Atlas NE-5 Caboose Photos posted.

[wcfn100]

http://www.atlasrr.com/NFreight/nne5caboose.htm

Obviously as a CGW fan, these are highly anticipated.



I'm a bit disappointed that Atlas didn't use a plate to put the CGW herald on, but that's something I can fix.  I may be more disappointed that they didn't get the rib pattern correct.  And not so much that it's wrong, but it could have easily been corrected if they'd just ask for input. 

But overall I'm very happy to pack up my 15 years of home etching, styrene patterns and 3D printing I did to try and get one of these. 

Thanks Atlas!

Jason

[bbussey]

Looks like they used a herald plate. It was scheduled to have a herald plate.

[wcfn100]

Looks like they used a herald plate. It was scheduled to have a herald plate.

If you look close, you can see the shadow of the rib through the paint. Plus Paul told me they didn't use one. 

Jason

[bbussey]

Pretty sure the carbody is the correct arrangement for most of the roads that owned the prototype.  In that vein, the stairs are not the correct style for New Haven.  But that isn't going to stop me from acquiring a fleet of them in multiple NH schemes as they are released, given that the prototype comprised the largest class for the railroad by far.

[wcfn100]

Pretty sure the carbody is the correct arrangement for most of the roads that owned the prototype.

I should have said 'spacing' instead of 'pattern'.  The center two ribs are supposed to be farther apart than the rest of the ribs.  A subtle thing, but one that pretty noticeable when comparing lettering and logo placement to the prototype.


Jason

[ai5629]

Does anyone know if the running board is a separate part?  Would like to remove it on the Conrail ones I will be purchasing.  Thanks.

Jeff

[Doug G.]

I think I see an extra casting mark on that right truck compared to the prototype.



Just kidding.

Doug

[jmlaboda]

Does anyone know if the running board is a separate part?

Sure looks like it is...

[bbussey]

Does anyone know if the running board is a separate part?  Would like to remove it on the Conrail ones I will be purchasing.  Thanks.

It is. Similar design to the NE-6 except that the windows are more flush.

[bbussey]

I should have said 'spacing' instead of 'pattern'.  The center two ribs are supposed to be farther apart than the rest of the ribs.  A subtle thing, but one that pretty noticeable when comparing lettering and logo placement to the prototype.

Not with the New Haven cars, which comprised the majority if the P-S production.

[wcfn100]

Not with the New Haven cars, which comprised the majority if the P-S production.

Wow, thanks Bryan, I never notice the first build was different.

But it should be said, the majority of the New Haven cars had the wider spacing like the CGW cars.  Based on the build numbers and looking closer at photos, it looks like just the first 25 (c510-C534) NH cabooses had the narrow/constant spacing.  But starting with C-535, they went to the wide center space.  The  B&M cars also had the wide space.  And of course the CGW cars.

Here's C-548 which was part of NH's second order (c535-c584).



The third order was the same as the second (c585-c634).

So 100 of the 125 NH cars had the wide spacing.

So I'll apologize to Atlas for saying they got it wrong.  In 15 years of working on these, I never picked up that 25 of the 160(?) total cars built were different.

Doesn't really help me knowing this, but I always like learning stuff. 

Jason

[bbussey]

Interesting. Fortunately the difference is subtle enough not to stick out.

[bbussey]

I guess the spacing is off on the Trailiner cabooses as well, but they still look pretty hot — placards and all. 

[Point353]

Here's C-548 which was part of NH's second order (c535-c584).

Here's C-548 about to be put back on the trucks after the move its latest home:

[bbussey]

Of note — two of the three Atlas NH car numbers are from the first twenty-five.