Making a Bobber Caboose- PRR ND and Variants

[Chris333]

Guess there is no letter board down the side so no trim on the end either.

[peteski]

You can just wing it, like me 

Yeah, sure.   
I suspect that some people are more natural at this task than others.

[Lemosteam]

If you notice, there are no window frames proud of the sides, except the window sill, I'd lose those on the sides ends and the cupola.

If I were modeling this for SW, i could completely eliminate all of Pete's concerns by printing the main shell separate and all of the windows separate, the cupola walls separate and upside-down, and the two roof panels separate.  I would orient the roof tops down (yes against the wax) because they would be easier to sand smooth (sanding resign striation is a Biatch). With the windows out the modeler could drag the side across a flat piece of 400 or 600 sandpaper and have very smooth sides and ends, do the same with the cupola sides, AND i be able to print holes for all of the grabs.

Not sure if doing this in an Anycubic would make a difference, but it would test dimensional fits and assembly.

All of that for 6x the price that @narrowminded made it for, 

[Jbub]

You can just wing it, like me 

Your 'winging' level is like everyone else's pro level

[Maletrain]

As I watch various posters experimenting with printing car shells, I wonder why there seems to be so much effort to print all in one piece.  To me, the difficulty in finishing some of these models would be in smoothing the surfaces to look as good as, say MTL cast surfaces.  Wouldn't it be easier to both print and finish well if all of the flat surfaces were printed flat, and then finished and assembled like most kits with cast parts?  And, many of the protruding details seem to be better applied separately, rather than printed-on.

Just asking.

[narrowminded]

As I watch various posters experimenting with printing car shells, I wonder why there seems to be so much effort to print all in one piece.  To me, the difficulty in finishing some of these models would be in smoothing the surfaces to look as good as, say MTL cast surfaces.  Wouldn't it be easier to both print and finish well if all of the flat surfaces were printed flat, and then finished and assembled like most kits with cast parts?  And, many of the protruding details seem to be better applied separately, rather than printed-on.

Just asking.

There is an argument for printing one piece in many areas and individual parts in others.  It depends on the detail.  My original post identifies exactly this.  I would want to print the shell sides as one piece to avoid the corner seams that can be tough to mate perfectly and squarely in these small dimensions and relatively thin walls.  In the other hand, the roof, which is susceptible to aliasing lines, has an overhanging lip all of the way around so good access can be afforded by making it a separate part and the overhang will go a long way to hiding a seam.  

Then again, if just the cupola was out of the way, the roof is accessible with no interruptions from details so maybe make it one piece with the shell and the cupola a separate part.  Additional stiffness/ squareness and something to hold on to while sanding the roof, and this applies to both the shell and the cupola.  And the cupola is a part that may need some other detailing work so another reason to make it separate.  And if you mess it up, it's just that part and not the whole shell.  Get a new one and start over.   Plus, it's got detail differences in various versions like the Ma&Pa version so a different cupola could be printed to keep prototype fidelity.  These are things I'm weighing as I progress with this. 

Some of those detail variations apply to the window frames as well.  Some have exterior trim and when present, not all the same style. And the best shot of a PRR restored original from Strasburg has no trim except a small sill at the bottom.  As separate parts all variations could be relatively easily met if the need arose.


Meanwhile, I need/ want good dimensions to get the basic frame accurate so the rest has a better chance of falling right in place.  It's only as good as the foundation!

[narrowminded]

Yeah, sure.   
I suspect that some people are more natural at this task than others.

I've seen you work through all sorts of things.  It's probably time to get your feet wet and sort it out as you go.  You will do quite well with this.

[peteski]

I've seen you work through all sorts of things.  It's probably time to get your feet wet and sort it out as you go.  You will do quite well with this.

Thanks for your vote of confidence Mark! 
I have dabbled in SketchUp about 4 years ago (still have it installed on my XP machine), but I ran onto all sorts of problems when trying to design items in true N scale size. Plus I found looking for ways to do certain things but SketchUp was not really capable of doing them I wanted.  I will need to change my way of thinking to the SketchUp's way of doing things.  I really need to invest some time to work with it (but that is a problem too).  Messing around with SketchUp can eat up time really fast, and I have so many projects in-progress going on. 

[narrowminded]

Here are a few pics with the window trim variations I was referring to.  I will start with the Strasburg RR restored version figuring it's likely to be the most prototypical but some of the variants will probably be of interest to some.  And I've decided that I really need to see this thing as there's just too much stuff that I can see enough of to know its general direction but not enough to be sure of the detail or proportion.   I could do a reasonable job with it by stabbing at it but why do that when I CAN make it anything I want just for a matter of knowing what it SHOULD be. 

For that, does anybody know if that thing is readily accessible to a walk in visitor at Strasburg or do you need more than normal access?  I would like to get inside, too.

Anyway, here are some of the window variation pics.  And searching the web there are many more variations where they still exist.  I think some of them are patch jobs to cover rotted wood for display purposes but the Ma&Pa shown is a pretty safe bet photographed as it was.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[wazzou]

Curious if anyone knows from personal or written accounts how those things rode.
I know conductors and brakemen were pretty vocal when it came to their comfort.

[Lemosteam]

Here are a few pics with the window trim variations I was referring to.  I will start with the Strasburg RR restored version figuring it's likely to be the most prototypical but some of the variants will probably be of interest to some.  And I've decided that I really need to see this thing as there's just too much stuff that I can see enough of to know its general direction but not enough to be sure of the detail or proportion.   I could do a reasonable job with it by stabbing at it but why do that when I CAN make it anything I want just for a matter of knowing what it SHOULD be. 

For that, does anybody know if that thing is readily accessible to a walk in visitor at Strasburg or do you need more than normal access?  I would like to get inside, too.

Anyway, here are some of the window variation pics.  And searching the web there are many more variations where they still exist.  I think some of them are patch jobs to cover rotted wood for display purposes but the Ma&Pa shown is a pretty safe bet photographed as it was.

(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)

Ahh, I see, up until this point all of the images had none including the drawing so i was wondering where they came from.

But those could still be printed separately, even the sill and the upper trim.

[dougnelson]

Nice job Mark.  I did an NDa a while back using beautiful drawings of the ND/NDa by Harold Geissel in the July 1952 Model Railroader.  Also see an excellent article that was very useful to me in the April 2006 (#33) Keystone Modeler.

I chose a mostly scratch built method, although the cupola, roof, and smokejack were from the MTL wood caboose.  End platform steps were salvaged from a donor Bowser N5.  I used scribed styrene for the wood sides.  This was a fun project, but obviously a one-off. 

[narrowminded]

Nice job Mark.  I did an NDa a while back using beautiful drawings of the ND/NDa by Harold Geissel in the July 1952 Model Railroader.  Also see an excellent article that was very useful to me in the April 2006 (#33) Keystone Modeler.

VERY nice @dougnelson !  And that information is exactly the kind of stuff I need.  Thank you sooo much!

I've been looking hard at the pictures of the PRR ND at Strasburg and am editing the drawings, getting ready to make another test piece with more detail to the best I can glean from the photos.  It'll get pretty close but I do want to check out the real thing before to call it a done deal.  And those drawings, or any more that anybody might have will be greatly appreciated.    This is being fun.

Also, it truly does look like just the chassis and trucks make it an N... something else.

Oh, and a specific paint color?  Acrylic is OK as is stinky stuff.  And decals?  And anybody want to come over and make it for me?  I can get bacon.

And thanks again, Doug.

[dougnelson]

Mark:
PM me your email.  I can send the plans and articles.  I also have a brake equipment diagram.  For paint, PRR Freight Car color evolved over the years, so there is some variation depending on period, however with some weathering, the colors can mesh.  I used to use Badger Modelflex Light Tuscan Red Oxide, however new bottles of this paint showed a different color that I did not like.  Decals are from Mount Vernon Shops and Microscale.

[narrowminded]

Mark:
PM me your email.  I can send the plans and articles.  I also have a brake equipment diagram.  For paint, PRR Freight Car color evolved over the years, so there is some variation depending on period, however with some weathering, the colors can mesh.  I used to use Badger Modelflex Light Tuscan Red Oxide, however new bottles of this paint showed a different color that I did not like.  Decals are from Mount Vernon Shops and Microscale.

Thanks so very much.