Hello, What’s everyones take on “fantasy” paint scemes. I was looking at a Broadway Limited P5a BoxCab with Milwaukee Road paint (not a real milwakee road loco). But i’m thinking it might be close enough. Also, would like to have a Big Boy one day, but not necessarily in UP. Just wondering what others think.
Hello —
Check this thread first then get back to us.
https://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/88/p/293525/3424219.aspx#3424219
Regards, Ed
You’ll find those who like 'em and those who don’t care for 'em. I’m somewhat of a purist so I’m in the latter camp. I do like the look of the P5 boxcab though.
If a particular fantasy paint scheme on a prototype locomotive appeals to you and that’s what you would enjoy running on your layout - go for it! Who cares what others think…
Tom
Personally find fantasy schemes really undesirable…especially when a manfacturer make them “limited edition” or a trainworld (or other store) “exclusive”, just to artificially inflate their rarity and value.
I will say that certain schemes are better than others. Fantasy schemes from the same railroad (like an ATSF warbonnet steam loco for ex) or schemes from future mergers (like a PRR loco decorated for Penn Central) in my opinion are better than the completely bizzare ones.
Charles
I model the Pennsylvania to the limits of my ability and as accurately as possible. When there are locomotives the PRR never had a paint them for my Allegheny railroad that has trackage rights on the PRR. This keeps the purists at bay.
I know some people don’t like engines that are not prototypical but I think some of the fantasy schemes look great on other roads engines or different schemes then the ones in real life had.
Screen shots taken from athearn preorder sheet and train world.
Posted from ipad.
In general, I do not like them, but there are schemes I can tolerate. Paying $900 MSRP for an all-black BLI Santa Fe “Blue Goose” or $550 for a Reading T1 4-8-4 in red labeled “Merry Christmas” would be unthinkable for me. On the other hand, I can tolerate a Bachman doodlebug in warbonnet paint (The Santa Fe had only two doodlebugs in warbonnet paint, M-160 and M-190; in contrast to the Bachmann doodlebug, neither one had a passenger compartment.). One idea I found actually intriguing was to create more “bonnets”. The Santa Fe had F units with the original warbonnet in red, and later they derived bluebonnets and yellowbonnets (although the yellowbonnet F units had a slightly different overall scheme). What about keeping the same overall scheme and just changing the main color? You could make greenbonnets, purplebonnets, pinkbonnets, blackbonnets, whitebonnets,…
Wow, so were do we draw this fuzzy line? How accurate or inaccruate does a model need to be to pass the test?
Sure, a lot of them are clearly obvious to the informed, and the truly playful ones are generally clearly identified by the manufacturers as such.
If they can make money selling them what business is it of those who are not buying?
I’ve been at this a while just like many of others on here. But we have newer/younger people on here as well who don’t know about the early days, generic models with every popular roadname painted on the side.
Whatever you want to call it, I’m a freelance/protolance modeler with my own fictional roadname, and I model three other actual prototype roads.
I won’t lie, I model those other roads with a moderately high level of accuracy - BUT - compromises will be made - AND - history will be fudged a little here and there. After all those real roads have to blend into my fictional version of 1954…
Again I will ask, where is the magical line?
Broadway Lmited is putting all sorts of fantasy paint schemes on locos, OK.
But they make locos that they would like you to take seriously that are not correct, or not as correct as they easily could have been.
They sell their “generic” USRA Heavy Pacific lettered as B&O P7 locomotives - and while the P7 was based largely on the USRA Heavy - BLI could not even change a few simple details that would have made it much closer - a trailing truck, a headlight and bell locat
So please explain, is a BLI Pacific lettered as a B&O P7 a “fantasy scheme” or just “incorrect”?
And what makes that differrent from some steam loco with a Daylight scheme that never had that scheme or it being a loco the SP never had?
If we are going to object to this we need it to be defined?
Again, I do think manufacturers should identify these fantasy locos, but if your not buying, why would you care?
Sheldon
i find it kinda interesting, and some of the fantasey schemes are very nice.
I’m generally pretty realistic, but I think that “plausible” ones are interesting. NS did their heritage fleet and CN has been slow rolling out one. Is there an ES44AC in GN sky blue? Is there an ACL “Champion” in purple? No, but it wouldn’t be much of a stretch for something like those to exist. They’re just paint jobs on equipment that they already own. It isn’t like a GN GG1 that likely never could have existed.
Admittedly that aspect of this is hard for me to follow, I know there are heritage paint schemes, but I don’t follow modern railroading so I would not know an accurate heritage scheme from a fictional one.
And I would not know the correct era for any of these diesels past the early 70’s.
So it’s all good to me, whatever people want that the manufacturers are willing to make.
Sheldon
Hmmmm,
While im for the ‘idea’ of seeing the what if side, so far, im not impressed with the results that ive seen.
So 50/50 here.
PMR
I model the BNSFs’ Pikes Peak Sub which runs from Denver to Pueblo Colorado. I model engines that I like in BNSF, ATSF, BN and GN colors. For example I have five U50B’s painted in these colors. If I liket he engine I will paint it and run it on my railroad.
Why stop there?
-
Look up the history of the D&H Sharknoses – one of the more significant model contributions to railroad reality…
-
Google ‘vomit bonnet’…
While my entire layout is present day, there is a long Union Pacific “City of Los Angeles” pulled with E units traveling through. No one on the layout seems to notice or care.
Im just saying in my opinion, an SP cab forward painted for SP daylight is less offensive than a PRR E6 painted in SP Daylight schemes. The lesser of two evils of sorts. That’s just my opinion, there is no defined law or rule that outright states one is better than the other. As you said, I dont really care since I wouldnt buy either anyways.
And since you asked, I think a B&O P7 is a fantasy scheme that isnt as offensive, since the USRA heavy pacific is the closest model BLI made to a B&O P7 in terms of dimensions. I know of B&O modelers who have taken BLI USRA heavy pacifics as a starting point and kitbashed/modified them to better resemble P7 pacifics.
Charles
[quote user=“Trainman440”]
ATLANTIC CENTRAL
Trainman440
Personally find fantasy schemes really undesirable…especially when a manfacturer make them “limited edition” or a trainworld (or other store) “exclusive”, just to artificially inflate their rarity and value.
I will say that certain schemes are better than others. Fantasy schemes from the same railroad (like an ATSF warbonnet steam loco for ex) or schemes from future mergers (like a PRR loco decorated for Penn Central) in my opinion are better than the completely bizzare ones.
Charles
So please explain, is a BLI Pacific lettered as a B&O P7 a “fantasy scheme” or just “incorrect”?
And what makes that differrent from some steam loco with a Daylight scheme that never had that scheme or it being a loco the SP never had?
If we are going to object to this we need it to be defined?
Again, I do think manufacturers should identify these fantasy locos, but if your not buying, why would you care?
Sheldon
Im just saying in my opinion, an SP cab forward painted for SP daylight is less offensive than a PRR E6 painted in SP Daylight schemes. That’s just my opinion, there is no defined law or rule that outright states one is better than the other.
And since you asked, I think a B&O P7 is a fantasy scheme that isnt as offensive, as the USRA heavy pacific is the closest model BLI m
I think we need to make a clear distinction between deliberate “fantasy” and “stand-in”…
A USRA 4-6-2 painted for Conrail is a fantasy because that clearly never existed.
A USRA 4-6-2 painted for Baltimore & Ohio is a stand-in if it’s meant to represent a similar real-world engine even if the details don’t quite match. (Steam is particularly difficult because almost everything was unique between railroads.) I wouldn’t call this a “fantasy”.
These are two very different things.
The situation is not quite that easy: what about a Mantua 4-6-2 painted in not B&O, but Chessie System colors, to stand in for the Chessie Steam Special?