 | | Super Chief Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —John Neal
|
| | | (URL) (23 years ago, 2-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Super Chief Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) 1. This isn't a shot of a "Super Chief" it's a shot of an A-B-B-A lashup. 2. It's a model, not a prototype, so it's possible the model isn't quite curved right (it happens0 3. It's still a curve all the way from one side to the other even (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Super Chief Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Well, I cropped it, so you could see it better, but it is a Super Chief. (...) Not likely in this case. This pic is from the cover of MR (10-99) which was taken at the Golden State Model Railroad Museum, one of the finest layouts in the (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | F unit Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) No, it isn't (they aren't). They may be PULLING a Super Chief. But a Super Chief is a train. These are locomotives. Locomotives aren't trains except in rare special cases. Your shot was cropped to illustrate the locomotives, not the cars and (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: F unit Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —Josh Baakko
|
| | | | | (...) I thought this started about the roof to the locos, not the nameing! Josh (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: F unit Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) True, but people, even people who claim knowledge levels such that they should know better, keep making this very grating mistake. Back to the roof topic, I did some studying of prototype drawings and I think the curvature of the roof (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: F unit Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —Josh Baakko
|
| | | | | | (...) I think so too, it looks closer to a PA1 or something to that affect... I think those new curved bricks, (1x6, 2 studs) would be great if it wern't for the 2 studs, & 1x6 length... I'd love the curve for an S-2... Josh (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: F unit Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Well, it's my understanding that a "Super Chief" is the *entire* train, locos and cars. Yes, these are locomotives, but they are a part of a Super Chief, which I cropped so you could see them better. (...) Like this one. (...) Which happened (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: F unit Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) They may be locomotives "currently assigned" to *pulling* the Super Chief, but it was not Santa Fe practice (or hardly any other US road, either) to assign specific locomotives to specific trains, except in the very very beginning of delivery (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: F unit Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | (...) I seem to recall reading that the Super Chief was occasionally pulled with F45s, so the F7s can't really be considered part of the train - just it's usual motive power. I get the impression Sante Fe tended to consider "Super Chief" to relate (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: F unit Roof Shot: Flatter curve than you'd think —Josh Baakko
|
| | | | (...) GRRR, FP45 with emphasis on the P! You need the P for it to pull that passenger train;-). Josh , so the F7s can't really be considered part of the train - just it's usual (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
