Railworks America

It has now occurred to me that DTG has been making U.S. diesel locos,but not any steam locos.
And there's only a few U.S. steam locos being sold on steam,such as:
Big boy,Challenger,Cab Forward,GS-4,mrennie's FEF-3 and connie,the PRR K4,Berks,and E-1's.
I'm pretty sure that's most (if not all) of the U.S. steam locos being sold on steam.Just compare the amount of U.S. steam to european steam and other engines.
Maybe DTG could expand on the U.S. steam DLC....

I agree. I've asked before about someone making the N&W Class J. But I know that there is an issue with doing that one since the Virginia Museum of Transportation, which owns the 611, now has a trademark on the likeness of any Class J locomotive.

But, a second idea to consider, would be to model one of the N&W Class K-2a's. There were a number of Baldwin Class K-2a 4-8-2 Mountain's that received semi-streamling that made them "look" like the Class J's. If you do a search for images online (N&W K-2a), or go to ( http://www.3rdrail.com/images/NW-K2-brochuresm.pdf ), you'll see what I'm talking about. This would give us a nice streamlined locomotive that resembles the Class J without worrying about the trademark since it's NOT actually a Class J at all.

I think it would make a great addition to the TS fleet of American steam.

K-28, original 2-8-0 that came with Challenger, USRA 0-6-0,0-8-0,2-6-0,2-6-2,4-6-2,2-8-2,4-8-2,2-6-6-2,2-8-8-2 I'm sure I forgot some from Britkit.

wopflyer wrote:I agree. I've asked before about someone making the N&W Class J. But I know that there is an issue with doing that one since the Virginia Museum of Transportation, which owns the 611, now has a trademark on the likeness of any Class J locomotive.

But, a second idea to consider, would be to model one of the N&W Class K-2a's. There were a number of Baldwin Class K-2a 4-8-2 Mountain's that received semi-streamling that made them "look" like the Class J's. If you do a search for images online (N&W K-2a), or go to ( http://www.3rdrail.com/images/NW-K2-brochuresm.pdf ), you'll see what I'm talking about. This would give us a nice streamlined locomotive that resembles the Class J without worrying about the trademark since it's NOT actually a Class J at all.

I think it would make a great addition to the TS fleet of American steam.

The trademark of 611 isn't the problem. It's possible to get a license from VMT that would allow a developer to sell a model of 611. The problem is the astronomical cost of the engineering drawings that have to be purchased from the NW Historical Society (and, surprisingly, the price is the same regardless of whether the drawings are on huge sheets of paper or simply scanned and put onto a DVD), plus the fact that the VMT license includes a royalty (a percentage of sales revenue) that has to be paid to VMT. That makes it a completely unprofitable venture.

wopflyer wrote:I agree. I've asked before about someone making the N&W Class J. But I know that there is an issue with doing that one since the Virginia Museum of Transportation, which owns the 611, now has a trademark on the likeness of any Class J locomotive.

But, a second idea to consider, would be to model one of the N&W Class K-2a's. There were a number of Baldwin Class K-2a 4-8-2 Mountain's that received semi-streamling that made them "look" like the Class J's. If you do a search for images online (N&W K-2a), or go to ( http://www.3rdrail.com/images/NW-K2-brochuresm.pdf ), you'll see what I'm talking about. This would give us a nice streamlined locomotive that resembles the Class J without worrying about the trademark since it's NOT actually a Class J at all.

I think it would make a great addition to the TS fleet of American steam.

Or maybe it could be like an un-lettered (no N&W on the engine/tender) version,and after the release,we create a patch.

No, they OWN the entire likeness of the class of locomotive.

I was the on who mentioned some time back,that the VMT has "Trademarked" the 611. But this does not mean it is impossible,or even impracticable to make a payware version. You would not need to purchase mechanical drawings from the N&W Historical (hysterical) society. There are many sources out there. Trainz has 2 Class J's available. And K&L Trainz is wrapping up their N&W 1218,and it seems they are getting ready to do the "J",next. So there will be 3 for that platform. I invite you to take a look at the work they are doing. It still; comes down to the fact that there is a fraction of the content creators working on out beloved platform. I swore I would at least have a building imported into RW by now. But it is so much more complex than in Trainz,or MSTS.
A N&W K-2a may seem like a good alternative,but it would not sell a fraction as well as a Class J,especially THE 611.I do not believe DTG would consider doing this engine,without having a matching route to go with it. SO there is more research,etc,etc,before they would consider it.

RAILSOHIO wrote:I was the on who mentioned some time back,that the VMT has "Trademarked" the 611. But this does not mean it is impossible,or even impracticable to make a payware version. You would not need to purchase mechanical drawings from the N&W Historical (hysterical) society. There are many sources out there. Trainz has 2 Class J's available. And K&L Trainz is wrapping up their N&W 1218,and it seems they are getting ready to do the "J",next. So there will be 3 for that platform. I invite you to take a look at the work they are doing. It still; comes down to the fact that there is a fraction of the content creators working on out beloved platform. I swore I would at least have a building imported into RW by now. But it is so much more complex than in Trainz,or MSTS.
A N&W K-2a may seem like a good alternative,but it would not sell a fraction as well as a Class J,especially THE 611.I do not believe DTG would consider doing this engine,without having a matching route to go with it. SO there is more research,etc,etc,before they would consider it.

To make a model as accurate as the FEF-3, it would be absolutely essential to purchase the drawings from the NWHS. As far as I know, they are the only source, and custodians, for the original mechanical drawings (which might be why they charge so much for them). I, personally, wouldn't even contemplate building the loco "by eye" using only photos and "folio" drawings as guides. Other people do that and end up with models that have incorrect dimensions and parts that don't line up properly (pistons rods that aren't even centred with the cylinders, etc.). That's not for me, which is why I abandoned the idea of doing 611.

You're also right about the problem of a suitable route, although I suppose 611 could, at a pinch, run on the NS Coal District route.

At this point, I would be perfectly happy with a conversion of one of the MSTS N&W Class J's. I just don't know how to do it myself, or I would have tried already. If someone on here does know how to convert an old MSTS loco, would you please consider doing that? Or, at least, telling me/us what we need and how to do it ourselves? I know you'd have to get permission from whomever made the original model if you wanted to post it for others to download, but still it might be possible.

wopflyer wrote:At this point, I would be perfectly happy with a conversion of one of the MSTS N&W Class J's. I just don't know how to do it myself, or I would have tried already. If someone on here does know how to convert an old MSTS loco, would you please consider doing that? Or, at least, telling me/us what we need and how to do it ourselves? I know you'd have to get permission from whomever made the original model if you wanted to post it for others to download, but still it might be possible.

Ask FanRailer who did the conversions in his MSTS conversion promo video.

mrennie wrote:To make a model as accurate as the FEF-3, it would be absolutely essential to purchase the drawings from the NWHS. As far as I know, they are the only source, and custodians, for the original mechanical drawings (which might be why they charge so much for them). I, personally, wouldn't even contemplate building the loco "by eye" using only photos and "folio" drawings as guides. Other people do that and end up with models that have incorrect dimensions and parts that don't line up properly (pistons rods that aren't even centred with the cylinders, etc.). That's not for me, which is why I abandoned the idea of doing 611.
You're also right about the problem of a suitable route, although I suppose 611 could, at a pinch, run on the NS Coal District route.

Why the need of copies of original shop drawings? Why not using something with detail but not so accurate (and so costly), like the "Steam Locomotives" ciclopedia Vol 1 used by layout loco builders. Those books have very accurate measurements. They even have a few pictures of cab views of a few of the locos portrayed.
I think that very accurate measurements from shop drawings will dilute when you have the model finished and ported to the game scale.

What a designer needs are good pics (real and museum if available), side, top, front, back and a few cross sections views (with full measurements) along the loco length, a couple pictures of the cab (and a description of some of the controls).
And the most important, the physics parameters of that locomotive. If you do not have this last information, you will loose all accuracy gained with the model.
What is needed is something like the Antoni Moragas books (Spanish locos) but for USA locomotives. The ciclopedias help in that department.

http://www.amazon.com/Model-Railroader-Cyclopedia-Vol-Locomotives/dp/0890240019/ref=sr_1_sc_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1453597928&sr=1-1-spell&keywords=Steam+locomotives+ciclopedia

But it is only my opinion

I think where we are are going here is that while Mike's FEF is a work of art maybe not to be duplicated for a long time it is more than many of us need to satisfy our sense of realism in the simulator. Of course now that Mike has set this high bar some think this is the only future thing that is acceptable for our passion. While this is the only thing he wants to do doesn't mean it's the only thing that can be done. Some purists will not find this acceptable however purists find most things not acceptable, hence the term rivet counters. The rest of us while appreciating works of art are willing to accept prints of original works of art to get to play with out railroad fantasies.

Nice philosophical dissertation, Buzz

buzz456 wrote:I think where we are are going here is that while Mike's FEF is a work of art maybe not to be duplicated for a long time it is more than many of us need to satisfy our sense of realism in the simulator. Of course now that Mike has set this high bar some think this is the only future thing that is acceptable for our passion. While this is the only thing he wants to do doesn't mean it's the only thing that can be done. Some purists will not find this acceptable however purists find most things not acceptable, hence the term rivet counters. The rest of us while appreciating works of art are willing to accept prints of original works of art to get to play with out railroad fantasies.

I guess that makes me a purist and a rivet counter. One day I'll count the rivets I put on the FEF-3, just to satisfy my own curiosity. I'm pretty sure it's into the thousands.

To answer Jalsina, I rely on the original drawings to make every part as accurately as possible, which means that the dimensions are accurate to within a scale 1/64th of an inch. I do that because I like to be able to go right up close to a model, in-game, and look at it as if I were actually standing next to it in real life. If you do that with a model that's not been made the way I make them, you see all the flaws. That's why I spend so much time doing all those tiny details that you barely see unless you go up close. A lot of other models simple miss them out completely. It's a great feeling when I bring together all the pieces I made individually, from their individual drawings, and join them in accordance with the erecting diagrams, and they fit like a glove. I hate it when I have to make them by eye and guess at the measurements, because then I know that it's not as perfect as it could have been. Believe me, if one of those parts is out by even a tiny amount, it does make a difference to the model (the most obvious thing is that you get light shining through the gap between the mismatched parts).

Mike,
There is no doubt what you are, what you say, plus a superb engineer and artist combined not a common trait.

And thank you for a Mona Lisa of a model.