Would You Buy a Model of This?

I might. But only if it did not include the four action figures.    The Seddonville Railroad opened in New Zealand in 1893 for the sole purpose of transporting coal to a nearby harbor. The railroad survived about 100 years.

dkdkrd posted:

 

 If this is a GG1,

Wouldn't this, then, be a G1??

 

 

Maybe more correctly, a G1/2 (G one half).

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.

Absolutely! Competing for NY City passengers, both PRR and  New York Central built tunnels. The PRR built this self-propelled (top speed of 35 mph) for tunnel work, including emergencies. NYC  later built one, and both went to Penn Central later.

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:

Absolutely! Competing for NY City passengers, both PRR and  New York Central built tunnels. The PRR built this self-propelled (top speed of 35 mph) for tunnel work, including emergencies. NYC  later built one, and both went to Penn Central later.

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.

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.

Absolutely Yes!

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

Since we're posting weird railroad equipment we may or may not buy should it be manufactured.

Quick Casey posted:

Since we're posting weird railroad equipment we may or may not buy should it be manufactured.

No, I wouldn't buy one. But I THINK it is a Talgo "push-pull" high speed diesel manufactured in Spain.

Okay, the Talgo was a bit "normal."

How about these?

Great pictures, Casey, BUT...

Is the first photo a real locomotive?

Vincent Massi posted:

Great pictures, Casey, BUT...

Is the first photo a real locomotive?

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.

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 ?

No. For the life of me, I can't figure out how this loco could go around a curve.

Yes, it's real. It is a weight car, designed to test the accuracy of track scales.

Okay, railroad experts--what is this?

Vincent Massi posted:

Okay, railroad experts--what is this?

That is a Pennsylvania RR tender off one of their larger steam locomotives, maybe from a J1a 2-10-4, or something larger.

Vincent Massi posted:

Okay, railroad experts--what is this?

You're joking, right?

It's a Pennsylvania Railroad so called coast to coast tender.

Rusty

Looks like a PRR "coast-to-coast" tender without the "doghouse" on the top of the rear deck.

Vincent Massi posted:

Definitely! (I like cranes and crane cars). The London and North Eastern Railway was founded in 1923. In 1948, it was divided among three other railways.

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.

Vincent Massi posted:

Okay, railroad experts--what is this?

That’s a PRR long haul tender from either an M1A or M1B. It is going to be used on PRR 5550. 

Quick Casey posted:

Since we're posting weird railroad equipment we may or may not buy should it be manufactured.

I don't know why, but I thought of this fluffball when i saw that.

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.

This thing reminds me of some of those weird fish from the ocean deeps!

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.

Japan used armored trains and railcars during its invasion of China. How many of these would you buy a model of?

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:

Yes, they actually did make a non-motorized model of this.

I don't know what it is, and I don't even know if it is a good static display.