Re: SD30

What difference does that make?

Yes, what difference does it make?

Hands in the air for a survey:

How many have built fictional locomotives out of "junk box" leftovers, or something fictional just for fun?

I haven't yet, but my junk box isn't that big.

Jay CNS&M North Shore Line - "First and fastest"

SD30s and their ilk are not to my taste, which is to say I doubt I'd ever build one for myself ... which does NOT mean I can't enjoy seeing a well made one sombody else has constructed (as I HAVE done). I'd debate whether it was a 'model', as it has no prototype. It undeniably exists however, so it's actually it's own prototype. Make believe ... but, to a lesser degree, that's what most all of us are doing anyway. To each his own. That's what makes this hobby so popular ... everyone can go in their own direction.

To me here are only two real 'rules' ... Have some FUN (it's a hobby after all), AND, do the best YOU can ... at least until you learn to do better ('growing' is a part of the hobby too).

Peace ...

Dan Mitchell ==========

Neb Okla wrote:

What's the deal with this "digitally signed message"? just curious

Well, a lot of people take as FACT things that are only vague generalizations. That's where THEY get into trouble.

As for the SD30, EMD never made one, so there is NO prototype. That's a FACT! Even if somebody else cobbled a full sized one together from assorted parts, it wouldn't really be an SD30 (only EMD can make those, in th econtext we're discussing) ... just an imitation of something that didn't exist!

And, yes, I know several railroads HAVE cobbled together various locomotives and given them 'GP' designations ... model that EMD never made. These are 'wann'a-bes', not the genuine article. If EMD was UP they'd have an army of lawyers suing them insensible for improper use of the designation. Naturally it would make NO difference if the lawsuit had any merit or not.

And since the SD30 model has NO 'prototype', does that make it it's own prototype, as I earlier suggested? The real issue as I see it is whether it's a MODEL. I think it's just a really small prototype. It can't be a model if there's no original to model. Note that a model can be in any size ... even 1:1 'full' size.

So, even a full sized ersatz SD30 wann'a-be would be a prototype but not a model, but it wouldn't be a real SD30 since that never existed. It would be a prototype for a locomotive that never existed!

I think that about sums up the issue. :-) ... or is it :-(

Dan Mitchell ==========

Neb Okla wrote:

HUH!!?? If it's the prototype then it must exist ... it's the prototype. It would, by definition, be in the 1:1 scale, i.e. - it is itself.

You could then make models of that prototype. Now figuring out what scale those models are in could be interesting. If I made the prototype to blend with an HO scale layout and then model that prototype to fit with an N-scale layout that model would not be 1:160, it would be 87:160 ... no!?

Paul

Saw the same thing, but didn't bother to jump through the hoops to open. Nothing in this forum is so _valuable_ that it needs such questionable "protection". Digitally encrypting or signing anything for a public forum is a foolish practice.

Frankly, I don't have the time or interest to waste to have to click several additional times to see whatever gem of wisdom an AOL poster using an alias like Neb Okla submits.

-- Jim McLaughlin

Please don't just hit the reply key. Remove the obvious from the address to reply.

I think you have the right idea! :-)

Dan Mitchell ==========

Paul Newhouse wrote:

Hand up.

JCun> Hands in the air for a survey:

What does that mean for my DDF90Ps?

-Hudson

In a more general sense, "me too" ... but not in railroad modeling. Other than my layout that's freelanced as most are and have to be, I stick pretty much to scale modeling in the railroad area. I also do some ship and armored vehicle modeling, and stay rather serious there as well.

I have been known to indulge in science fiction and anime modeling, however. I guess that satisfies any desire I may have for fantasy modeling. Sometimes it's fun to NOT follow a prototype. As I've said, I have no problem with freelance railroad 'modeling'. It's just not MY 'cup of tea'.

Dan Mitchell ==========

"Frank A. Rosenbaum" wrote:

waves hand gleefully...

Apply the rules alluded to in the previous few posts and it should be obvious ? *8-D

Paul

HAH!!!!! I can hardly get the RTR stuff assembled!!

OK, boys, care to share with the rest of the class?

Jay CNS&M North Shore Line - "First and fastest"

Well, I took two MDT Hustlers, smashed them cab to cab, painted them grimy black, mounted the result on an Athearn F unit chassis, added Horns, lights and a fuel tank skirts and cut out a slot for the tab to hold the body on the chassis and then added a Gigantamungo snow plow.

My friend? called it "The Black Abomination". I still have it and it still runs.

JCun>> Hand up.

If a model is only a model if a prototype existed for it, is a fat hooded Athearn SD45 not a "model," since fat hooded SD45's never existed?

If indeed that is also the case, does a "model" have to be an exact reproduction (right down to a functional miniature diesel prime mover and miniature wing nuts and prototypical copper traction motor windings) to qualify as a "model."

At what point is it allowable to depart from actual absolute protoypical practice and still qualify to be a "model" and who is the judge of where that line is?

Isn't any model train really just an abstract anyway?

With that in mind I think I'll go build a model of a center cab DD38TR transfer locomotive, and paint it in SP colors...

"SP 9499 to the Santa Fe tower. I have a transfer for Mormon yard, OOOOVVVER."

I can see it now!

--Steve Sloan

I've already alluded to the SD-30, and SDF7A, and recently added a DDF-45.

You're right; brain fart on my part. They still used 8 axles because the narrow gauge traction motors wouldn't work with 6; too much juice.