Author Topic: Not the Seaboard 2.0  (Read 13732 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #90 on: January 09, 2018, 04:48:21 AM »
0
Maybe this could be bashed a little:
http://siotani.blog.so-net.ne.jp/_images/blog/_389/siotani/DSC08211-2.JPG

https://www.google.com/search?q=Kato+23-225+-+Wood+2-Stall+Engine+House&num=30&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiglajNvcrYAhVCq1MKHZzQD_IQ_AUICigB&biw=1280&bih=633

https://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/156253232253.jpg

That looks a lot like the Kato kit. 

You got me looking and thinking.  Maybe I'd scratch one that had two bays and a machine shop added on one side, partial length.   That Thurmond one looks to be wood.  What would the roof be on something of that vintage?  I'm guessing Evergreen or Plastruct would have sheets suitable for those parts.  Off the top of your head do you have any specific recommendations for those components?
Mark G.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #91 on: January 09, 2018, 09:42:30 PM »
0
I looked at those drawings some more and this seems like it could definitely be made to fit and the height isn't overpowering.  It scales out to between 2 1/2"- 2 9/16" overall height whereas the kit building is at 4 3/4".  And that was what had me concerned.   The length could be what I want but somewhere between 8" and, if I want to house the EM-1, 10" or so, seems appropriate for function and should fit the space comfortably.  I would be able to add a room off the side at about 1/3 to 1/2  the overall length that could serve as a little shop area.  It also seems like it would be very appropriate in style for the locale.  The whole scene could not be just OK but pretty sexy. 8) 

The way my previous post was worded it seemed like the next question might be, "Would you build it for me?"  :facepalm: :D  That wasn't the intent, just some advice based in your experience and my lack thereof.  :)  Example, I scaled the siding boards on that drawing and they seem to measure about a foot, maybe slightly less.  That scales out to .075" which strikes me as a little wide but maybe not in a structure like this and a building from the heart of hardwood country.  Would they even draw that to scale on a drawing like this?  Or maybe it's just representative. :|  And I was wondering if maybe a different style of siding might be nice such as a board and batten.  And if so, what widths strike you as appropriate?  That's the stuff I meant.  I can cut straight, fit accurately, etc, but I don't trust my artistic eye especially with no experience.  The same kinds of questions surface when I start to consider the roofing materials.   That was all it was.  Any advice that doesn't require major effort on folks' part would be appreciated and just in case it came out differently, I apologize. :)
Mark G.

Chris333

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 18545
  • Respect: +5862
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #92 on: January 09, 2018, 10:11:46 PM »
0
You could just use tar paper for the roof. Using masking tape. And the sell board and batten in sheets as well.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #93 on: January 09, 2018, 10:27:01 PM »
0
You could just use tar paper for the roof. Using masking tape. And the sell board and batten in sheets as well.

Thanks, Chris. 8)  And I just found this on the C&O Historical society site.  Copied complete with creative spelling.

"THE ENGINE HOUSE AT THURMOND AS IT APPEARED IN AUGUST 5, 1953, NEAR THE END OF THE STEAM AGE. THIS BUILDING WAS ENLARGED TO ABOUT DOUBLE ITS SIZE IN 1922 TO ACCOMIDATE MORE OF THE MALLET TYPE 2-6-6-2 LOCAMOTIVES THAT WERE BEING SERVICED HERE. IT WAS A STANDARD C&O BOARD AND BATTEN BUILDING PAINTED RED. PHOTO BY D. WALLACE JOHNSON."

Going back to that site.
Mark G.

Chris333

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 18545
  • Respect: +5862
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #94 on: January 09, 2018, 10:39:57 PM »
0
It was just an idea. You should first find a real enginehouse you like and figure out how to model it from there.

Could always cut the top story off the Walthers kit too.

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #95 on: January 09, 2018, 11:32:10 PM »
0
I get that. 8)  But it was a good idea! :D 

I do like that especially by style.  I couldn't model it exactly as there's nowhere near the room but the research I did tonight shows that basic style to be thematic with the C&O.  There are a number of examples of those throughout WV and into Kentucky.  Just this far I've learned a lot and think it might be worth the effort.  I may also have to sideline the project because I have to get back to chassis stuff so maybe I'll play with that other kit as it's ordered and coming but I think this idea would fit in perfectly with the whole scene.  Whatever happens I think there will be something like this on that board someday. :) 

Thanks for your helpful insights. 8)
Mark G.

Ed Kapuscinski

  • Global Moderator
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 24920
  • Head Kino
  • Respect: +9557
    • Conrail 1285
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #96 on: January 10, 2018, 10:17:46 AM »
0
It was just an idea. You should first find a real enginehouse you like and figure out how to model it from there.

Could always cut the top story off the Walthers kit too.

It's funny, I was thinking that same thing too. That Walthers kit is so ubiquitous, but I don't think I've ever seen that kitbash done.

Chris333

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 18545
  • Respect: +5862
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #97 on: January 10, 2018, 01:55:37 PM »
0
You know I keep looking back at that Kato enginehouse. Here is a photo of it without all the Japanese signage:
http://www.diotown.com/creative/assets_c/2013/04/-thumb-800xauto-3822.png
And some photos of putting kit together/weathering:
http://www.diotown.com/creative/2013/04/kato-wooden-loco-house.html

If you chop off the bottom "concrete" base that is there for Unitrack. It would look much better.

Amazon has it for $20:
https://www.amazon.com/Kato-USA-Inc-23-225-2-Stall/dp/B002OBA6UC

It has board/batten siding  ;)

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #98 on: January 10, 2018, 04:36:20 PM »
0
You know I keep looking back at that Kato enginehouse. Here is a photo of it without all the Japanese signage:
http://www.diotown.com/creative/assets_c/2013/04/-thumb-800xauto-3822.png
And some photos of putting kit together/weathering:
http://www.diotown.com/creative/2013/04/kato-wooden-loco-house.html

If you chop off the bottom "concrete" base that is there for Unitrack. It would look much better.

Amazon has it for $20:
https://www.amazon.com/Kato-USA-Inc-23-225-2-Stall/dp/B002OBA6UC

It has board/batten siding  ;)

Yes, It would be pretty darn good as a stand in.  All of the details are right too with the exception of the windows and that concrete base.  But you have created a monster! ;) 

I now want to detail it pretty nicely so a number of the dimensions are just that little bit off that means everything for a nice fit.  The length is about 3" short so the bigger steam won't fit within the shell.  Then the track C/L's are about 1/4" too close so if I add doors, the center between them is a little narrow and that would show up in the interior space and detailing as well.  Since I'd have to make the base anyway and may have to add something on the perimeter to take up the space lost to the removed base (maybe not due to loss of track bed too) I have at least one side of six that's scratch built and less than I'd like.  Then the windows aren't really right being continuous and are probably those molded pieces with a radius transition to the mullions that gives a slight distortion BUT they would be helpful to see the loco operating within the shell. :|  Then, I was thinking of adding a small addition to one side for a shop area and history says that would start another series of not small efforts and compromises, especially because the four walls appear to be one piece.  So when I consider measurably too short, a tad too narrow, and limited opportunity for a decent interior I get back to scratch building one. 

I suspect windows could be parts from Grant Line but am just a little stuck on louvres for the... whatever it's called down the center of the roof.  I haven't looked for those yet but in a pinch, suspect I could make them.  I've seen where they use steps stood on end to simulate that in the larger scales.  That might take the thinking cap or... what have you guys done with this?  The drawing in addition to some photos has enough detail to fill in roof support, joist design and spacing, and take a good guess at the joist and support column dimensions.  It also has some indication of the door and pit/ floor detail.  I feel that I might be able to do this justice. 8) 

Still pondering. :)

Edit add:  I could probably bash two of those together. :|  It would get me all of my parts and even some leftover that might be able to be used for a shop extension on the side.  The width would need to be split and extended and then the roof, too.  That could be done even if it took a new roof panel layered on or just scratch built, depending on the actual parts.  Something could be done with the joists.  This would give me all (most) of the parts I'd need and for just over $40.  I suspect a scratch built would cost every bit that much for materials. :|  Hmmm.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2018, 05:43:03 PM by narrowminded »
Mark G.

Mike C

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1064
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +170
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #99 on: January 10, 2018, 06:31:51 PM »
0


sorry disreguard
« Last Edit: January 10, 2018, 06:34:46 PM by Mike C »

Mike C

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1064
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +170
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #100 on: January 10, 2018, 06:36:09 PM »
+3
Scratchbuilt ....Maybe 15 bucks at most .....
« Last Edit: January 10, 2018, 06:37:50 PM by Mike C »

narrowminded

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2305
  • Respect: +743
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #101 on: January 11, 2018, 05:57:46 AM »
0
Scratchbuilt ....Maybe 15 bucks at most ....

Thanks for that pic, Mike.  That looks good! 8) 

Maybe scratch building it would cost less than my guess but I was planning on the raised roof section with the louvres and such.  Figured that the bought components like that, the windows and doors, as well as my meager stock of Evergreen may have me buying a pack for just a small piece here and there.  But if I'm going to be doing this stuff I will use it and maybe it's time to get on with it. :)  I tend to estimate high on these projects because I usually manage to spend more than the obvious going in by the time I'm done. ;)
Mark G.

Cajonpassfan

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5393
  • Respect: +1961
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #102 on: January 11, 2018, 10:06:30 AM »
0
My vote goes to the modified Thurmond :P
It just oozes character, and the location on your layout is up front and personal and visible from three directions. Something like that needs to be scratchbuilt, and you could tweak the plan/footprint dimensions to suit your needs. I would love to see the grade drop along the edge of the layout, (implying the river or creek) and model the vertical supports and diagonal bracing, but realize it maybe too late for that... The open track along the edge is also a great opportunity to display equipment and all kinds of railroad junk...
Oh this is going to be fun to watch 8)
Otto

chicken45

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4500
  • Gender: Male
  • Will rim for upvotes.
  • Respect: +1014
    • Facebook Profile
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #103 on: January 11, 2018, 10:11:12 AM »
0
You know, this is kind of a neat coincidence. I never got to see this layout when it was with Foxxxy and was sad when he sold it, thinking I'd never be that close to it. And now it's only an hour away!

Time to bring the big steam (and little steam, too)!
Josh Surkosky

Here's a Clerihew about Ed. K.

Ed Kapucinski
Every night, he plants a new tree.
But mention his law
and you've pulled your last straw!

Alternate version:
Ed Kapucinski
Every night, he plants a new tree.
He asks excitedly "Did you say Ménage à Trois?"
No, I said "Ed's Law."

Lemosteam

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5966
  • Gender: Male
  • PRR, The Standard Railroad of my World
  • Respect: +3798
    • Designer at Keystone Details
Re: Not the Seaboard 2.0
« Reply #104 on: January 11, 2018, 11:47:01 AM »
0
My vote goes to the modified Thurmond :P
It just oozes character, and the location on your layout is up front and personal and visible from three directions. Something like that needs to be scratchbuilt, and you could tweak the plan/footprint dimensions to suit your needs. I would love to see the grade drop along the edge of the layout, (implying the river or creek) and model the vertical supports and diagonal bracing, but realize it maybe too late for that... The open track along the edge is also a great opportunity to display equipment and all kinds of railroad junk...
Oh this is going to be fun to watch 8)
Otto

Agree the Thurmond scratch would be awesome.  I am imagining the clerestory on that model.  Would look fantastic, particularly if you built trusses and added subtle interior lighting, welding LED, etc.- signature scene.