went and did it. Found/purchased a set of "fixer upper" Erie 2032's on Flee Bay. I intend to get them mechanically/electrically sound first. If the shells don't clean up, it's a no brainer: They'll be stripped and repainted Frisco black/yellow.

However, if the shells DO clean up nicely, then I have a decision: Keep the set original or repaint anyway????

Here's a pic of the set "as is":



Andre

If they clean up OK, get repro nose decals. You won't regret it.

Rusty

quote:

Originally posted by laming:
Well...

I went and did it. Found/purchased a set of "fixer upper" Erie 2032's on Flee Bay. I intend to get them mechanically/electrically sound first. If the shells don't clean up, it's a no brainer: They'll be stripped and repainted Frisco black/yellow.

However, if the shells DO clean up nicely, then I have a decision: Keep the set original or repaint anyway????

Here's a pic of the set "as is":



Andre

In case anyone missed it.

Missed what, Vulcan? And what's with the ?

Andre

Andre, I went the same route on two just like those. And if you keep them Erie, the good news is, the markings are easy. Mine were gone, I couldn't locate decals and I found it not difficult to re-do the stripes and wings with testor's flat yellow.

Also, these are very common. Just the two as Eries won't be missed in the toy train world. So, I can look in their future and definitely see St. Louis-San Francisco Ry.

Btw, where was that A&M photo taken in the other thread, Springdale, Van Buren or Ft. Smith?

Rusty:

Yeah, I know: That's a pretty snazzy looking paint scheme. Very "railroady". I almost hope the shells have issues (pits, gouges, scrapes) that would require stripping and filling/sanding... then it would be an easier decision!

BUT... like I said... if they clean up nice... well... not so easy. If that turns out to be the case, I will likely keep them original and return shopping for some repaint subjects.

Andre

Hi Ginsaw!

Just saw your comment after I posted the above replies. Lessee' what'cha said...

quote:

I went the same route on two just like those.

What paint scheme did you paint yours into?

True enough that the 2032's are common as dirt. It really wouldn't be a big loss to the toy train world. However, I'm learning that a nice set of 2031's (Rock Island) ain't the same animal. When those show up, they go for bigger prices. (I would eventually like to have a set of the Rock Island's, too.)

2023's are hard to find without "humpback" non-pimple shells. 2033's are a grab bag: Some have non-pimple shells other have pimple shells. In fact, I've seen that same thing with 2031's and 2032's some have pimples, some don't. (????) I thought Lionel added the pimple shortly after the 2023 to prevent the "humpback" problem? Odd that they came on some later models? Weird.

Anyway... I await their arrival so I can see just what kind of can of worms I've purchased!

Andre

quote:

Originally posted by laming:
Missed what, Vulcan? And what's with the ?

Andre

Nothing against you, Andre.

But reposting the same photos right under the original is thoughtless.

Vulcan, I don't have a clue what you're talking about. What do mean by:

quote:

But reposting the same photos right under the original is thoughtless.

What original? Thoughtless? How??

I am completely lost. Enlighten me.

Andre

quote:

Originally posted by laming:
Vulcan, I don't have a clue what you're talking about. What do mean by:

quote:

But reposting the same photos right under the original is thoughtless.

What original? Thoughtless? How??

I am completely lost. Enlighten me.

Andre

You posted your pictures of the Erie Alcos. Right?

Right under your post is a comment >>>> Along with the same set of pictures, right?

Why?

The nose decal comment could have been made without the second set of pictures. Right?

I know I can scroll up that far to see the Alcos.

Andre, I re-did mine as Eries, or restored I guess is the word. And, I know. Un-imaginative. But it was years ago and I thought then there was something untouchable about original Post War. But now, I wouldn't hesitate.

Anyway, the black paint wasn't in too bad shape. Just needed touch ups. But I did have to buy different brands and bottles of paint to find something close. And I never did find an exact match. It appears there are MANY toy train black paints. But, like I said, the yellow went pretty easy. It just takes a real steady hand and a real small brush on those wings. They were harder even than the Erie emblem.

The Rock Islands shown in the lead photo above however...nobody just ever even think about re-doing those. But then I like the Rock about as much as the Frisco. I think we know Lionel probably didn't build as many of them.

As for those "pimples" you've now got me curious about my Eries. But maybe just short of inspiring me to crawl under the layout and dig them out...but I don't think they have that.

Vulcan:

I didn't repost the same pics. The second set of pics you reference were quoted by Rusty in his reply, thus reposted (pasted) into his reply by the forum software.

I didn't post the same pics twice.

Please read a bit more carefully.

Andre

quote:

Originally posted by laming:
Vulcan:

I didn't repost the same pics. The second set of pics you reference were quoted by Rusty in his reply, thus reposted (pasted) into his reply by the forum software.

I didn't post the same pics twice.

Please read a bit more carefully.

Andre

I know you didn't, Andre.

quote:

Nothing against you, Andre.

I was talking about Rusty reposting. (Just trying not to do any name calling, too late now).

Go back and read again.

Boy... I WAS lost.

Seein' as this is my thread I started... thought you were referencing me and understood the "nothing against you" as "not that I don't like you... but... (insert correction matter here)"

You're right... I do need to understand the unspoken better! That's what my wife says, too.

Ah well... quoting ver batem and including the pics is an easy thing to do. See it lots on this forum. No biggie.

And now... we return to our previously scheduled programming!

Andre

Ginsaw:

Ah, got it: You repainted them... but back to the Erie scheme. Thought maybe you had changed the scheme/roadname.

As for the Erie decals/stickers: They show up often on Flee Bay now. Should I decide to keep them Erie, that's the route I would go: Repro decals/stickers/whatever.

Understand COMPLETELY on repainting the factory Rock Island units. Even though Lionel missed it a mile on the actual paint scheme the CRIP used, the Lionel version is still really nice.

BUT...

Back to the Eries I just purchased:

Wow... wouldn't a pair of Lionel 2000 series look SUPER as a set of Frisco FA's????

Andre

Yes, back to the subject. I think we were talking about a very critical matter, Erie or Frisco.

They're both your basic black diesel. So either way, I suppose you could always change it back.

Anyway, Lionel did you know announce the FA in Frisco black/yellow, but it was cancelled. I hope that's right. It's my recollection.

Hi Again Ginsaw! (We're going to have to stop meeting like this! )

Yup, both basic black.

The Erie is indeed nice... but the Frisco is strikingly nice! Of course, the Erie doesn't fit too well with my "KC Lines" theme... unless said Erie FA's in KC represent a leased set on a line that ran in KC?

I didn't know Lionel ever considered the Frisco livery for their FA. Are you talking the Postwar era or Modern? (Modern = Post-Postwar? )

Andre

Or, behind this door, it could just be a run-through in KC..

The Lionel Frisco FA was a couple years ago. Modern, scale. I think I put in an order and found out later it was cancelled. Lack of interest I do believe. They've had some others like that. A Rock Island U-boat in red/yellow and the same in MoPac were cancelled.

But with Atlas I've never seen that happen. I have Atlas Fs in RI and MP and a couple cab units in SSW. But those are scale size. The Erie 2032 FA is "officially" I think 027 - I may be wrong, but I think it says that on them.

I used to run mine with both 027 and "6464" size cars. K-Line tank cars look good with those too. But, I like for everything to be more or less the same scale or "on the same page". So that's why my old Eries see only occasional track time these days.

Erie FA's in KC in the early/mid 1950's: I know... I could "justify" it, after all, it IS only a toy train. BUT... don't know.

Know what'cha mean on the desire for your trains to be the same size. IF I follow through and start collecting with the intention of a layout "someday"... I likewise will want my trains to be "on the same page", size wise. As mentioned previously, in my case I am choosing to go with the "traditional" sized trains. And, right you are: Lionel's 2000 series Alco's are indeed "shrunk" aka "traditional sized". 6464's look good behind the little Alco's.

There is a slight downside to my "traditional" desire: Switchers. There are no traditional sized diesel switchers to use. Lionel's 600 series NW2's were essentially scale sized. The Railking SW/NW series was pretty close to scale sized. Either will over-power a 6464. I thought about using Lionel PW 0-4-0's for switchers... but a diesel would be nice. Hmmm.

Welp... all for tonight. Getting close to bedtime. (yawn)

See 'ya!

Andre