Trainworx 86' Thrall Hi Cube Box Car

[ljudice]

Robbman, they did say they are doing heavyweight passenger cars in N...

[Robbman]

Where?  All the news I've read has been on the Z versions due out this year... will they be the same as those?

[ljudice]

Trainboard - this was from the MTL guy himself!

[wcfn100]

Where?  All the news I've read has been on the Z versions due out this year... will they be the same as those?

http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?t=90055


Jason

[ljudice]

From TRAINBOARD:

"Hi Guys,

The Heavyweights are scheduled for 08 but not sure the exact release date. We are working on 4 different cars now and I can post images of the art in a few weeks I hope. Photo's of plastic will have to wait for the test shots of course ) I am also working on the next 4 cars after these...at least folks will have a selection of 8 cars. As for release plan, if we do what we are planning with the Z Smoothsides then we will make them available in 4 car sets followed by individual cars to fill out a consist. I'm sure there will be a number of releases of undecs...painted in Pullman colors without any markings. I'm sure there are decals out there that will even make the Pennsy folks happy!

Cheers

Joe"

[Robbman]

Al right... time to see if any match any N&W cars... thanks!

[Toptrains]

Hi All,

Just for info there have been a number of articles written on the 86-foot Auto Parts Box Cars and a numbers of models have been made. Some good, some fair and others, well that is another story. From what I have read and seen the three major players in the 86 foot car field were:

Greenville 4,809 cars
Thrall 3,544 cars and
Pullman Standard 2451 cars

Pullman made 1900 double plug door cars and 55 quad plug door cars. I do not have the breakup of figures for Greenville or Thrall.
Pullman made cars for:

Double Plug Door:   ATSF, CoG, CNW, C&O, MP, KO&G, T&P, NYC, N&W, PRR, PC, SLSF, SSW, UP, WP and WAB.
Quad Plug Door: B&O, CRI&P, D&RGW, KCS, MILW, MP, KO&G, T&P, NYC, PRR, SOU and UP.

It would appear the PRR, NYC and PC bought large groups of the cars and CR finished up with over half the total PS Production.
Another small player in the field was PACAR. It will depend if Trainworx are going to also do the quad plug door variant but there is a faily simple conversion that can be done to modify the Thrall car to a PACAR vehicle. (see RMJ Page 36 Sep 2000).  Article appear the the Jan 1994 and August 1999 RMJ. Some of the DT&I PS cars were painted over by GTW to the Good Track Road paint scheme but the retained the DTI reporting code.

I have tried to look at the RMJ website but keep getting this site that tells me it has expired. Does anyone know what has happened to RMJ. Has it gone the way of Model Railroading.

I hope the information helps all. Models of double and quad plug door cars are currently available from ConCor with older models available from Atlas, AHM. These are reasonable representations of the PS Model. A model from Arnold is close to the Greenville design but is only 83 feet and Minitrix has a car based on the PACCAR  design but with the wrong roof the side dimensions were our of wack. Some of the early cars had roof walks which we later removed. I thank D Scott Chatfield  and Mike Budde for their informative articles and the great source of information provided.

References:

A  RMJ January 1994
B  RMJ August 1999
C  RMJ September 2000

Regards

Al Cutmore

[Mark5]

Apologies to Chessie, but the cat is out of the bag:

http://www.wic.net/~trainworx/86box.htm

[Robbman]

Odd way to show a screenshot...

[Chulvis]

Odd way to show a screenshot...

That's very polite.

[Robbman]

Couldn't think of any other way to say it... it looks like they scanned a B&W printout of a screenshot of the 3D model (note the model has no perspective)... which is just plain odd.

[wcfn100]

note the model has no perspective

Probably 'cause you don't work in perspective.

That type of view can happen if you decide to rotate a normal working view like the side or end, neither will have any perspective and when you rotate the view, you get some odd looking stuff.  If that was just a wire frame, you might never get a reference for viewing it, if fact it'll probably look inside out.

Easily fixed with the press of a button however.

Jason

[daniel_leavitt2000]

I was told longer tooling was a problem by an MTL several years ago. This was before the open auto racks. I'm not saying you are wrong. They ,ay have just been bumping me off (I was asking for Comet IIs), but too-short tooling machines was the reason given.

[Robbman]

note the model has no perspective

Probably 'cause you don't work in perspective.

That type of view can happen if you decide to rotate a normal working view like the side or end, neither will have any perspective and when you rotate the view, you get some odd looking stuff.  If that was just a wire frame, you might never get a reference for viewing it, if fact it'll probably look inside out.

Easily fixed with the press of a button however.

Jason

Actually, I do work in perspective sometimes (and yes, it is simply a press of a button).  Especially helpful to see if a part is sized correctly...

I know in very finite detial how a view like that is created... I only create parametric models for a living

[Robbman]

I was told longer tooling was a problem by an MTL several years ago. This was before the open auto racks. I'm not saying you are wrong. They ,ay have just been bumping me off (I was asking for Comet IIs), but too-short tooling machines was the reason given.

They probably just wanted you to go away... no offense.