Detailing SJEX GP15-1 #1637

[packers#1]

As part of my protolanced industrial layout, I want to create a pair of ex-Conrail GP15-1 locomotives. As I'm getting the layout started now, I'm going to begin with my Operation Lifesaver GP15, Conrail #1637. I will purchase a second GP15-1 when I have made enough progress on the layout or they're nearly sold out at MB Klien, whichever comes first. Rather than make an exact model of my main prototype, LLPX 1506, I am making a protolanced version based heavily off the prototype, with a few touches from Conrail 1637 and CSX 1545 (the unit's number when it became CSX property). This allows me to keep the same number on the numberboards, and frees me a bit from explaining how LLPX wound up on my layout instead of being purchased by the Cape Breton and Central Nova Scotia Railway. It also allows me to not move the horn, as I am currently living in an apartment and will move again, so the locomotive will still fit perfectly in the jewel case.

I am primarily working from this shot of LLPX 1506, as this unit will primarily be viewed from this orientation when switching on my layout.
http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2251300

Another front shot:
http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1843428

And a view of the rear, courtesy of LLPX 1508, which will be the basis for the second Conrail locomotive:
http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1843429

And the prototype 1637 during CSX ownership:
http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=144283
http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=177278


Phase 1 will include a lot of detail painting as well as decaling. I will practice on some of my other locomotives first to refresh my decaling and painting skills before I get to work on this. I also forgot to point out the painting on the back handrails, but that will also follow the prototype.



The second phase will be a gradual, change as I go sort of thing. I'm primarily going to base the weathering off of LLPX 1506, but will add in some cues from the prototype 1637 and other LLPX locomotives. I will first add the reflective stripes though. The detailing parts will be as I go and find them. With the snowplows, the prototype 1637 has them on both ends, but the LLPX only has them on one end as far as I can tell. If whatever snowplow I buy has two in the pack, I'll do both ends. Otherwise it'll just be the cab. Same with the MU hoses. I won't worry about powering the ditch lights, but will just add the casings. The cab wipers will be added if I can find the appropriate ones.



I will use this thread to chronicle both my test runs on other equipment and my actual changes to the model.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Ok, one other thing you're going to want to do... figure out how to improve the electrical continuity between the trucks and the frame. I've had nothing but issues with mine relegating them to hanger queens as opposed to my preferred yard power (which they should be).

[packers#1]

Ok, one other thing you're going to want to do... figure out how to improve the electrical continuity between the trucks and the frame. I've had nothing but issues with mine relegating them to hanger queens as opposed to my preferred yard power (which they should be).

Ooooo that should be fun.  Considering the "Quality" of the Conrail Quality printing I'm not shocked. I haven't had a chance to run it yet so hopefully mine manages to not have the same issues (Atlas TrueTrack on the way, will set up a circle before setting down the layout to test the locomotive out). However, worst case this is the "pretty" locomotive for photo shoots and I use my U23B for actual switching on the layout.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Ooooo that should be fun.  Considering the "Quality" of the Conrail Quality printing I'm not shocked. I haven't had a chance to run it yet so hopefully mine manages to not have the same issues (Atlas TrueTrack on the way, will set up a circle before setting down the layout to test the locomotive out). However, worst case this is the "pretty" locomotive for photo shoots and I use my U23B for actual switching on the layout.

It shouldn't be a terribly difficult fix. I just haven't found "the" solution yet. Essentially, there needs to be some sort of spring between the pickup tabs on the trucks and the bottom of the frame. Or maybe some wire.

[tom mann]

Ok, one other thing you're going to want to do... figure out how to improve the electrical continuity between the trucks and the frame. I've had nothing but issues with mine relegating them to hanger queens as opposed to my preferred yard power (which they should be).

Weren't these a special design to keep costs down for the Trainman line?

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Weren't these a special design to keep costs down for the Trainman line?

They were.

And they suck!

Sorry @Atlas Paul, you know I usually love you guys.

[CR4100]

The trucks have a solid tab that contacts the frame which gets flaky no apparent reason. In the newest run they added a universal joint between the flywheel and the worms.  I'd have preferred if put the money into improving the pickup.

[Spades]

Has anybody tried wiring the tab to directly to the motor?  I would like to try this with  MT SW1500 and a few 40-2's but I am waiting for some other pioneer/trailblazer to try first.   

[coosvalley]

It occurs to me that GP15s were made on frames of GP7/9s...Could the GP15 shells fit on a GP7/9 frame?...Not the cheapest way to get a good runner, but maybe a workable one..

[Steveruger45]

Has anybody tried wiring the tab to directly to the motor?  I would like to try this with  MT SW1500 and a few 40-2's but I am waiting for some other pioneer/trailblazer to try first.   

I did something similar years ago on a flaky Atlas gp40.  Basically I just soldered wires to the truck tabs, 36 gauge as I recall, being sure to leave the wires a little long to account for them turning. I routed the wires up to the board contact slots in the frame, at front and back, one wire per slot.  I filed a groove in the frame for each wire, using a triangular file, to get started and finished the grooves with a round file so nice and smoothe.
The trick is to getting the length of the wires long enough but not too long.
So run the loco on a tight radius and observe/adjust and when happy put a spot of super glue on the wire to hold its position.
Sorry I don’t have photos or that loco anymore but I hope you all get my drift.

[packers#1]

Looking at the tabs, there's a thin film of some grayish oil that seems to be making contact; maybe that's an attempt by Atlas to improve the situation? I'll be taking my unitrak loop back to Memphis, so I'll set that up and test it this weekend. If I don't have issues, I'll just roll with it.

However, if I do have issues or the film ever dries out, I've got a few ideas. My primary one is to just put a dab of solder onto the pickup tab on the truck, then file it if needed, to try to make the tab a bit taller and contact the frame more frequently. I could also see soldering a small brass strip that's slightly bowed out to the frame to contact the truck. Or, like @Steveruger45 suggested, just running some wires up to the circuit board could also work.

[Steveruger45]

I don’t have a GP15 but I just checked spookshow for a closer look at the frame and truck contact area.
The truck copper contacts seem to be flat on top, unlike the old gp40 I had, and run against the frame directly. I was thinking this design gives no flexibility and could easily loose contact on a turn or grade or over switches or even joins in track that may be a little uneven.
I looks like it might be possible to solder a cut down MT coupler spring or one of those MT springs for truck axels used to help stop the slinky effect, on top of the copper truck contact. If this would be possible, that is enough room etc, it would allow the truck to flex relative to the frame and still keep contact electrically with the frame.
Clearances would be the issue, and I cant tell only from a photo, but this idea may be worth investigating for those out there with one of these or even the new bachmann gp40 which appears to use a similar approach at transferring power from the wheels to the motor.

Just had another idea spring to mind (pun intended).  You could possibly cut the ears off an HO scale Kadee coupler spring and solder one of those to each of the truck tabs, sufficiently sized and angled, to do much the same thing too.

[packers#1]

Good ideas Steve, thanks!

I got my track in yesterday so I set up the trackplan for my layout on the kitchen island and tried out an ops session with the GP15 and had very few issues with the electrical pickup. I guess whatever that gray fluid is works well; if I start having issues I'll probably try out the spring idea first. I think the first thing that might help is weight in the unit, so I'll see what I can add. I'll also probably be omitting the grade from the layout to reduce the travel of the locomotive.

[peteski]

. I'll also probably be omitting the grade from the layout to reduce the travel of the locomotive.

You are willing to change your layout's design just to accommodate a single locomotive with poorly designed electrical pickups?

[packers#1]

You are willing to change your layout's design just to accommodate a single locomotive with poorly designed electrical pickups?

In a word, yes. But to expand, the grade would have been minimal anyways, and the Atlas True Track I'm using doesn't seem like it will behave in the way I want, so I'm not too worried about it. The direction my layout is taking is more of a typical industrial park than the inspiration behind it, so I'm not really that broken up over it. I'll be explaining more on my layout thread later hopefully.