The Big Boy thread prompted the question. I agree with the respondent who said some of the comments (mine included) were negative. So let’s be positive. What do we want?
Some suggestions:
BLI could possibly offer their forthcoming T&P 2-10-4 in a Chicago Great Western version. Or maybe an aftermarket producer could offer a modification kit to allow a modeler to make the mods himself.
A B&LE/DM&IR/CB&Q 2-10-4. If properly designed from the beginning, it would be possible for this engine to be offered in several of its variations.
Lima A-1 2-8-4. Variations could be offered for B&A, B&M, IC, and secondhand units on the SP and ATSF. Again, this presumes that the model engine is designed from the beginning to allow for these variations.
D&H/CRI&P/MILW/SP GS-2/WP/Cof Ga 4-8-4 (Model Railroader Cyc. No. 1, drawings 106,109 & 112). The running gear and boiler are about the same, but details vary. Unless I’m mistaken, the SOO 4-8-4’s were close too. These variations could be accommodated by designing these options into the models from the start.
There is an opportunity for aftermarket manufacturers to produce modification kits that would give us some other specific prototypes, based on commercially available generic models, such as USRA’s. GHQ has made this work in N scale.
You’re still making the mistake of choosing relatively large power rather than more layout friendly small to medium sized power ( 2-6-0, 2-6-2, 2-8-0, 4-6-0, light 4-6-2 smaller than USRA).
examples: 2-6-0 - Wabash F-4, SP M-4 or M -6
2-6-2 - Santa Fe 1050 class, NP T-1, Milwaukee K-1
2-8-0 - Santa Fe 1950 class, SP C-8/9/10 and UP variants (Harriman Standard), NYC G-46, Southern Ks-1
Two of my wants & wishes would be for a New York Central K-3 or K-5b or K-11 Pacific. One of the classes with a nice, big, Elesco feedwater heater on her forehead would be frosting on the cake! P&LE, B&A, and Big Four versions could be produced, too.
The Big Boy thread prompted the question. I agree with the respondent who said some of the comments (mine included) were negative. So let’s be positive. What do we want?
Some suggestions:
BLI could possibly offer their forthcoming T&P 2-10-4 in a Chicago Great Western version. Or maybe an aftermarket producer could offer a modification kit to allow a modeler to make the mods himself.
A B&LE/DM&IR/CB&Q 2-10-4. If properly designed from the beginning, it would be possible for this engine to be offered in several of its variations.
Lima A-1 2-8-4. Variations could be offered for B&A, B&M, IC, and secondhand units on the SP and ATSF. Again, this presumes that the model engine is designed from the beginning to allow for these variations.
D&H/CRI&P/MILW/SP GS-2/WP/Cof Ga 4-8-4 (Model Railroader Cyc. No. 1, drawings 106,109 & 112). The running gear and boiler are about the same, but details vary. Unless I’m mistaken, the SOO 4-8-4’s were close too. These variations could be accommodated by designing these options into the models from the start.
There is an opportunity for aftermarket manufacturers to produce modification kits that would give us some other specific prototypes, based on commercially available generic models, such as USRA’s. GHQ has made this work in N scale.
Tom
You’re still making the mistake of choosing relatively large power rather than more layout friendly small to medium sized power ( 2-6-0, 2-6-2, 2-8-0, 4-6-0, light 4-6-2 smaller than USR
Think your all missing the point here…small while much more practical is boring to us manly man types …big as Tim Allen said is MORE POWER!!!ARRRRRGH!!!
The point about smaller power is very well taken. Back in 1958 and 1959, my dad would take me down to the B&O roundhouse in town. The railroaders were very welcoming, and I was allowed to play on the last steam engine in town: Not a big Mallet, but a Q-4 2-8-2. The world was different then. I’m currently negotiating a purchase/trade to acquire three locos for my own collection: a 2-6-0 and two 2-8-0’s. And my most recent purchase was another 2-8-0, so I cetainly have no objection to smaller power. My suggestions were just to get the ball rolling.
I believe a good Harriman 2-8-0 (57" drivers, please) would be popular. Same for a Harriman 2-8-2. I also believe somebody would do well to offer aftermarket mod kits for the Walthers USRA 0-6-0 and 0-8-0. Lots of possibilities there, including a WWII era version of the military 0-6-0, which found favor on a lot of US industrial and short lines.
As for diesels, the F-M H20-44 wore two demonstrator schemes and was used in fairly large numbers by PRR, NYC, IHB, and P&WV (and later, N&W), as well as AC&Y, UP, and SW Portland Cement. Then there’s the Lima switcher. Neither of these has been done as a R-T-R model.
For narrow gauge, I suspect there would be a market for an HOn3 ET&WNC 4-6-0 or an EBT 2-8-2. Nobody has ever seriously tried to open that market, AFAIK.
Getting back to big power, the WM and D&RGW L-105 Baldwin 4-6-6-4’s were based on the same design, so there is another opportunity to cover two roads with one basic design (with appropriate detail variations). Two geographical market areas, too.
And let’s not forget the other Van Sweringen Berkshires. Those of L&N, W&LE, and Erie used very similar boilers and running gear to the many NKP and C&O based models currently available. Reruns with appropriate detail
For my money, THE most beautiful Challenger ever built. Period! Well, along with the Alco Z-6,7 and 8’s of the NP/SP&S. But those Baldwin-built Rio Grande 3700’s were big, long, heavy, fast and POWERFUL! 105,000 lbs of tractive effort put the more popular Union Pacific version in the shade. They were versatile. Originally designed for the Utah Lines between Ogden and Grand Junction, Colorado, they were fast enough for expidited freights and powerful enough for Rio Grande’s difficult Rocky mountain 2-state profile. There are photos of them hauling freight on the 3% grades of Tennessee Pass looking no more overworked than they do on the flat-lands of the Utah deserts or the long up-and-down profile of the Front Range line between Denver and Pueblo. The Grande loved them. When they tried to get more during WWII, the design was frozen and they ended up with half a dozen UP clones, which
Even though I’m in N scale I would like to see a really nice mogal 2-6-0 for a small switching layout in HO, kind of like what Brakie has done. I have always been impressed with what he was able to do in such a small space and I think the 2-6-0 would be perfect for that.
A camelback 2-8-0, actually a camelback boiler that would fit on the Bachmann or Roundhouse mechanisms. That way we could have a 4-4-0 or 4-6-0 or a 4-4-0, 2-6-0 or 2-8-0. All plausible arrangements.
Yes why would we want a smaller engine that actually worked for 30 or 40 years and were the backbone of the US railroad system when whe could have one of those big prima donna engines that couldn’t run on half the layouts and were generally obsolete when built or within a decade of being built.
