| |
Dear all,
Continuing my love of building trains from countries off the beaten track I
present an Indian EMU. These run as commuter service in Mumbai and other Indian
cities.
front carriage
front
detailing folder when
moderated
The front of this train has a typical livery while the sides are decked out a
completely different advertising livery. This is quite prototypical as can be
seen in this picture of the
real thing.
This model was built in one day as part of a challenge with another AFOL who
didn’t fulfil there side of the bargain. Please make any suggestions or
criticisms you like as I would like to improve it.
Thanks,
Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
This model was built in one day as part of a challenge with another AFOL who
didn’t fulfil there side of the bargain. Please make any suggestions or
criticisms you like as I would like to improve it.
|
Interesting. The prototype seems rather squat (much wider proportionally than
your model), can you try to lower the height of this model at all to achieve
that look?
I like the front pilot/buffers area.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.trains, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
This model was built in one day as part of a challenge with another AFOL who
didn’t fulfil there side of the bargain. Please make any suggestions or
criticisms you like as I would like to improve it.
|
Interesting. The prototype seems rather squat (much wider proportionally than
your model), can you try to lower the height of this model at all to achieve
that look?
I like the front pilot/buffers area.
|
Hi Lar,
Thanks for the comments.
It’s a wide, wide-gauge train but I just couldn’t bring myself to go to seven
wide even though the model REALLY needs it. I might be able to squeeze one plate
lower (need to check on a brickbuilt version) but unfortunately any lower than
that and my minifigs will fall off the sides. I might try to force myself to
widen it but it is hard for me to do.
Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
It’s a wide, wide-gauge train but I just couldn’t bring myself to go to seven
wide even though the model REALLY needs it. I might be able to squeeze one
plate lower (need to check on a brickbuilt version) but unfortunately any
lower than that and my minifigs will fall off the sides. I might try to force
myself to widen it but it is hard for me to do.
|
I hear that!
So tell us more about this one day challenge thing?
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.trains, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
This model was built in one day as part of a challenge with another AFOL who
didn’t fulfil there side of the bargain. Please make any suggestions or
criticisms you like as I would like to improve it.
|
|
Oi! I said I’d do the 8 wide Ghan as soon as I can! *shakes fist* just you wait
till the 14th!!
| |
Interesting. The prototype seems rather squat (much wider proportionally than
your model), can you try to lower the height of this model at all to achieve
that look?
|
The EMUs run on 5ft 6in gauge track. In addition to this, they’re wider than
regular stock too.
Tim, nice model, a contest winner if I ever saw one, but I have to say... you
wasted your time making gangways (or whatever they’re called) between the
coaches. They don’t exist in real life.
Legoswami
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
It’s a wide, wide-gauge train but I just couldn’t bring myself to go to seven
wide even though the model REALLY needs it. I might be able to squeeze one
plate lower (need to check on a brickbuilt version) but unfortunately any
lower than that and my minifigs will fall off the sides. I might try to force
myself to widen it but it is hard for me to do.
|
Seriously-- why would that be “hard to do”? Aversion to creating wide trains is
baffling to me. This MOC could easily be built 9 wide, going by the looks of
the prototype, and it would look great at that width!
Forget about conventions, Tim. Capture the look of what you are modeling. I
always find that “function follows form”. Work out the running details later
(if even necessary).
You have a great start on this MOC. Now hit the ball out of the park:-)
JOHN
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Samarth Moray wrote:
| |
The EMUs run on 5ft 6in gauge track. In addition to this, they’re wider than
regular stock too.
|
Cool! A gauge that can be accurately modeled at minifig scale! Built that
sucka 10 wide!
JOHN
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.trains, Samarth Moray wrote:
| |
The EMUs run on 5ft 6in gauge track. In addition to this, they’re wider than
regular stock too.
|
Cool! A gauge that can be accurately modeled at minifig scale! Built that
|
Exactly what do you mean by ‘precise’? I’d love to know. I build loads of IR
models that are of this gauge, so any scale conversion (from real world to in
the brick) you might have handy would be great for me. I suck at math :-P
Legoswami
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Samarth Moray wrote:
| |
Exactly what do you mean by ‘precise’? I’d love to know. I build loads of IR
models that are of this gauge, so any scale conversion (from real world to in
the brick) you might have handy would be great for me. I suck at math :-P
|
Well, maybe precise was too exact a term:-) But I figure it like this:
I assume a scale of 1:48 (which is “O” scale). O scale model railroad locos
are 8 studs wide, but LEGO track gauge is wider than O scale track gauge. So
in essence, LEGO track gauge at 1:48 scale is some sort of wide gauge.
Now, if you assume for argument’s sake that a minifig is on average 5’ 6” tall,
then you see how well it fits, because LEGO track gauge is almost exactly the
same as a minifig’s height. And if IR gauge is 5’ 6”, well then you are spot on
at 1:48 building 8 wide (assuming a 10 foot wide train).
JOHN
|
|
| |
| |
Seriously-- why would that be “hard to do”? Aversion to creating wide trains
is baffling to me. This MOC could easily be built 9 wide, going by the
looks of the prototype, and it would look great at that width!
|
If your other trains are eight-wide I’d say this should be a least nine-wide,
possibly ten.
| |
Forget about conventions, Tim. Capture the look of what you are modeling. I
always find that “function follows form”. Work out the running details later
(if even necessary).
|
What I enjoy is trying to capture the look of something with the extra challenge
imposed by limiting myself to six-wide (and typically built on a stantard train
baseplate). As a general rule this works out fine but in this case I think that
a true “six-wide” version would actually be seven-wide to keep the look accurate
enough given the second limitation of a minifigs height.
| |
You have a great start on this MOC. Now hit the ball out of the park:-)
|
Thanks. I think I will go seven-wide if/when I upgrade it. So much becomes
easier and better if I do.
Tim
|
|
| |
> I hear that!
>
> So tell us more about this one day challenge thing?
Since Samarth has outed himself elsewhere in the thread you know who it was with
now. Basically Swami and I had been talking about building a train (this one for
me and the Ghan in eight-wide for him) for a while so I suggested half-jokingly
that we had 24hrs to come up with something. Since I like a challenge and had an
empty Sunday I decided to see what I could do. I recommend trying a 24hr build
challenge to anyone as it's a good way to force yourself to build those unusual
projects you might otherwise not get around to.
Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.trains, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
What I enjoy is trying to capture the look of something with the extra
challenge imposed by limiting myself to six-wide
|
Sure, but you can’t defy the laws of geometry, Captain! The shape of the loco
is clearly a rectangle, so if you chose to limit yourself and create it 6 wide,
then (as Lar pointed out) it needs to be a lot shorter. So short, in fact,
that it will no longer be minifig scale.
You know, even TLG breaks the “rules” now and then and creates 6 wide cars and 8
wide rolling stock... ;-)
JOHN
|
|
| |
> Continuing my love of building trains from countries off the beaten track I
> present an Indian EMU. These run as commuter service in Mumbai and other Indian
> cities.
>
> <<http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/timgould/EMUIndian/emu_whole_side.png>>
Very nice Tim.
How did you do the corner of the roof at the front?
It looks like the curve piece and the 2nd slope conflict.
--
Dean Earley, Dee (dean@earlsoft.co.uk)
irc: irc://irc.blitzed.org/
web: http://personal.earlsoft.co.uk
phone: +44 (0)780 8369596
|
|
| |
Sorry to respond to my own post. Due to having enough feedback suggesting that a
seven-wide version of this train would be much, much better, I went back and
redesigned it. Here is the new wider version
front
car panto car
front
view gallery when
modded
Note that that is the same gallery as the old version so you can compare each
‘shot’.
Hope you enjoy,
Tim
|
|
| |
| |
Very nice Tim.
How did you do the corner of the roof at the front?
It looks like the curve piece and the 2nd slope conflict.
|
It’s a 1x4 vertical curve (part 6191). I
actually wanted to use that technique in my
Russian EMU but it didn’t look right so
I was happy to get to use it on this.
Tim
|
|
| |
> > How did you do the corner of the roof at the front?
> > It looks like the curve piece and the 2nd slope conflict.
>
> It's a 1x4 vertical curve (<http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/6191 part 6191>). I
> actually wanted to use that technique in my
> <http://news.lugnet.com/trains/?n=25404 Russian EMU> but it didn't look right so
> I was happy to get to use it on this.
I didn't know they existed :)
--
Dean Earley, Dee (dean@earlsoft.co.uk)
irc: irc://irc.blitzed.org/
web: http://personal.earlsoft.co.uk
phone: +44 (0)780 8369596
|
|
|
