| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Tom Reed writes:
> That's what I was thinking John, but I couldn't put the AT with it. To me
> it would be the Santa Fe Super Chief or SFSC! I hope someone else knows...
Please remember I (a train aficionado with a penchant for accuracy) was
transcribing this. To me it's their "ATSF model" as it is wearing ATSF
(Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe, the corporate name of the Santa Fe
predecessor component of BNSF) colors (warbonnet to be exact).
The Super Chief is a *train*, not a locomotive, so you'll never ever ever
ever hear me calling that set anything like SFSC.
Once the cars referred to become available, we'll have lots of Super Chief
models out there.. they will consist of several copies of the locomotive
followed by several copies of the cars. That's a train. Locomotives AND cars.
The Super Chief is a train, not a locomotive. A locomotive by itself is not
a train. Hence this locomotive is not going to be called the SFSC by me. Ever.
Hope that helps.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> The Super Chief is a *train*, not a locomotive, so you'll never ever ever
> ever hear me calling that set anything like SFSC.
>
> Once the cars referred to become available, we'll have lots of Super Chief
> models out there.. they will consist of several copies of the locomotive
> followed by several copies of the cars. That's a train. Locomotives AND cars.
Out of curiosity, what was the_most_common configuration of the SFSC? How
many cars of each type? How many B-units, if more than one?
Pedro
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Please remember I (a train aficionado with a penchant for accuracy) was
> transcribing this...
One would rather this 'penchant for accuracy' led you to transcribe what was
said at the time...
Hey! What? He started it! :)
Jason J Railton
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Jason J. Railton writes:
> In lugnet.events.brickfest, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > Please remember I (a train aficionado with a penchant for accuracy) was
> > transcribing this...
>
> One would rather this 'penchant for accuracy' led you to transcribe what was
> said at the time...
That's actually what was said. :-)
Nice try though.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.events.brickfest, Jason J. Railton writes:
> > In lugnet.events.brickfest, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > Please remember I (a train aficionado with a penchant for accuracy) was
> > > transcribing this...
> >
> > One would rather this 'penchant for accuracy' led you to transcribe what was
> > said at the time...
>
> That's actually what was said. :-)
>
> Nice try though.
Hey, you gotta take the shot when you can.
JJ
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Pedro Silva writes:
> Out of curiosity, what was the_most_common configuration of the SFSC? How
> many cars of each type? How many B-units, if more than one?
Pedro-
It would depend on which time frame you wanted, and the fact that there were
other routes besides the most famous Chicago to LA one that used different
configs. Here is a helpful link somebody posted a while back about the Super
Chief:
http://www.midwestnpioneer.org/timetable/fallenflags/superchief.html
-John
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.events.brickfest, Tom Reed writes:
>
> > That's what I was thinking John, but I couldn't put the AT with it. To me
> > it would be the Santa Fe Super Chief or SFSC! I hope someone else knows...
>
> Please remember I (a train aficionado with a penchant for accuracy) was
> transcribing this. To me it's their "ATSF model" as it is wearing ATSF
> (Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe, the corporate name of the Santa Fe
> predecessor component of BNSF) colors (warbonnet to be exact).
>
> The Super Chief is a *train*, not a locomotive, so you'll never ever ever
> ever hear me calling that set anything like SFSC.
>
> Once the cars referred to become available, we'll have lots of Super Chief
> models out there.. they will consist of several copies of the locomotive
> followed by several copies of the cars. That's a train. Locomotives AND cars.
>
> The Super Chief is a train, not a locomotive. A locomotive by itself is not
> a train. Hence this locomotive is not going to be called the SFSC by me. Ever.
>
> Hope that helps.
Heck yeah, that helps a bunch! The whole thing just had me baffled and I
was worried that I was just having a dumb spell! hehheh (Hey, it happens)
I'm glad to know that I'm just not versed in "train" speak and not getting
senile! Thanks Lar
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Please remember I (a train aficionado with a penchant for accuracy) was
> transcribing this. To me it's their "ATSF model" as it is wearing ATSF
> (Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe, the corporate name of the Santa Fe
> predecessor component of BNSF) colors (warbonnet to be exact).
Huh. When I look up 10020 on shop.lego.com, it tells me that the set is
named "Santa Fe Super Chief". So it seems it would be inaccurate to
refer to 10020 as anything else.
Steve
[FUT lugnet.nitpick, if it existed]
|
|
| |
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> The Super Chief is a train, not a locomotive. A locomotive by itself is not
> a train. Hence this locomotive is not going to be called the SFSC by me. Ever.
Actually, technically I think a locomotive can be a train. Normally,
anything running on the mainline is a train, whether it is a single
locomotive, or a locomotive pulling a number of cars.
On the other hand, the Super Chief is the name of a particular train
which would never operate on the mainline without a full consist of
cars...
I think most model railroaders would tend to go more with Larry's
definition of a train though, even though it's not absolutely
prototypically correct.
Note that the prototype needs it's definition of a train in order to
make the rules of operation unambiguous (trains have certain rights and
responsibilities, which are not any different just because there aren't
any cars being pulled by a locomotive).
FUT: lugnet.trains
Frank
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Steve Bliss writes:
> In lugnet.events.brickfest, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> > Please remember I (a train aficionado with a penchant for accuracy) was
> > transcribing this. To me it's their "ATSF model" as it is wearing ATSF
> > (Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe, the corporate name of the Santa Fe
> > predecessor component of BNSF) colors (warbonnet to be exact).
>
> Huh. When I look up 10020 on shop.lego.com, it tells me that the set is
> named "Santa Fe Super Chief". So it seems it would be inaccurate to
> refer to 10020 as anything else.
Asked and answered, see .trains where this topic has been discussed at length.
You may call it the LEGO(r) "Santa Fe Super Chief" if you want, but you'd be
just as wrong as they are on this minor point. I can start calling it
TSINSFSC if you wish (The Set Incorrectly Named Santa Fe Super Chief for non
TAFKAP fans).
Besides, I'll stand behind the accuracy of the transcription. ATSF was what
was actually said every place I used it, unless I am misremembering(1). The
anti SFSC nomenclature ranting by me was added later (after someone asked
what ATSF stood for) by me and should not reflect on the transcription
accuracy as it wasn't in there.
But I digress... We're going down a rathole. (as is our wont...)
The naming thing is not important. Fun to argue, maybe, but not that
important. I bought lots of the 10020 despite its name being messed up. :-)
What's far more important to focus on is that another one of our own, one we
know is highly talented (and excessively modest about it, if you ask me),
has gotten not one, not two, but **5** (2) different designs accepted for
production by LD and we will all be able to buy them pretty darn quick.
And that's neat. Really really neat!
1- Which is possible, of course, but not the way to bet, because I never
make misteaks.
2 - that they take only 2 SKUs is even neater!
++Lar
|
|
| |
> The naming thing is not important. Fun to argue, maybe, but not that
> important. I bought lots of the 10020 despite its name being messed up. :-)
>
> What's far more important to focus on is that another one of our own, one we
> know is highly talented (and excessively modest about it, if you ask me),
> has gotten not one, not two, but **5** (2) different designs accepted for
> production by LD and we will all be able to buy them pretty darn quick.
>
> And that's neat. Really really neat!
>
> 1- Which is possible, of course, but not the way to bet, because I never
> make misteaks.
>
> 2 - that they take only 2 SKUs is even neater!
Right On!!!
That means "extra" pieces!!! Purchasing Mulitple copies = multiple clear
macaroni pieces!!! extra grey Slopes, and other details...
plus, this is an awesome addition to the MOC program, since this set is
"lovingly" created by Lego Train Model Guru, James Mathis!! Excellent
James!!!!!!
Ben
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Larry Pieniazek writes:
[snipped unimportant stuff]
> What's far more important to focus on is that another one of our own, one we
> know is highly talented (and excessively modest about it, if you ask me),
> has gotten not one, not two, but **5** (2) different designs accepted for
> production by LD and we will all be able to buy them pretty darn quick.
>
> And that's neat. Really really neat!
I totally agree. :) Maybe I'm in the minority, but this is the point that
totally surprised me. I don't keep close tabs on lugnet.trains, or maybe I
would have remembered seeing postings about these models when they
originally happened (assuming James created them independently, and posted
about them in the normal LUGNET-ish manner).
Steve
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Steve Bliss writes:
> Maybe I'm in the minority, but this is the point that
> totally surprised me. I don't keep close tabs on lugnet.trains, or maybe I
> would have remembered seeing postings about these models when they
> originally happened (assuming James created them independently, and posted
> about them in the normal LUGNET-ish manner).
You did not miss them being posted, nothing was posted about them prior to
Saturday, except for the leaked spy catalog scans. These carried no model
designer identification, nor does the new catalog... but the boxes
themselves state clearly that these are designed by James. Brad referred to
it as a bit of a departure from the first MOC as these were commissioned
rather than preexisting work.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Frank Filz writes:
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > The Super Chief is a train, not a locomotive. A locomotive by itself is not
> > a train. Hence this locomotive is not going to be called the SFSC by me. Ever.
>
> Actually, technically I think a locomotive can be a train. Normally,
> anything running on the mainline is a train, whether it is a single
> locomotive, or a locomotive pulling a number of cars.
>
> Frank
Even though I no longer work fo the NS, they describe a Train as "an engine
or more then one engine coupled with or without cars, displaying a marker."
It also says see Rule 19 which basically says on single or multiple engine
consists, the rear engine headlight on low acts as a marker.
It's probably the same on most railroads I would think. Then again, perhaps
the definition of a train has changed since the Super Chief's days.
Jeff Christner
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Frank Filz writes:
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > The Super Chief is a train, not a locomotive. A locomotive by itself is not
> > a train. Hence this locomotive is not going to be called the SFSC by me. Ever.
>
> Actually, technically I think a locomotive can be a train. Normally,
> anything running on the mainline is a train, whether it is a single
> locomotive, or a locomotive pulling a number of cars.
You are correct, when viewed from the dispatcher/train order/CTC
perspective. An engine "running light" is indeed a train from that
perspective. However it's not a Super Chief, no matter the paint color.
|
|
|
