|
In lugnet.announce.moc, Chris van Lottum wrote:
> I went for a biggie for my first loco MOC so please let me know what you
> think of my Canadian Pacific GE Evolution Series in six-wide.
>
> ...
>
> Pictures and construction drawings when moderated:
I like this model because it looks just like the engines that go past my
family's house (CP and Norfolk Southern, mainly). Growing up right there I kind
of took the trains for granted, but seeing all the effort people here put into
modeling them has rekindled an interest. They are mighty machines.
I am impressed that you created your instructions in Excel. Does that mean you
drafted your own set of part graphics, or are the part images derived from their
LDraw equivalents? Developing orthographic plans certainly makes sense,
especially from a civil engineering perspective, but I am curious if Excel is
often repurposed for this kind of draftwork. I know it is a flexible program,
but this surprised me!
Be well,
Jim
|
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Jim DeVona wrote:
> In lugnet.announce.moc, Chris van Lottum wrote:
>
> > I went for a biggie for my first loco MOC so please let me know what you
> > think of my Canadian Pacific GE Evolution Series in six-wide.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Pictures and construction drawings when moderated:
>
> I like this model because it looks just like the engines that go past my
> family's house (CP and Norfolk Southern, mainly). Growing up right there I kind
> of took the trains for granted, but seeing all the effort people here put into
> modeling them has rekindled an interest. They are mighty machines.
>
> I am impressed that you created your instructions in Excel. Does that mean you
> drafted your own set of part graphics, or are the part images derived from their
> LDraw equivalents? Developing orthographic plans certainly makes sense,
> especially from a civil engineering perspective, but I am curious if Excel is
> often repurposed for this kind of draftwork. I know it is a flexible program,
> but this surprised me!
>
> Be well,
> Jim
Thanks Jim, I draft each piece myself; I don't use CAD. Most parts are really
just combinations of simple rectangles and circles, and the geometry is well
documented and easy to understand. I admit I haven't got all the parts 100%
right, especially the complicated ones, but I tend to limit the number of
odd/and irregular pieces when I build in my head, I only tend to get funky when
I have to solve a problem in real brick, like the three-axle truck on the GE, on
paper the geometry doesn't work but in brick it does - go figure!
As for the widespread use of Excel for drafting - I don't think it is used like
this too often. It's probably a bit to quirky - but then so am I!. At work I
just tend to use it for to use it for the odd figure or sketch to illustrate
calculations for a report. As a package it is commonplace in most offices (the
lowest common denominator is best when you transfer information) and we have
company templates for calc sheets and so on which we are encouraged to use.
Play Well
Chris
|
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Chris van Lottum wrote:
...snip...
> Thanks Jim, I draft each piece myself; I don't use CAD. Most parts are really
> just combinations of simple rectangles and circles, and the geometry is well
> documented and easy to understand. I admit I haven't got all the parts 100%
> right, especially the complicated ones, but I tend to limit the number of
> odd/and irregular pieces when I build in my head, I only tend to get funky when
> I have to solve a problem in real brick, like the three-axle truck on the GE, on
> paper the geometry doesn't work but in brick it does - go figure!
>
> As for the widespread use of Excel for drafting - I don't think it is used like
> this too often. It's probably a bit to quirky - but then so am I!. At work I
> just tend to use it for to use it for the odd figure or sketch to illustrate
> calculations for a report. As a package it is commonplace in most offices (the
> lowest common denominator is best when you transfer information) and we have
> company templates for calc sheets and so on which we are encouraged to use.
>
> Play Well
>
> Chris
This is one really nice engine!
Would it be possible for you to post the Excel file for those of us who dabble
in Excel?
I have built your Prime Mover and am building the engine in LDraw (MLCad).
Except for the part immediately in front of the rear cowl, all has came together
rather well; it looks OK from the outside but it would not lock into the rest
ofthe engine. I did have one piece left over on one of the other parts.
The Prime Mover is a jewell...I'm trying different methods of fitting it into
4558/10001 extended A and C units. It may also become a flat car load.
Thank you for both these.
Joseph
|
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Joseph A. O'Donnell wrote:
>
> This is one really nice engine!
>
> Would it be possible for you to post the Excel file for those of us who dabble
> in Excel?
>
> I have built your Prime Mover and am building the engine in LDraw (MLCad).
> Except for the part immediately in front of the rear cowl, all has came together
> rather well; it looks OK from the outside but it would not lock into the rest
> ofthe engine. I did have one piece left over on one of the other parts.
>
> The Prime Mover is a jewell...I'm trying different methods of fitting it into
> 4558/10001 extended A and C units. It may also become a flat car load.
>
> Thank you for both these.
>
> Joseph
No problems, I have posted the excel file here:
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/chrisvanlottum/Trains/Locomotives/GE-ES44AC/ge_es44ac_20.xls
If you cant work the problem out, let me know the assembly reference and I will
break it down a bit so it is easier to follow. I do not intend to be
deliberately obtuse. If you could also let me know where that pesky spare part
is/isnt I will sort that out too.
Thanks for your interest
Chris
|
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Chris van Lottum wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Joseph A. O'Donnell wrote:
> >
> > This is one really nice engine!
> >
> > Would it be possible for you to post the Excel file for those of us who dabble
> > in Excel?
> >
> > I have built your Prime Mover and am building the engine in LDraw (MLCad).
> > Except for the part immediately in front of the rear cowl, all has came together
> > rather well; it looks OK from the outside but it would not lock into the rest
> > ofthe engine. I did have one piece left over on one of the other parts.
> >
> > The Prime Mover is a jewell...I'm trying different methods of fitting it into
> > 4558/10001 extended A and C units. It may also become a flat car load.
> >
> > Thank you for both these.
> >
> > Joseph
>
> No problems, I have posted the excel file here:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/chrisvanlottum/Trains/Locomotives/GE-ES44AC/ge_es44ac_20.xls
>
> If you cant work the problem out, let me know the assembly reference and I will
> break it down a bit so it is easier to follow. I do not intend to be
> deliberately obtuse. If you could also let me know where that pesky spare part
> is/isnt I will sort that out too.
>
> Thanks for your interest
>
> Chris
Thank you for your fast response.
The Excel spreadsheet is a true work of art. I have never seen such a display!
Over the next several days I'll be trying to work out the last details. If there
are still missing steps I'll get back.
But, in the mean time, thank you, again, for posting the engine and prime mover.
Joseph
|
|
|