BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CBQ] Re: New Q steam

To: <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Re: New Q steam
From: "Charlie Vlk" <cvlk@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 11:54:41 -0600
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
Delivered-to: archives@nauer.org
Delivered-to: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima; d=yahoogroups.com; b=U5HWKEY39cyqKtmF/NWoz6SUv0TgQ+wGzVDpaUNM5MlEUUG83HfL51eU7h/9p0Iy+ksPO/Z51jztzBzi/cnm8bg9Im96ygeBJWGxG+I7z86+bsK6BsFrgOAouCxAjlGN;
List-id: <CBQ.yahoogroups.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-list: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com
References: <6.2.3.4.2.20060201165318.03d3aa38@mail.comcast.net> <drrfv5+pmnj@eGroups.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20060201204405.03732eb0@mail.comcast.net>
Reply-to: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Sender: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
In today's market "close" may or may not cut it.
While there might be some locomotives that share driver spacing, there are 
subtle variations in most "mechanisms" that prevent much sharing of model 
components.

That being said, Baldwing, Alco, etc.. certainly did not make a brand new 
design from scratchh every time they build a locomotive.   They had a 
library of designs and
patterns that could be combined to  meet the customer's needs.

In the case of the Q there was much standardization between locomotives. 
The Aurora shops did not want to stock a totally separate parts inventory 
for each locomotive class.  There were standard domes, cylinders, springs, 
drivers, pilot wheels, etc.. etc.  that were common between many classes and 
were totally interchangeable.
In fact, there was an article in Railway Gazette showing drawings of various 
parts that were shared between 0-6-0s, 2-6-2s and I forget what other class 
of locos on
the Q.

I have oft speculated that the Q M1 and M2 2-10-2 were either basically 
stock Baldwin designs or vice-versa.  They certainly shared many design 
characteristics with the
O1, O2 and O3 locomotives (and of course they, in turn, shared details and 
boilers with the S1 and S2), so I suspect it is the former.  The CB&Q was 
considered a very progressive railroad in design and engineering and may 
very well have been the pattern-setter for Baldwin designs.

The Wabash had Burlington pattern 2-6-2s which differed only in boiler 
front, cab and tender details.  They also had 2-10-2s which look 
suspiciously like Q engines but I haven't analyzed them or other road's 
Baldwin 2-10-2s built around the same time to see if they are duplicates in 
any way.

One of the main problems with finding common prototypes is that it costs a 
lot to do separate boilers, cabs and tenders for steam and the variations 
are for non-top selling
roadnames.   For example, the MILW, CRI&P and D&H 4-8-4s were built from the 
same basic plans.  But the details, tenders, driver style, and valve gear 
variations limit the common parts to the frame, drive train and not much 
more.  BLI did a similar project in the PRR J and the C&O T1.... locos that 
were built from the same plan but that had totally different "looks".... and 
the C&O engine did not sell well enough to justify the cost of tooling the 
additional parts to make it.

Even "Harriman" locos, while "common" designs, present a problem as they may 
have started out looking pretty much the same between UP, SP (both strong 
selling prototypes) and IC, Alton/GM&O and maybe Erie..... but being older 
machines they got heavily modified by each road by the time they got to the 
era that most of us model ....and you might not even suspect they started 
from the same set of plans.

And you thought these issues should be crystal clear to manufacturers!!

Charlie Vlk
Railroad Model Resources 



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>