Building a GP9 in Proto:48

[davefoxx]

Very nice!  Love the broom.

DFF

[peteski]

Ah yes, sometimes things come out looking pretty much like what they actually are.   The original kit did come with some clear plastic ones that were very thick and connected to an interior light pipe for a single incandescent bulb.  But with the chop-nose mods to the cab, they simply would not fit, so I just ended up scratching from sheet styrene and hoping for the best.  To illuminate them with LEDs would have also required a whole custom/opaque interior light box for each one.   Nowadays a Shapeways approach could perhaps be feasible, but as with every model one must eventually reach a stopping point.

Ed

I wasn't even thinking of illuminating them (which is unusual for lighting-whore that I am). I was just thinking of having them looking like the 1:1 ones (glass pane in front of of the number insert).  Like I said, to me that was the only think that gave away the fact that the photos were not of a real loco.  It is still an awesome model!

[Santa Fe Guy]

Hooley Dooley Ed. When did you start to purchase full sized locos must have cost a packet.
Rod.

[Sokramiketes]

I wasn't even thinking of illuminating them (which is unusual for lighting-whore that I am). I was just thinking of having them looking like the 1:1 ones (glass pane in front of of the number insert).  Like I said, to me that was the only think that gave away the fact that the photos were not of a real loco.  It is still an awesome model!

Pete-

While that was probably how they were built originally (glass pane in front), by the period Ed is modeling it was just a plastic insert without a glass cover.  If you look at the proto photos linked on page 1, you can take a look.

I have a pair of numberboards off of what I think is a Paducah rebuild, white background with black numbers.  Those were built on about a 3/8" white plastic sheet base, with 1/8" thick black numerals glued to the surface. 

[peteski]

Pete-

While that was probably how they were built originally (glass pane in front), by the period Ed is modeling it was just a plastic insert without a glass cover.  If you look at the proto photos linked on page 1, you can take a look.

I have a pair of number boards off of what I think is a Paducah rebuild, white background with black numbers.  Those were built on about a 3/8" white plastic sheet base, with 1/8" thick black numerals glued to the surface.

You're right. That makes Ed's model even more accurate then.  I guess I was still stuck in the '80s when I climbed over couple of B&M GP9s and I remembered the number boards being behind glass (or Plexiglas?) panels. 

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ednadolski]

It may be that the numberboards were updated when the units were rebuilt with the chop nose.  There was a GP9 in Boulder that looked the same (you can see that the glass was damaged): http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/2/2/0/1220.1186689600.jpg

I couldn't find any better pics of the #132 but here are a couple of sister units where it's easier to see the numberboards:

http://www.railpictures.net/images/d2/1/3/2/6132.1424090703.jpg
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5814/22219444152_2814f19c78_o.jpg


Ed

[peteski]

It may be that the numberboards were updated when the units were rebuilt with the chop nose.  There was a GP9 in Boulder that looked the same (you can see that the glass was damaged): http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/2/2/0/1220.1186689600.jpg

I couldn't find any better pics of the #132 but here are a couple of sister units where it's easier to see the numberboards:

http://www.railpictures.net/images/d2/1/3/2/6132.1424090703.jpg
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5814/22219444152_2814f19c78_o.jpg


Ed

I can now see that your model number boards are an accurate depiction of whatever was used on http://www.railpictures.net/images/d2/1/3/2/6132.1424090703.jpg . Ed's law applies again. 

[Chris333]

One of LTEX's stash spots:

[Lemosteam]

That's simply a masterpiece. Period.
 

[tappertrainman]

I vote you submit this image to Trains magazine and see if anyone notices...

Excellent work!

James

[Iain]

I'm done.

[peteski]

I'm glad that I don't model in Proto:48. 

[ednadolski]

I'm glad that I don't model in Proto:48. 

Like anything else, it all comes down to preferences and trade-offs.   If I were not so invested in N-Scale and Tehachapi, I would definitely be doing more of this.  Still, I do have plans for a small, portable display/dio to work on when I want/need a break from N.

Ed

[peteski]

Like anything else, it all comes down to preferences and trade-offs.   If I were not so invested in N-Scale and Tehachapi, I would definitely be doing more of this.  Still, I do have plans for a small, portable display/dio to work on when I want/need a break from N.

Ed

My statement (after what Iain wrote) was basically saying that your modeling in Proto:48 is so darn good that I'm glad I'm not doing it as I woudl have to , as we say, throw in the towel!   

[Ian MacMillan]

Hot damn that's good! I pondered moving the AN to Ossipee scale back in January but eventually ruled it out.