Has an H10 2-8-8-6 ever been made in O-scale?

That's because the locomotive never existed except for on the internet.

The camera never lies, the same can't be said for the images once they leave the camera.

Rusty

Fascinating. Ore mining in the Appalachians? Unfamiliar with the history and type of ore.

As Rusty said, that engine never existed.  There was a webpage at one time where the guy proposed some of these engines and some crazy variants by modifying original photographs.  The way the guy worded it on the webpage indicated that the engines in his "photos" were real, when in fact, they were not.  I seem to remember a very small disclaimer somewhere that said they were not real.  In all cases, the images were heavily Photoshopped photos of real locomotives.  The photo above is nothing more than a stretched C&O H8 2-6-6-6 Allegheny.  If you look close enough at the photo, you can see that the last drive wheel of each engine truck does not belong with the others.

I think it was either upsiedaisyium or improbabilium ore.

Rusty

So someone should make this in 3 rail. Isn't everyone always asking all of the manufacturers to make things that "have not been made before". 

Well, it is elegant.  Bill Lenoir built a C&O 4-8-6 from railroad plans.  You can see it in that neat book that Billy Davis sells for $35 - 2001 Steam Locomotives.  Paper back, self- published by Lenoir, and should be a part of every 2-railer's library.

Many years ago, an HO modeler I know took a junk Akane C&O H8 and two  PFM C&O Berks and he built a 2-8-8-6. and it was pretty.  Don't know whatever happened to the model.

Larry

You know it's odd.  I have stated several times that I am new to this hobby ad also have no knowledge background in railroading either.  My elderly father last night was trying to recall a locomotive he got to ride in the cab with his uncle as a young boy.  He went on about how thrilling it was and was trying to remember what type it was.  He said he thought it was a 2-8-8-6.  I went to the internet to look this up having no knowledge at the time that the photo and the paragraphs describing the region and service of this was in fact a farse.  That also my thought to try find a model of this for my elderly father with his obvious failing memory, would be, once again a grave mistake to mention here.

For a group of people who so often lament and question the lack of growth in this hobby and the reluctance of new people to join in, I offer you as an intuitively obvious explanation, your joy at pouncing on an opportunity to turn a mistake or new member's "unenlightened question" into a source of amusement for yourselves.

Unfortunately for you, people who wait in unabated anticipation for others to mis-step in order to throw around ridicule, are often themselves sadly mistaken in some aspect of that ridicule. 

Rusty, your apparent ignorance of the Appalachian region of the United States century and a half mining production of Copper, Gold, Zinc and Iron ores along with sulfur, phosphorus, mica, rubies, industrial diamonds and quartz, does not mean that you should be held up to lambasting.... or does it?

If new folks, who are by definition, ignorant of most, if not all, of the subject matter discussed on this forum, are not welcome here, except as fodder for this Sophomoric stupidity, you should have the decency to say so up front.  That way you can avoid the trouble of having to put up with new people looking for a hobby, coming here.

Perhaps you received the responses that you did, was due to the fact that you posted your original question/post on the 3-Rail SCALE Forum. Had you read the heading of this particular "sub-forum", for would have seen the detailed explanation relative to SCALE MODELING within the 3-Rail format.

Now, had you made your original post over on the 3-Rail Trains Forum, which is the very top sub-forum, in my opinion you would have received MANY more "fun responses". 

I'm fairly new also (as you can possibly see by my botched attempt at quoting here)

and it took me quite a while just to figure out the difference between 3 rail scale and hi-rail-and 3 rail trains, heck I'm still not 100% sure? I finally saw someone define all that stuff and should have saved it somewhere. It takes us new folks a while to catch on. Especially us old ones. I'm sure you all get tired of trying to explain things to us also. Maybe us new folks should be a little thicker skinned? Probably all was meant to be in fun, but it is really easy to take the typed words in the wrong way as well.

Guess I'm just trying to say we could all be a little more understanding of each other.

You can also see I'm not too good with the typed words either! Pretty windy, you have to admit though.

Lambaste away.

At least I can take a joke.

Rusty

Gee, I don't like the way this has gone.  Most of the people on here are very helpful

and knowledgeable to answering questions for newcomers, and the not so new.  I was

startled to learn fairly recently that there was gold mining, and a lot of it, in North

Carolina before the California rush.

Well, I did not see it as a slam.  If I offended you, I apologize.  

For anyone interested, the website mentioned above with the photoshopped creations is the S. Berliner III site.  The home site is vast, and varied in content.  Only some of which is train related and only some of which is tongue-in-cheek.  I've included the link instead for the Berlinerwerke part of the site, which seems to relate to the spoof locomotives.

Have a look around, but good luck navigating the pages.  There is a lot there, and it's not always easy to figure what the links go to.

Jim

No - I just read it all again.  I do not see anything remotely impolite.

Wow, that is a handsome engine.  I would make a nice bashing project.  Not quite worth it to me - its not that handsome - but I'd sure be interested in following another who would take on one.

For those whose interest in steam locomotives has been piqued by model trains and truly want to learn more, an easy place to start your education is with a copy of "Model Railroader Cyclopedia Vol.1 Steam Locomotives" (for you dieselophiles there is also a Vol.2 Diesel Locomotives). Usually it is an affordable book and will do well to get you started on your way to learning about steam locomotives. No, it does not show every steam loco that ever existed, but, it is a good primer. Hopefully, it will create a spark for you to want to learn more.

Now, the subject of being "thin skinned" must be addressed.

This seems to be a wide spread affliction on the internet. If you truly think about it, I am sure that in the reality of growing up in your everyday life, you have either kidded around with your friends and fellow workers or have been the object of their kidding and thought nothing of it. So why go flying off the handle here?

A little joking around can be good. Hasn't someone's little barb ever spurred you on to learn more about a subject? No one here is trying to run anyone out of town on a rail. So, toughen up a little bit. Don't be so vain that you take someone's joking quite so seriously.

And...go grab a book and read it. At the worst, you may learn something!

It's also frequently available from many decent sized public libraries for free.

Jim

I good idea for those who don't want to start their own library. Though I haven't used it in years, inter-library loaning is hopefully still available if one's local doesn't have the book you are looking for.

Thank you for the reminder.  I have wanted to get this book and keep forgetting.  $32 for Amazon Prime - arrives tomorrow - my only Christmas present to myself.  

Another good piece of reference material is the Trains Magazine DVD Rom archive from Kalmbach.  The DVD contains every issue of Trains from 1940-2010.

While the $149.95 price may seem a little steep, it's better than having 70 years of paper cluttering the house and it puts history at your fingertips.

Rusty

Photoshop...it's a wonderful thing. 

There is no such thing as a 2-8-8-6.

It is all just a fig newton of someone's imagination. 

I like the "Guide to North American Steam Locomotives" as a great starting point on learning about classes of locomotives and what railroads rostered them.  Concise, but full of good information.  If one specific locomotive sparks my interest more, I will normally find more specific books or literature to get a better understanding.  I find reading about trains is about as fun as modeling them and running them.

Weird thread; hurt feelings all around. Wow. I actually thought that the original poster

was doing this tongue-in-cheek - I kept looking for the punch line. Either way,

too many ruffled feathers.

Anyway, memories and people being what they are, an elderly non-train-geek

mis-remembering a 2-6-6-6 as a 2-8-8-6 is thoroughly reasonable.

There is, you know, on the glorious InterWeb, a "photo" of a NYC J4 Hudson.

Yes, I said "J4".

HEY!!  For Pete's sake!  It's Christmastime!! 

Be a little more lighthearted and benevolent, a little more understanding and...(gasp)...tolerant, a little more supportive and enlightening, etc., etc..  And MUCH less condescending!

All together now, "Kumbya, my lord, kumbya..."

I'd like to thank the poster for starting this thread with that photo.  Sure, I know the engine never existed in 1:1 or a commercially available model form.  But I've been fascinated through most of my 69 years (as of yesterday, ta-da!) with the conceptual articles, drawings, artwork, etc..  Except for poor timing, poor balance sheets, and fate from several different sources(e.g., war and restrictions), seemingly unrelated yet wholly intertwined, these beasts might have existed, if for no more than as singleton of experimentation and marketing chutzpah. Actually, many did come to fruition.

The C&O 2-8-8-6 idea (Lima written all over it!) would've been awesome...perhaps a real challenge to UP's 'Big Boy".  I remember seeing a piece of artwork by the infamous Howard Fogg showing a Santa Fe 4-6-6-4 leaning into a curve.  Yep!  A Fig Newton of the imagination, commissioned by a dreamer, yet looking wholly plausible as only Mr. Fogg could've painted it to be.  It had the unmistakable hallmarks of Baldwin, but begged to be recreated in HO with an Alco chassis.  If I were less mortal, I'd put it on my bucket list! 

So, when posters ask 'What would you have Lionel or MTH (or ?) do next?' I often mutter beneath my breath 'Something that never was for which a picker of nit could never prevail!'   ...like a C&O 2-8-8-6!!!  Or an AT&SF 4-6-6-4!! 

Scary, I know.  But wouldn't it be fun?

And, again, I say......Merry Christmas!!

KD

Question:  This 2-8-8-6 is listed as an H-10.  The C&O 2-6-6-6's were H-8.  So what was the H-9 supposed to be?

Stuart

I'm sitting here, patiently waiting for the engineering work-up on this bad boy.  While the chooch in question here will stomp an H8 for tractive effort....I'm not so sure about all-out DBHP.  Overall per axle weight might be survivable, but the locomotive weight overall will be positively zoological !

I was not going to add to this, but then, thought I would.

I have been reading on here for several years, sometimes post. Learned a great deal and may have added to someone else's knowledge. (I can only hope.) Most posts go well, sometimes they turn south. People argue, agree or neither and move on. 

It is almost like being in a class in school again. For every type of person we knew in school, one of those type exist here. The nerd, the brain, the clown, the out cast and the outspoken. We all exist in the real world, many of us wearing the different masks on different days.

Looking back at this, I admit, I was taken in by the original photo. I did not know it was a "fantasy engine" just like Bluebeard4590 did not know. That does not make either one of us idiots, just ignorant of the facts. (meaning not aware of) D500 probably can't understand why I thought it was a real engine, but I have no problem with him thinking that. Hey, I wish I did know it all....instead of thinking that I do!

The educated among us, by the 2nd and 4th post, made everyone including me, aware of the hoax by someone else's ability to manipulate a photo. No problems so far....as least I see none.

Then, Rusty and Casey, added a little humor to the mix. I saw nothing wrong with that, we seem to do it frequently and who does not enjoy a good laugh every now and then? Things should have been dropped or we move on to other things. They were not!

It appears, from the eloguent response from Bluebeard4590, that he was offended and proceeded to tell others why they were wrong to say what they did. So far, have I stated anything wrong?

Then, the trouble started. Perhaps Bluebeard4590 is a little thin skinned. Perhaps he is not used to the style of humor found here often. But, he has the right to voice his opinion. Just like everyone else can voice theirs....and we often do without getting mean or nasty. And sometimes...we don't.

Personally, I found that no one said anything out of line to Bluebeard4590 that should have caused him to write such an essay back, but then, I can't see it from his point of view. I can only hope that, as a new member/visitor, he takes the time to rethink what was written to him originally, and what he wrote back as an extended reply, and sees the attempts at humor (not made at his expense I might add) for what they were....a couple of guys trying to entertain us and also educating us. Not a bad set of goals for those two guys.

Bluebeard4590, please revisit this and reread what was written. Then, put yourself on the other side of what you wrote back and decide it you think it was a 100% appropriate response to an attempt at a little humor. No one meant to intentionally slam your (or your father's)  lack of knowledge regarding this engine, they did what they meant to do.....they informed you about the history of the picture you posted. No one called you an idiot for thinking it was made, no one said only a fool would think a model should be made of that engine. If they had, your response would have been 100% spot on. As it was, it came across as rather harsh and not an appropriate "thank you" for setting the record straight on the photo you posted.

Only each poster knows what their original intent was. I can only hope that no one deliberately posted a demeaning comment. Looking at what I see, I do not think anyone did. I hope Bluebeard4590 continues to read, post and feel free to "get back in the game" and let this drop and continue to enjoy his train experiences on this forum, one that normally runs pretty smoothly. And yes, it does have its share of sophomoric stupity....I have been guilty as charged.

For what it is worth, my viewpoint on a situation that seemed to get out of hand rather quickly. I wish everyone a Wonderful Christmas!   Greg

I kind enjoy the way some of the old "curmudgeons" on this forum educate us about real trains.

None of the "softball" P.C. crap, just tellin it like it is, the way "they" used to when this Country was great!

I don't know about others, but the fact that a particularly type of locomotive never existed actually doesn't matter a tinkers dang to me if it sounds like it would be nice to have.  For example, I would love to have a 4-10-10-6!!! I have been thinking about how to make one.  I haven't figured that out yet, but that would be one cool locomotive if I could  build one.