I learn something every day. Thanks. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: David Engle To: C & P Porter ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Tom Hawley Cc: [email protected] Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 8:20 PM Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} Re: Minimum radius
So were the Russian Decapods that ended up on the Frisco, then later went to Eagle-Picher; up to 5 of them are in museums today. DJE ----- Original Message ----- From: C & P Porter To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Tom Hawley Cc: [email protected] Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 7:45 PM Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} Re: Minimum radius Along w/your comment re wider driver tires, some may not know this but the Panama RR was originally built to 5' gauge. At least some of the engines were bult to standard gauge w/wider tires. Some years ago we were down to Eureka Springs, AR and rode the msm operation there as well as their excellent dinner train. They had an ex Panama RR steam locomotive there that they were running on their std gauge track. It really looked interesting with those wide tires. Chuck Porter ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob Werre To: Tom Hawley Cc: [email protected] Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 9:35 AM Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} Re: Minimum radius Arden, Tom and Everyone else: A couple of us had discussed getting some extra drivers from SHS and replacing the blind ones. I then checked the side-to-side movement and discovered that the engine would have trouble making most curves if converted. So unless you want to do some major rebuilding on the frame, I think we will be running blind drivers. Thus far, on my layout, I have to relay a few inches of track with a slight kink. The SHS engine will derail when backing through that area. All of my other engines (most of them larger) run through this area, so I never bothered to fix the track. This just proves that every steam engine will have it's own issues and some will find your own shortcomings. There had been a SP (TN&O) 2-10-2 on display at Houston's Zoo which has recently been moved to Minute Maid Park. Several years ago a group got together with the idea of running it again. They started work on it but never got very far because of the money issue, but we had a talk by one of the workers. He said that engine would run anyplace a 2-8-2 could run because the side to side movement of the middle axles was greater where other engines resorted to blind drivers. I also understand that if a engine had blind drivers the thread width would be greater so the engines drivers would not drop off the rail on a sharp curve. Bob Werre Tom Hawley wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arden Goehring > Are you saying that the SCALE SHS 2-8-0's all have blind drivers? > Which, the > center two axles? > > > > > > > > > I believe I once heard Don Thompson say he could not persuade his > engineer > to put flanges on all wheels on the scale version. Yes, it would be the > center two that are flangeless. > Tom Hawley -- Lansing Michigan > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
