ShrikeArghast

Decided to mod the model just slightly (or, more accurately, this could be considered an alternative) with a unique valve gear. I know the one in the original would work - not quite as confident about this, but it should function in theory:

Thanks. I've been wanting to throw a skull onto one of my engines for a while, but hadn't found the right one.

Probably not. I am chronically unemployed and impoverished.

It's *okay* - the cab is just iffy. Frankly, I think Lego Ideas is a bit of a scam. Their cherry-picking of projects renders the voting process superfluous.

This thread...

Well it still looks superb. Planning on adding any interior detail? Also, when it was a depot, did it have platforms?

I like it... though that was a depot? Must have cost an arm and a leg to build in brick form. Also - and I am not by any means trying to pick nits - but why did you choose to skip the top-most row of smaller windows between the lettering?

As a lot of you are probably aware, I've been posting a number of MOCs lately set to what I have been calling 2-foot gauge. However, the entire time I've been building, I have also been looking (naturally) at a lot of train photos, and for a while I've had a strong sense that what I've been calling 2 feet might have actually been closer to 3. The problem comes down to how tall you assume a Lego figure to be, since they remain an enduring and unchangeable metric by which to judge scale. A lot of folks just settle on a five-foot height, where one stud equals 12 inches, and move on from there. The core of the issue is, aesthetically, the vast majority of Lego builders do not adhere to this logic when building objects in minifig scale. The human eye wants to assume that, proportionally, the minifig is actually taller than 5', and most buildings, ships, trains, etc. actually lean closer to the upward end of how tall a fig is. This is only natural... we do not live in a world populated by people (and particularly males) who are that short (at least not in Europe in the U.S.). Therefore, in practice, the actual height of a minifig for most builders is probably closer to 6', even if, inwardly, they maintain a simple-to-understand perception of a 60-inch tall minifigure. All of this relates directly to how broad a gauge Lego track actually is, especially since the gap distance between the rails on generic Lego track is effectively 5 studs. Moreover, it ultimately defeats the notion that Lego track is anywhere near standard gauge. And, after doing some math, my hunch was confirmed. Even at the lowest height assumption (re: a figure is just 5 feet tall), Lego track is 60" in width - or 3.5 inches wider than standard gauge track at 56.5". Sadly, it only gets worse from there. Assuming a middle-ground height of 5.5 feet for our brothers in brick, track gauge balloons (correspondingly) to 5'6" in gauge. And, if you follow through logically, that means that a 6' minifigure would, of course, lead to a startling 6 foot broad gauge! Ergo, even at the lowest end, my 2-foot gauge track was actually 3 feet! And it only goes up from there. Thus, even at the most modest height for a Lego minifigure, my track for "2-footers" was actually a robust Cape Gauge of 3'... which means that 2 feet is actually closer to a 2-stud gap between the rails. More to the point, for a while now a lot of Lego train people have been advocating the expansion of locomotive and car width to account for this discrepancy, when they actually should have been begging Lego to reduce track size. To put that another way, the width of Lego trains right now isn't quite as egregious as it seems; it is a problem that is worsened significantly because the gauge of track is so wrong to begin with. Just food for thought.

Eh, forums are for talking. I think perhaps the happiest outcome would be, as a result of a future mega merger, BNSF demands the Tennessee Pass as a concession, with traffic rights into Salt Lake City over the western half of the Moffat line. This would make some sense, since the TP is fairly close the Raton route. I couldn't imagine a major traffic shift off of the Transcon, but, then again, it would open up a new market opportunity, and with intermodal continuing to grow, a short-to-mid-haul routing for BNSF that way could be a logical move.

Unfortunately, talk on several of the railfan forums I follow is that once the coal traffic dries up, even the Moffat route will be 'Homesake'd,' definitively marking the end of heavy Colorado Rocky Mountain railroading. I shudder at the thought, but acknowledge it is a possibility, with only Amtrak remaining a viable user of the line. Sadly, all the thrust lately regarding American railroads is a new round of mergers, which would almost certainly lead to further spin-offs and closures. Much as I want to see Tennessee Pass open, I think the future looks even bleaker. At least they're running through freights over Siskiyou again.

I like it, but it could definitely use foliage (and I would love to see the rest of the mountain, complete with goats and a snow cap :D). Also, generally speaking, a tunnel either had a complete portal structure, or it had nothing (and was as much of a ragged mess as your average hard rock cave) - the inclusion of a very definitive arch here is kind of jarring when the rest of the tunnel front is just raw rock. and vs. A nice compromise might be to extend your internal timber bracing to the exterior, like such: I wish they would just reopen Tennessee Pass :/. At least the rails are still there.

It's a pity Lego no longer prioritizes working valve gear. I imagine that, with today's casting, they could come up with something that looks good and functions without any trouble at all. And yet, we continue to see steam loco after steam loco roll out with absolutely zero effort in this department (the Emerald Night being the exception, but even that was rudimentary and off-the-shelf). And you know what? I haven't bought a single Lego trainset since the Super Chief released because of it. They don't try? I don't buy.

As if we needed a stronger argument against the 6-stud standard. Wow.

Spent about 15 hours making this last night. First the prototype: My version: The torpedo doors open, wings fold, and it will actually seat three minifigs. It would obviously look better with a few stickers.

Ah, there's nothing like an ALCO. Well, a MLW. Or maybe it's a Bombardier? Regardless, the DL-535Es - the workhorses serving as the backbone of White Pass and Yukon's freight and then passenger operations for more than a generation - certainly have that classic ALCO styling, sound and smell. From the gentle curves of both hoods and the cab, to those boxy air intakes, to the long, low-slung profile, these locomotives beg to be modeled. After 8 hours of labor, I feel like I've come about as close as is possible to capturing the essence of the beast. Plus, it's minifig friendly and powered! Proto video: Proto photos: Model:

I could do something like that, but I don't know if it's really as visually appealing:

Prototype is 3-foot cape gauge, and runs from Skagway, Alaska to Carcross, Yukon (although the tracks are largely intact all the way to Whitehorse). It was built for the Yukon gold rush at the turn of the 20th century, but missed the rush by about a year, and spent the rest of its existence in receivership off-and-on until being abandoned, then revived as a tourist hauler catering to cruise ship passengers. The wheelsets use an outside frame method with LDD parts 32017, and then 48729 supporting inverted, black cups that serve as the base for the arched bricks. I think I'd lose the curve on the top of the nose then, though, wouldn't I? If I built it, I'd just slap a few stickers on to even out the yellow in several places. *Shrug* It's LDD - it's fantasy. It probably wouldn't look at that bad to use light grey ones instead there, provided I introduced the color discretely in some other locations. Thanks. Only part I'm unsatisfied with the railings... but looking around on the web at various GP builds, I couldn't find anyone who had come up with a better solution (well, that's not entirely true - I have seen some using hoses, but that's not possible to represent in LDD). They're just so thick and awkward looking. There. Problem solved.

You don't send your royal princess daughters abroad by shipping them like cattle crammed into coach - a noble excursion calls for for an equally queenly car to convey the inheritors to the throne. For the tiny nation of Cape Arundel, that means deploying the Heir Imperial, a luxurious, first-rate Pullman car with numerous amenities needed to satisfy the high standards of spoiled sisters on an overnight journey via narrow gauge. From top to bottom: dressing room, palatial suite (with gold-adorned bed frame), and study: Top to bottom, kitchenette (accompanying chef/butler sleeps with the rest of the peasants), bathroom (the royal throne), and, again, study): Coupled onto a train:

Should fit fine - I test-placed a minifig inside while building just to make sure everything would allow for standing. Only place they probably do not fit is the balcony. :/

Simple yet elegant. I have to confess, my initial reaction was to suggest that you make it narrow gauge (because I am woefully predictable), which might assist its proportions while still keeping it small. However, I understand it's a fringe portion of the hobby at its best :P.

Insets - just extra levels of detail. I didn't want to make the car look like it was fluted in any way, but I did want some eye-catching elements to break up the frame. Therefore, I opted to try to recreate (as best as possible) the appearance of some wood inlay. I guess I was only partially successful :/. Also, the line is supposed to be a gold seam, but it just came out as an off white in Bluerender.

Actually the reason is simple: the car is from a scene in a fantasy steampunk book, and it incorporates certain advanced elements while retaining a classic late 19th century charm. I wanted something that looked familiar, but simultaneously unique, so that is why the carriage is modern, but hearkens back to the original Pullman Palace cars.

The Heisler is the less well-known (and, arguably, less well-beloved, because of it) younger brother to the Shay and the Climax. The renown of this particular breed of engines is also likely decreased due to the fact that most of the "action" - which is the hallmark of the other two versions of geared locomotives - is fairly well hidden on the Heisler, occurring inside a pair of opposed pistons sealed inside a casing, with the power transfer all going on beneath the frame, rather than on the side (as with the Shay). Still, I stumbled across this picture of a model of a rather beefy version of the type a few hours ago and knew I had to construct my own. I was only partly successful - aesthetically, the locomotive is largely complete (it should have piping, but I am God-awful at getting the bend tool to behave), but owing to the fact that I am clumsy as heck with technic in LDD, my feeble efforts to drive the pistons by linking them to the rear-most truck failed. Still, it looks good, even if you wouldn't be able to see the little piston heads pop up and down inside the barrels (which isn't even prototypical, but I wanted action). *Edit* Also, yes, I know the Heisler's wheels are coupled with rods. However, it's impossible to represent custom wheels in LDD that would allow for this, so I elected to simply link them together. Prototype: Mine:

Only one driver has flanges, and the pony truck as well as both wheelsets on the tender at all articulated. Without fiddling with it, I wouldn't know for certain, but I did design it with motion in mind.

I knocked this out due to boredom more than anything else, though I was really surprised how excellently it turned out, considering the narrow frame. I based it loosely on the privately-owned Eureka and Palisade 3-footer, but there were 2" gauge 4-4-0s out there, too (though probably not many as high-stepping as mine - those are big drivers for such a narrow gauge). Prototype: Model: