M-10005 'City of Denver'

[ccvstmr]

Morton,

There is no doubt, you will have an excellent model when you complete this project. Great workmanship! Your passion and attention to details shows clearly. Something you can be proud of.

After looking at your photos, I saw an underside shot of your pilot...and here's a suggestion you should seriously consider. Simply put...derailments happen! You don't want to see your model damaged...and clubs or individual track owners don't want to see their rail "shaved" (aluminum rail in particular).

I found a way to save both model and rail. When I shared this idea with one of my club colleagues, he followed the suggestion and referred to this as "The Baskin Bar". It's basically, a 3/8" or 1/2" round piece of round cold rolled steel welded to the underside of the pilot and behind the face sheet metal (please don't use all-thread rod). Nothing wrong with letting the bar hang down an 1/8" or so. It won't be easy to see unless someone is on the ground anyway. The whole point is to allow the loco pilot to skid/slide along the rail top instead of digging in and causing damage. Think about it. It could save a few hours of repairs.

Another suggestion...hope you'll be carrying a loco re-rail fixture. One of the "lift and swing units" comes to mind. I've made (2) different versions. The first used a wheel barrel handle and a swivel caster. The second version was portable and collapsible. With all those batteries in the "power compartment"...you're going to want mechanical leverage to help get the weight back on the rail.

Hope this gives you some worthwhile ideas. Keep up the great work! Carl B.

[morten1996]

Hello Carl,

Thanks for your input and the picture you have included.
However, if you take a close look on to the 'later' shots of the pilot, you might see there's an offset at the lower edge of the pilot. It's a 1/8" plate sticking out app. 1/16" outwards (similar to the prototype design) but extend further inwards to the pilot. So it works like a skidding shoe in the case of a derailment...it's close to your suggestion.

Best regards
Norman

[morten1996]

After a long time some photos of the project's progress:
- The grill has been remodeled to reach more sidewards along the nose - the aspect ratio of the grill is now closer to the prototype's photos
- trucks have received fake coil & leaf springs
- shell received a surface application with (colored) gel-coat
- not visible, but coupler & safety hook were attached to the unit's end; gave me some headache because the initial trial with a coupler & draft-gear interfered with the truck's end....now a coupler-type w/o draft-gear is attached (no span-bolster here).






And yes, I know that the lower skirt on the sides reaches to much downwards - it is closer to the E-units than to the rather shallow outline of M-10003-6; however, I don't intend to remodel this point (the model's skirting covers the battery trays)

Best regards
Norman

[rrnut-2]

And yes, I know that the lower skirting on the sides reaches to much downwards - it is closer to the E-units than to the rather shallow outline of M-10003-6; however, I don't intend to remodel this point (the model's skirting covers the battery trays)

Best regards
Norman

If anybody says anything, just ask them "Where's yours?"

Your work looks nice! Keep the pictures coming.

Jim B

[aopagary]

if you finish the lower skirting with the prototype dark brown under a red stripe, visually it will look a lot smaller than it does in the primer coat. excellent job!

[morten1996]

@ aopagary
Thanks for the reply - I'll hope that the visual effect will be sufficient to shrink the skirt a bit (however, to be honest, I prefer the lower skirts of the E-units with a more compact look rather than the 'stacks at half-mast'-look of the M-10003-6...but this is only my opinion, of course non-prototypically).

Did some 'hernia'-sport today and assembled A- and B-unit (it's not possible to do this in my shop / garage)...
It revealed some interference of the idler-gear with the A-unit's coupler-pocket - some more cutting & grinding necessary...





Regards
Norman

[morten1996]

Having already mentioned the wrong designed skirts I finally decided to rebuild the unit to a smaller more prototypical design.



Although it took some efforts I'm feeling better now ;-) ...now the B-unit has to be remodeled, too.

[chrfitt]

Very nice work. Keep the photos coming. What is the length of the A/B together?

Chris

[morten1996]

Chris, thanks for your nice comment.
Length of A+B-unit is app. 18ft.

[BobbyT]

It is coming along nicely! Please keep the updates coming.

[morten1996]

And some news about the ride-on engineer's car (prototype: 'aux. power-baggage' with two diesel-generator sets at the car's front end); length app. 10' 8".





Unfortunately my design of the skirts based on the former skirts of the A-unit (which was reaching too low) - so the car's skirts will have to rebuild to a shortened version, too.

Regards
Norman

[ccvstmr]

Norman...I can see where you might be upset by the different loco skirts. I think I would have another concern and hope you accept this FWIW...for whatever it's worth. It appears your (2) units are very close coupled. That may be in keeping with the prototype design for streamlining, but in the event of tight radius turns/turnouts or worse a derailment...I'd hate to see your bodywork get damaged. Perhaps longer shank couplers might minimize that risk. Just sayin'. Carl B.