SavaTheAggie

Personally, I'm using my backing less as a donation to the project, and more of me voting with my dollars. I'm showing my eager willingness to spend money on new track geometry, to show there truly is a market out there for it. And the chance to actually get that new geometry - bonus! --Tony

I'll definately building something on this scale. If I do build this one, finishing the building will only be half of the battle. The yard behind the building may not be as challenging a build, but sourcing the parts (and the funds to purchase them) will be a feat. I live within a few miles of Houston city limits, but I am closer to downtown Galveston than downtown Houston. I visit Galveston often, and I consider it to be one of my favorite places. There is a lot of history there, and had things gone differently Houston would be taking a back seat to Galveston in terms of economic power (though I would argue what happened to Galveston was inevitable). Sure, Galveston isn't as pretty as other coastal cities, but it's MY costal city, so to speak. Additionally, the folks at the Galveston Railroad Museum (who use part of the Santa Fe Union Station as the museum) have always treated me and my club very well, and have done nothing but bend over backwards for us. The idea of building their home in LEGO has a lot of draw for me. --Tony

I have supported the project. I was very happy with the pieces of straight track I purchased for my Engine Shed, and I'm looking forward to R104 curves with great anticipation. My main concern is my ability to ballast the curved track to the PennLUG standard, but I guess the only way to know if its possible is to get them in-hand. I don't doubt that its possible so much as my ability to minimize gaps. --Tony

Thank you both. It's been quite fun doing something a little different than my norm. As to if I'll built this building in real bricks, I don't want to make a final decision until I can visit and photograph in detail the Hotel Galvez, the other mega-build I'm considering. It's a Spanish styled beach front hotel built in 1911. --Tony

Half of it built in 1915, the rest built in 1932, the Gulf, Colorado, and Santa Fe Railroad's home office on Galveston Island now is home to the Galveston Railroad Museum and other offices. It stands as the capstone of the historic Strand Street, towering over its neighbors. Santa Fe Union Station by SavaTheAggie, on Flickr Its a strange building. The part to the left of the tower was built in 1915. The right side and the tower in 1932. And while it looks symmetrical from the front, from any other direction it is anything but (and if you look carefully it isn't fully symmetrical on the front, either). Santa Fe Union Station WiP #9 by SavaTheAggie, on Flickr I've been mulling over building a Mega-build - this one, or the Hotel Galvez also on Galveston Island. I have to admit I have a soft spot for this one. SantaFeUnionTerminal_41 by SavaTheAggie, on Flickr The building itself would sit on a 2x5 baseplate footprint, but together with the other out buildings, station platforms, track, and maaaybe the parking lot, the whole complex would take up an excess of 9x5 baseplates. I've selectively compressed the building so it would fit on a smaller footprint than it would have otherwise. The virtual model you see is still unfinished. The crown is missing certain details still, the front entrance and side are missing lanterns, and nearly all of the back of the first floor is completely missing. --Tony

I built a 2-10-4 with this FBBF wheel spacing (or in my case BFBBF). Testing under ideal conditions went flawlessly, so I went forward and finished the train. But running the locomotive on my ballasted track proved less successful - it started grinding in curves, so I had decided that the FBBF wheel spacing was too much. I abandoned the train to only be decorative, stripped out the motors, and went on my merry. But now, some two years later, I discovered a flaw in my ballasted track, where the curves were resting on exposed studs, causing them to twist. I've since fixed the design but have not had a chance to revisit my 2-10-4. It may be viable after all. In any case I wouldn't suggest any larger spacing between flanged drivers - the FBBF spacing is pushing it. --Tony

I agree, well done. There's some nice detailing in there. --Tony

I've been admiring this on Brickshelf for several days. Excellent work. --Tony

At least when it comes to American trains. At the same scale, British trains would be 7-wide (I've looked into building a British train or two), as might European trains (never looked to know for sure). --Tony

Did you try MLCAD, or just LDraw? I can't use just LDraw. MLCAD is awesome. --Tony

I don't screw in the battery case. Half the time I leave it completely off, the batteries don't care. --Tony

Thanks guys. I plan to build some lightweight "shell" coaches for her, but not a full train. The coaches will be part of a "mixed fleet" of passenger liveries. --Tony

I exclusively use Eneloops in my trains, and I frequently have issues with the batteries making initial contact in the battery box. Removing and putting back each battery, trying to turn on the battery box between each, seems to fix the problem. Typically its the batteries closest to the top of the box, but I've experienced issues with all six compartments over the years. --Tony

Thanks guys. Presently she's equipped with two 9v standard train motors, so she's got a bit of power. But she'll never have the same amount of power as a similarly equipped diesel since the powered tender is pushing an unpowered locomotive. I plan to upgrade her with 2 PF train motors, so she'll have increased torque, along with full torque at low speeds - not that I plan to run her slowly. She's got more than enough pep to pull my four streamlined coaches at full tilt. --Tony

Thank you all. I have not yet tested her under power, so that should be a fun experiment. Though right now I have to say it's looking promising - as I was taking photos of her, I had to break the track and separate the tender and locomotive so I could spin them around independently; I didn't have enough room to spin the whole thing. My table has a ever so slight lean to it, and when I separated the tender (motored, heavy) from the locomotive (free-wheeler), the locomotive quickly got away from me multiple times. She rolled off the track enough that her forward driver pair left the track. I don't think many of my locomotives would so freely roll so far on their own like that. As for instructions - probably not. I made instructions for the original version and they haven't sold well enough for me to make a new version. --Tony

Full Gallery Pennsylvania Railroad T1 Duplex (4-4-4-4) Steam Engine #5544, one of the Sharks of the Pennsylvania Railroad. The Pennsylvania Railroad's 52 T1 class duplex-drive 4-4-4-4 steam locomotives, introduced in 1942 (2 prototypes) and 1945-1946 (50 production), were their last steam locomotives built and their most controversial. They were ambitious, technologically sophisticated, powerful, fast, and distinctively streamlined by Raymond Loewy. Sadly, however, the inevitable march of Dieselisation meant that every T1 was out of service by 1952 and the last was scrapped in 1956. None survived. This model is a near complete rebuild of my original version. While it may not be initially obvious, the locomotive is about 90% different parts, the tender was only slightly adjusted to prepare it for swap over to Power Functions. Changes include: XL drivers, SNOT boiler, added boiler length, new wheel arrangement and articulation, added details and an overall closer eye on matching the prototype. --Tony

Thank you all. For only having three members able to attend, I think we did well. And Texas has hundreds of mountains. :) --Tony

Here's a video from Texas Brick Railroad's display this weekend at the Rosenberg Railroad museum. The lighting was not ideal, bug I hope its still fun to watch. --Tony

From someone with 20+ 9v motors and hundreds of 9v track pieces... I'm seriously completely abandoning 9v. Power functions are so much better. More pulling power, better speed options, no motors overheating and dieing. I use rechargeable AA and AAA batteries for my trains, which makes recurring costs next ti zero. 9v trains are only going to age, motors die, and track corrode. Without replacement parts, 9v parts are going to quickly become rarer and more expensive. Texas Brick Railroad is less than a year old, and we've declared ourselves a Power Functions club that will support legacy systems, but our mainlines will always be plastic. --Tony

In Europe I'm sure it sells well. Here in the states I don't know. Ive heard some anecdotes about how it just isn't selling, the main gripe is the lack of other train sets in the store (just HE and the Lone Ranger here), and that some customers won't buy it because of the lack of track and motor. I think if LEGO sold track in my stores again, and sold the motor elements necessary to run it in store, it'd be doing better. --Tony

That's funny. I would have included a photo of that in my original post had I known I had gotten a photo of it (I was a bit focused on just getting things photographed I'm afraid). Pat had showed the Metroliner Monorail the previous day, but said he wasn't going to run it because it was at the edge of the table, and part of the baseplate wasn't sitting on anything. I figured he had put it away. So to correct my error, here is: Metroliner Monorail by Pat Hough BrickFiesta-2013_032 by SavaTheAggie, on Flickr --Tony

This past weekend I was able to attend Brick Fiesta 2013 in Dallas, TX. Here are some of the train-related highlights of the show: Scott Sanburn's gargantuan layout: A history of LEGO trains: Kurt Baty's excellent steamers: The Midnight Express: The Ninjago Train: Metroliner Monorail by Pat Hough: Steamwood Falls by David Hawkins: My Palestine, TX, layout: More photos here: And a bonus video of my Allegheny trying out her new o-rings:

Very cool. None of my trains would clear the curves though, or in some cases the straights, either. :) Still, a very ingenious minimalist design. --Tony

The Alleghenies only had 67" drivers, or about 5.5 feet, not towering over a person. --Tony

A fine attempt at a challenging engine. You've given some nice detail. I am interested in seeing how she looks on a curve. To my eyes she looks disproportionately long. The Alleghenies were quite a bit shorter than Big Boys. Did you build the boiler that long and build everything else to suit, or did you have to allow more room between the driver pairs so they'd take turns easier? Some of the detail you say mine lacks I've since added, but never taken photos of (extra hoses on the boiler, etc.) After seeing a few of your version I may go back and add a few more, like the detail around the steam dome. My version has also not been 9v for quite some time - it's been using two XL Power Functions motors for four years. --Tony