H12-44

[SkipGear]

As if I don't have enough projects going on simultaneously, a month or so back I picked up an Atlas VO1000 mechanism in a lot of parts. It was the gen 1 frame but after a little tinkering, it runs as good as anything I have. I am not a big fan of VO1000's so buying a VO shell from Atlas and sticking it on is not part of the plan. I started looking around to find out that the H10 and H12-44 have the same wheelbase and truck as the VO1000. The other day nosing around Ebay I ran across a couple of the Trix H12-44 shells for $1 each. I picked up a few, hoping that they might just drop on, a little paint and decal later I would have what I needed. It turns out the Trix shell is about 2 scale feet too short and it won't fit over the VO frame.

Anybody have any suggestions on how to stretch the Trix shell without having to clean off all the access door detail and redo it? I can gain about a foot in front of the radiator grille as the nose is visibly a little short there. The cab looks a little narrow also so maybe I can just add a foot there and get what I need. Here is what I am shooting for....

http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?august05/08-16-05/B+O_SF-4_1200_hp_switcher_9724-right_side.jpg

[bbussey]

Tony,

That's good news that the VO-1000 wheelbase is prototypically correct for the FM units.  I don't have a shell in front of me, but based on the picture you linked to the cab definitely is shorter than the prototype in the photo.  I think you've already stated your best option  - stretching both ends of a Trix shell, possibly by using a second Trix shell as a donor.  I'll have to add that to the list myself for a potential New Haven unit.

[Chris333]

That photo looks much shorter than the Atlas VO. 
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2664818

I found a post on Atlas where I measured the VO WB, it was 25'9" FWIW.

[Dave Schneider]

Tony,

Here is how I "spliced" two shells together to lengthen the Trix shell. Major disclaimer, this photos was done in Photoshop. (Insert standard Skibbe Photoshop joke here) although I have cut up the shells. Note the lovely horizontal mark across the side doors where they applied a stripe, apparently with their paint chisel! I learned my lesson and will now only strip shells from lesser roads such as the Pennsy.



This is the object of my affection, which has longer battery boxes than the one you showed. This is at Humboldt Yard on the Beer Line.


I have been stuck trying to figure out how to mount the shell to the mechanism. I have thought about trying to replicate the two part Atlas design with a separate upper shell that attaches to the bottom portion. Trying to do this project is also complicated by the lack of scale drawings for these units (I do have some various equipment diagrams, but not a real drawing). I am also not a fan of the Trix cab, and would like to replace it with an Atlas cab.

I need at least 5 of these for the Beer Line, and keep hoping that maybe FVM will decide to take this one. All my suggestions to Matt have been met (understandably) with a polite "we'll see". My kids know that this means "No, but I am not going to come out and say it".

I look forward to seeing how this turns out for you. I have about 20 of these Trix shells to hack away purchased from Model Power during their big blow out sale. I also have 3 or 4 Trix mechanisms that I would be willing to sell if anyone wants to play around with those.

Best wishes, Dave

[delamaize]

I got a few ideas, but it's going to have to wait till the middle of June when my stuff gets back here from the land of good beer and brats.
I have all my trains, just no tools. 

[AVR Mark]

From what I have read, the H10-44 and H12-44 until mid 1956 had a frame the same length as the Baldwin VO-1000. During 1956 the H12-44 was re-designed with a 3 foot shorter frame and the newer version used belt drive auxiliary equipment instead of electric motor driven. This was done to reduce costs and increase the profit margin per unit. I sure hope that someone will come out with a correct model of the H10-44 and all the phases of the H12-44 as well as the Alco S series (1 through 6 and the T6 would also be nice). I also would like to see a model of the EMD SW-1000 (I would even settle for a SW-1500).

Mark

[Chris333]

Baldwin also did some screwy mid model length changes. I remember trying to bash a VO1000 into an Erie loco and found 3 of their locos had a different WB that matched the VO. Later they got shorter I think all the way down to the S12.

[Lenny53]

Rather than splicing shells, can you file down the ends of the frame?

[SkipGear]

The frame ends exactly at the end of the trucks, where it should actually. The screws are at the very ends. If you set one end or another of the shell on the frame, it lines up perfect, it's just not long enough overall. I have two shells, just need to decide where to splice them so they don't look awkward.

I wonder if the Trix is modeling one of the short frame versions or they just compressed it to fit an existing chassis.

[bbussey]

Judging by when they made the model ... during that era of N scale, the manufacturers pretty much replicated what was on the rails at that time - lots of 1960s equipment.  So it stands to reason that the Trix model is based on the shorter framed version.

[Brakie]

That H10-44 or the H12-44 might be a good candidate for Rapid Prototype Model project.

[Dave Schneider]

I posted the following info in a recent thread on backdating the H10-44.
https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=25667.msg256728#msg256728


(Compiled from 2nd Diesel Spotter's Guide).

• The H10-44 Loewy-style car body was produced from 1944-1949 and had a sloping nose, battery box fairing and roof overhang.
• Early H12-44 produced 1949-September 1952 were similar to the H10-44s.
• Beginning in September 1952 through 1953, the slant nose and roof overhang was eliminated.
• In 1953 the battery box fairing was removed.
• Finally, in 1956 the entire car body was shortened 3 feet and the side sill was made deeper.

The Trix model as built is a decent version of the 1956+ H12-44. The Milwaukee Road didn't have any of these, so that is why I need to stretch the shells. I would love to have a mixture of the various phases of the H10-44 and H12-44, but thought I would start with the 1953 version. Luckily many of the MILW 700-707 series of this style worked the Beer Line in the late 1960s to early 70s.

I too have hoped that this would be an attractive RP type project and have followed the various threads on similar projects. My read is that the technology isn't quite there yet to produce these at a cost that would be attractive to all but the most dedicated (and wealthy) modelers. Another route is the traditional master/casting process, and that is something that I have been considering. 

Best wishes, Dave

[bbussey]

Dave,

Rather than using the RP model as a production piece (a la the ESM White Tower), think of using it to create a master for making polyurethane castings (a la the ESM Keyser Valley caboose).  My suggestion would be to use the RP to create the basic core of the master, then add the details from other mediums such as etched brass and plastic parts.  Get the master as accurate as possible, then cast that for your multiples.  The higher price of making the master gets amortized across the multiple castings and becomes affordable from that standpoint.

[Dave Schneider]

Thanks for the suggestions Bryan. Do you think that producing the core without the door details, etc might solve some of the stepping problems as well since it could be sanded?

That said, I don't have the skill set currently to produce a core in CAD. Then there is the issue of not having any drawings to utilize. One of the Mod-U-Track guys (who doesn't post here) has measured an H10 or H12 recently so that would be a big help.

Best wishes, Dave

[hpwrick]

Is there a way to cut the chassis back?

Same model shell and I'm looking at the Life Like Chassis for a NW2.     To make it work I will need to cut the chassis back on each end.

Just a thought and no I haven't tried it yet.